Running a second instance

[detbear]

Hey everyone.

 

I read that it is possible to run more than one instance for a second render if you have more than one core on your processor. How can you do this without slowwing down the other render?

 

If I simply open the program twice and run the same render, the second render is much slower and seems to bog the firstdown too.....SO I figure there must be some other method of opening the software......OR is that just how it works. Are all renders(3-4) slower than just running 1 single render. That seems to defeat a multi-instance render.

 

How do you set this up properly on a multi-core Vista or XP machine??

 

 

William

[Fuchur]

How many cores do you have? And how much RAM do you have?

 

Normally you can run 3 instances without a problem on a Quadcore and it wont slow down anything. this may change if RAM is short or any other compontent isnt fast enough...

 

*Fuchur*

[John Bigboote]

Sounds like you have a fairly adequate machine...right? Are you setting your render-queue to render odds-evens? I find on a quad-core machine it is best to just render on 3 cores...and leave the 4th for Windows OS. Some people even go so far as to open the task-manager and set affinities for each instance- I never saw any advantage doing that, so I don't anymore.

 

IF you use 3 cores you can setup A:M to render every 3rd frame. Start A on 1, B on 2, and C on 3.

[detbear]

Hey Guys.... Do you simply open the app three different times and render the same thing...

 

Or do you have to install the app in several places??

 

My machine(s) have i7 Quad core ....with 3-6 gigs of ram

[detbear]

However..... When I opened the program twice and tried to render simaltaneously on both,,,,the second one seemed much slower..So i stopped the process. Figured I would inquire here for some better info on how to properly do it.

[robcat2075]

Some people even go so far as to open the task-manager and set affinities for each instance-

 

Try that. When I had a dual Windows NT machine I had to do that.

[detbear]

I tried that but seemed to be slow...So I was wondering what actually qualifies as an "Instance" in XP or Vista......AND how do you affirm that a single core is being used for each.....OR does window automatically do that.

 

William

[robcat2075]

Just to make sure it's not the hugeness of your scene, try setting A:M up on a simple scene, like a few spheres and a raytraced sun light and see how render times compare.

 

 

Usually multiple instances scale well, but if it's a case with massive textures or RAM hungry effects.... the bottle neck may not be the CPUs.

 

 

 

Also you may want to turn off the multi-threading option, where ever that is, if you are trying to run several one-core A:Ms.

[John Bigboote]

You ARE trying to render the same thing right? Like, frame 1 and then frame 2...or are you splitting the scene in half and (say for a 10 sec scene) starting the 2nd processor on frame 5:00. Could be worlds apart in render time depending.

 

I have a new PC and will open a 2nd instance and try a test...

[KenH]

Yeah, you need to render, for example, frames 0-1000 on the first instance and then 1001 to 2000 on the other instance. Of course it doesn't need to be in thousand frame batches.

[detbear]

Yeah....I was splitting it in half instead of trying to run the "stepped" style. The scene doesn't change much, so I figured that there would not be a huge difference which frames were being rendered......... Maybe there is some other element inusing the stepped process that just makes it work better...

[robcat2075]

Yeah....I was splitting it in half instead of trying to run the "stepped" style. The scene doesn't change much, so I figured that there would not be a huge difference which frames were being rendered......... Maybe there is some other element inusing the stepped process that just makes it work better...

 

You a better result with "stepped"?

[John Bigboote]

Hey guys... revisiting this old thread with a Q.... I am running A:M V15 on a Mac here at the new gig (until my PC comes in.) It is not bad. Wondering, how do I open a 2nd instance of A:M on this OSX?

[Fuchur]

Hey guys... revisiting this old thread with a Q.... I am running A:M V15 on a Mac here at the new gig (until my PC comes in.) It is not bad. Wondering, how do I open a 2nd instance of A:M on this OSX?

 

I think you have to copy the A:M installtion-folder and open it from there. So I am not a Mac guy and only heard about that.

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[markw]

Hey guys... revisiting this old thread with a Q.... I am running A:M V15 on a Mac here at the new gig (until my PC comes in.) It is not bad. Wondering, how do I open a 2nd instance of A:M on this OSX?

There's a little AppleScript app that Steffen added to the Mac version of A:M called "MultipleMaster" launch A:M with that and then wait 30 seconds and it will launch a second instance of A:M.

The neat thing is you can keep on doing this as much as you want and/or your system can handle

[robcat2075]

Not a mac guy here, but... I recall Steffen creating a script that would let you run multiple instances on a Mac. That's around here somewhere.

 

Before that people were actually making another copy of the whole installation on their hard drive and running the physically separate instance. Try duplicating the whole folder.

[John Bigboote]

Rob to the rescue, once again! Duplicate the folder worked. THANKS BROTHER!