Open onneti2013 opened 3 years ago
The requirements for the temp directories are 220G for temp1 and 110G for temp2. So, if you are running both temp directories off the same drive then you're going to run out of space. If that is the case, then perhaps moving temp1 to a different drive will work. I believe that temp2 needs to be the faster drive.
I can confirm that because the 2 temp dirs don't get filled at the same time, you can get away with using a minimum (in my experience) 246GiB disk (I am pretty sure it's GiB and not GB - the manpage for tmpfs seems to suggest that.) 245GiB worked but filled to 99% (eek!) and 244 resulted in a failure. So yes - you can do a full plot with 256gb - you just have to be careful. As such, I'm not sure why your plot would fail. What error does it output? It's possible that your 256GB drive is actually less than 246GiB due to filesystem overhead and the difference between GiB and GB. If you are on Linux, run df -h
and post the output.
I can confirm that because the 2 temp dirs don't get filled at the same time, you can get away with using a minimum (in my experience) 246GiB disk (I am pretty sure it's GiB and not GB - the manpage for tmpfs seems to suggest that.) 245GiB worked but filled to 99% (eek!) and 244 resulted in a failure. So yes - you can do a full plot with 256gb - you just have to be careful. As such, I'm not sure why your plot would fail. What error does it output? It's possible that your 256GB drive is actually less than 246GiB due to filesystem overhead and the difference between GiB and GB. If you are on Linux, run
df -h
and post the output.
that's exactly it seems you have it right, for some failure windows presents the NVME disk with only 238GB and at the time of. Volume creation 244GB Max but after created displays 238 , I don't know if it's a disk or windows failure but my SSD has less than 246 looking through that frame after windows creation. Would you know a way to get around this situation and use 100% its 256GB size?
I can confirm that because the 2 temp dirs don't get filled at the same time, you can get away with using a minimum (in my experience) 246GiB disk (I am pretty sure it's GiB and not GB - the manpage for tmpfs seems to suggest that.) 245GiB worked but filled to 99% (eek!) and 244 resulted in a failure. So yes - you can do a full plot with 256gb - you just have to be careful. As such, I'm not sure why your plot would fail. What error does it output? It's possible that your 256GB drive is actually less than 246GiB due to filesystem overhead and the difference between GiB and GB. If you are on Linux, run
df -h
and post the output.
The problem is that I can create plots normally using only the chia application , it does not generate any error and creates plots one by one but the problem is taking too long , as I am using a slightly weak computer I can not do more than 3 plots a day with this slowness and MadMax would double my creation if it weren't for this size problem.
I can confirm that because the 2 temp dirs don't get filled at the same time, you can get away with using a minimum (in my experience) 246GiB disk (I am pretty sure it's GiB and not GB - the manpage for tmpfs seems to suggest that.) 245GiB worked but filled to 99% (eek!) and 244 resulted in a failure. So yes - you can do a full plot with 256gb - you just have to be careful. As such, I'm not sure why your plot would fail. What error does it output? It's possible that your 256GB drive is actually less than 246GiB due to filesystem overhead and the difference between GiB and GB. If you are on Linux, run
df -h
and post the output.The problem is that I can create plots normally using only the chia application , it does not generate any error and creates plots one by one but the problem is taking too long , as I am using a slightly weak computer I can not do more than 3 plots a day with this slowness and MadMax would double my creation if it weren't for this size problem.
Unfortunately because of the way MadMax makes plots, it has a higher space requirement: the official plotter only requires 239GB. With regards to using more of your disk size, I have seen suggestions that making sure your drive is using GPT and not MBR may help a tiny bit, but I'm afraid I don't really know how to do that so I can't really help you there.
Posso confirmar que, como os 2 diretórios temporários não são preenchidos ao mesmo tempo, você pode usar um disco mínimo (em minha experiência) de 246 GiB (tenho certeza de que é GiB e não GB - a página de manual para tmpfs parece para sugerir isso.) 245GiB funcionou, mas atingiu 99% (eek!) e 244 resultou em uma falha. Então, sim - você pode fazer um gráfico completo com 256 GB - você só precisa ter cuidado. Como tal, não sei por que sua trama falharia. Que erro ele produz? É possível que seu drive de 256 GB seja menor do que 246 GB devido à sobrecarga do sistema de arquivos e à diferença entre GiB e GB. Se você estiver no Linux, execute
df -h
e publique a saída.O problema é que consigo criar plotagens normalmente usando apenas o aplicativo chia, ele não gera nenhum erro e cria plotagens uma a uma mas o problema está demorando muito, pois estou usando um computador um pouco fraco não consigo fazer mais do que 3 trama um dia com essa lentidão e MadMax dobraria minha criação se não fosse por esse problema de tamanho.
Infelizmente, por causa da forma como a MadMax faz as plotagens, ela exige mais espaço: a plotadora oficial requer apenas 239 GB. Com relação a usar mais do tamanho do disco, vi sugestões de que certificar-se de que sua unidade está usando GPT e não MBR pode ajudar um pouco, mas infelizmente não sei como fazer isso, então posso ' Eu realmente te ajudo nisso.
Thank you very much for your time I can manually convert the disk to GPT or MBR I will see if that solves my problem a big hug my friend.
Hello I would like to know if there is any special configuration for my board I can't get past phase 2 using a 256GB NVME doing a plot for once but doing the plot directly in the CHIA application it creates normally. Would there be any configuration for this? Failed to check Table 2 and when I see there is no space in NVME