10 connection limit

[paulison]

we are ordering some new farm machines soon and i need to look into this potential issue regarding maximum 10 connections to the management server. I currenltly have 9 machines rendering fine from the manager and i think previously I may have had more than that going without problem other than some machines do not start rendering untill it can get a connection to the manager (between polls from the other machines?) but think none of the jobs stopped and restarted.

If we have more than 10 machines available will a maximum of 10 machines be in use at any time if the management server is only running XP pro?

Looking into getting windows server 2003 but then we need to buy more CAL's depending on how many machines are in the farm. Quite an expensive option...

Is there a linux based network rendering manager that works with Vray and max7/8 that can handle 20+ farm machines?

Thanks for any help

PS: I did a forum search and didnt find much usefull info on this topic

[tammo]

here is a patcher that gets rid of the problem:

http://lvllord.de/

[roppin]

In my experience the only broblem is to save to a xp pro computer. I have a setup where I use xp pro as manager for 20 render slaves who saves to a server. That could easily be a Linux server I think. there is allso a windows hack to make it allow more than 10 conections...

[roppin]

here is a patcher that gets rid of the problem:

http://lvllord.de/

thats what I ment

[tricky]

here is a patcher that gets rid of the problem:

http://lvllord.de/

Surely this is illegal and you would be risking your business? We just upped the size of our renderfarm. I had a 'quick go' with Linux, but in the end, we opted for a new file server with Windows Server 2003 on it. The CAL licenses are pretty cheap, and we are still nicely legit

[instinct]

Hmmm...i dont see why this would be illegal. It is not patching any copyprotection schemes or anything. I´d see it similar to patching uxtheme.dll to be able to use third party themes. And it´s a pretty well known patch and MS would prolly have taken legal actions against the author (or at least tell him to shut down the site) as he is even stating his complete name and adress on the page. But i assume a quick mail to MS would resolve all questions

Regards,
Thorsten

[tricky]

It doesn't seem to be any different from any other 'crack' you see posted around forums/usergroups to me - basically, this could potentially loose Microsoft money - they can't agree with that...

(not that I am pro-Microsoft or anything, its just that there are 'proper' ways to do things, especially when in a corporate situation)

[plastic_]

that's cool...
it shouldn't be illegal. i see articles and download links about such patches in large german computer mags.
it's illegal in the USA to break encrypted data (digital millenium blah). but the windows dll's are not encrypted.
you can hexedit your system files how you want.

but there might be problems with windows auto update etc, that it suddenly stops working after an update.

[instinct]

actually this hardcoded limit was introduced with one of the servicepacks...i think it was sp1...before sp1 it was simply a registry setting. They claim it is a "security related limit"...but i dont know as am not a lawyer.
Here at our company we have a linux fileserver...and for the rendermanager it doesnt really matter as it can be send out sequentially...there´s still a risk that the patch causes instability in any way...one never knows..esp with Microsoft :P

Regards,
Thorsten

[paulison]

so basically a windows XP manager should be able to handle 20+ machines?

surely if the machines all connect to save their frames at different times there wont be an issue with 10 connections at once?

we will probbaly get windows server 2003 with a few extra cals. seems like a bit of double dipping by microsoft though considering we pay a lot for the server version as it is

[instinct]

we dont save to the manager here, that´s why it is not a problem for us. We have a dedicated WinXP manager, that does nothing but manage the jobs and a linux fileserver that has both the maps and the renderoutput.

Regards,
Thorsten

[jujubee]

It doesn't seem to be any different from any other 'crack' you see posted around forums/usergroups to me - basically, this could potentially loose Microsoft money - they can't agree with that...

I see what you're saying. But should something like that also prevent you from editing your registry values?

If it's on your computers and your computers alone, you should be free to wreck it... If not, they should force you to read their lengthy software agreements prior to letting you make a Windows purchase.

[roppin]

It doesn't seem to be any different from any other 'crack' you see posted around forums/usergroups to me - basically, this could potentially loose Microsoft money - they can't agree with that...

(not that I am pro-Microsoft or anything, its just that there are 'proper' ways to do things, especially when in a corporate situation)

As I remember it, this or a similar patch was to be downloaded at microsoft. But why go for a window system if its only to save rendered images and map textures?

[tammo]

"why go for a window system"

because you can render on a windows system.

[roppin]

Yes I can see that. But in general you have plenty of old stuff not worthy to use as a render node. like a 1.4 ghz pentium 4 512mb ram, as in my case.