rpiece: no NFS lock manager on this machine
rad: error rendering view 1
What operating system are you working with?
cheers, Lars.
Hi, Lars, I'm using windows 7. Thanks!
Ji
···
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Lars O. Grobe <[email protected]> wrote:
rpiece: no NFS lock manager on this machine
rad: error rendering view 1
What operating system are you working with?
cheers, Lars.
______________________________**_________________
Radiance-general mailing list
Radiance-general@radiance-**online.org<[email protected]>
http://www.radiance-online.**org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-**general<http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general>
Hi, Lars, I'm using windows 7. Thanks!
I do not know about the locking capabilities in Windows. Anyone out here having experience with rpiece on Windows 7?
What is happening is that rad starts render processes. As these are supposed to share the ambient data (ambfile) to speed up the work, there must be a mechanism doing the coordination work on accessing this file. This is done using file lock (basically you need to make sure that one process does not write data while another is reading, but waits for the read to complete).
Cheers, Lars.
Dear Ji Zhang and Lars,*
*Windows (whatever the version 7, Vista, XP) doesn't have a NFS lock
manager. (So rpiece will NOT work).*
*Maybe one has been written for Cygwin, but I doubt it.
If you want to use Radiance on multiple core's your best option is MAC OS or
Unix/Linux (Ubuntu seems to be user friendly).
Another option would be to install Interix/SUA/SFU (Windows services for
Unix) on Windows 7 (or Vista or XP). And compile Radiance from source.
I don't think anyone has tried to compile Radiance using SFU, so no
guarantees here.*
···
*
I hope this helps,
Guy*
*
Hi!
If you want to use Radiance on multiple core's your best option is MAC
OS or Unix/Linux (Ubuntu seems to be user friendly).
Sure, that is the preferred way. However, I would consider how much rendering work you expect. If it justifies setting up a dedicated machine - do it unix-like. If it is not that much rendering time, you are still free to
a) wait and have rad sequentially render images using one core
b) split your renderings and manually start processes - as long as they do not need to share data, you do not need locking
Cheers, Lars.
another option is vmware with a linux image.
but my vote, preference, soul (and pocket) goes the Mac OS X way...
I would not be using radiance without a mac.
life is short and it is once, why suffering?
G
···
On 16 Jun 2011, at 19:05, Lars O. Grobe wrote:
Hi!
If you want to use Radiance on multiple core's your best option is MAC
OS or Unix/Linux (Ubuntu seems to be user friendly).Sure, that is the preferred way. However, I would consider how much rendering work you expect. If it justifies setting up a dedicated machine - do it unix-like. If it is not that much rendering time, you are still free to
a) wait and have rad sequentially render images using one core
b) split your renderings and manually start processes - as long as they do not need to share data, you do not need locking
Cheers, Lars.
_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
Amen, Giugi!! OSX was a game changer for me in terms of Radiance usability.
Rob Guglielmetti IESNA, LEED AP
Commercial Buildings Research Group
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
1617 Cole Blvd MS:RSF202
Golden, CO 80401
T. 303.275.4319
F. 303.630.2055
E. [email protected]
···
On 6/16/11 12:39 PM, "Giugi" <[email protected]> wrote:
another option is vmware with a linux image.
but my vote, preference, soul (and pocket) goes the Mac OS X way...
I would not be using radiance without a mac.
life is short and it is once, why suffering?G
On 16 Jun 2011, at 19:05, Lars O. Grobe wrote:
Hi!
If you want to use Radiance on multiple core's your best option is MAC
OS or Unix/Linux (Ubuntu seems to be user friendly).Sure, that is the preferred way. However, I would consider how much
rendering work you expect. If it justifies setting up a dedicated
machine - do it unix-like. If it is not that much rendering time, you
are still free toa) wait and have rad sequentially render images using one core
b) split your renderings and manually start processes - as long as they
do not need to share data, you do not need lockingCheers, Lars.
_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
The thread is veering off topic, but I can't resist chiming in...
I'm not sure that OSX has any true advantage over Ubuntu or maybe another modern user friendly linux distribution purely for Radiance usage. The only advantage I see to OSX over linux is that it's more popular, so you'll see more frequent pre-compiled binaries floating around - for Radiance itself and any tools that users develop. On the other hand, linux has a strong advantage in terms of lower barrier to entry - it is cheaper to buy/inherit any old desktop box and install Ubuntu on it than to get a hold of a top notch Mac machine. It is even quite possible to set up an existing Windows machine to dual-boot into Ubuntu as necessary. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WindowsDualBoot
Windows implementation has the lowest barrier to entry in most cases, but shortfalls such as no file locking, X11 support, friendliness for programming/scripting, etc. On the other hand some common modeling tools such as Autodesk products are Windows native - so could avoid additional machines.
···
____________________________________________________________
Electronic mail messages entering and leaving Arup business
systems are scanned for acceptability of content and viruses