Moderator: Site Moderators
Here is something to help this:compdewd wrote:Having the column headings scroll with the rest of the page will take some JavaScript which I am not fluent in yet, to be honest. I may just look at someone else's code for that and then "copy" it (while learning at the same time, of course).
I'm not sure how that might work (JavaScript) if a lot of users have Java disabled in their browsers due to the recent security issues:compdewd wrote:Having the column headings scroll with the rest of the page will take some JavaScript which I am not fluent in yet, to be honest
They are actually not related at all. JS is an in-browser scripting language and has NOTHING to do with any JVM that might be running on the host. Java programs (in bytecode) run directly on the JVM. The only time you would need Java is if a webpage has any applets, and it seems like Compdewds doesn't.bollix47 wrote:Javascript and java usage are not closely related.
Thanks very much, guys, that's very good to know.bollix47 wrote:Javascript and java usage are not related. Having java disabled does not affect javascript but some confusion does exist between the two so there are people who might disable javascript which had nothing to do with recent java security problems.
The only problem with doing it with pure CSS is that that would create a fixed header that is fixed no matter what. Since I have filtering options above that actual table header, I can't have the table header fixed as that would cause it to be fixed possibly half-way down the user's screen at all times. The JavaScript code that I am referring to takes the table header with a default CSS property of "position: absolute" and makes it "position: fixed" when the top of the user's screen gets to a certain pixel margin from the top of the web page. I'm going to need a client-side scripting language (JavaScript) to do what I need to do. Also, I have code that works now, but the problem is getting the columns to agree to a width. It is something that will take a little time, which I am currently giving to other aspects of the database. You may PM/email me and we can talk from there.gero1369 wrote:Here is something to help this:
http://www.cssreset.com/creating-fixed- ... -with-css/
I can look at your code some time and rewrite it to include something that will work to have a scrolling header of the sheet. I am a web developer, but don't have much time to do side projects. I'd be happy to help out and think that I could help you with layout and maybe even some of the DB stuff. Let me know if you're interested.
Firstly, you're welcome!art_l_j_PlanetAMD64 wrote:PS: Did you see the entries I made using the Add to The Database form? There were, I think, 6 of them. Thanks for all the great work!
Secondly, I just now saw them as I have come back from a few days of not having much time. Could you let me know what day you entered those? I have yet to add a timestamp column to the "secondary database" that tells me itself.OK, it was Friday January 18, when I entered that data.compdewd wrote:Firstly, you're welcome!art_l_j_PlanetAMD64 wrote:PS: Did you see the entries I made using the Add to The Database form? There were, I think, 6 of them. Thanks for all the great work!
As long as the database user (in this case, me) understands how to appropriately judge the content presented there, and how it relates to the specifications of the GPU they are planning to buy, it is amazingly accurate. For example, I estimated 37k PPD for the GTX 660 Ti, and the actual data for the ones I bought is shown here:art_l_j_PlanetAMD64 wrote:Thanks, I've just read the database disclaimer/waiver. I did realize, even before I'd read it, that the entries were dependent on the honesty (among other things) of the person making each entry. GPUs with more different entries from different people in the same range of PPDs, I would tend to trust more than GPUs with a small number of entries (like 1 or 2).compdewd wrote:I'm glad you enjoy the database, Art!
As a reminder, be sure to become familiar with the database disclaimer/waiver before you base purchases off of the database.Thanks!
But now for some good news I got this morning. An email newsletter from one of my suppliers had a weekly special on GTX 660 Ti's, for $220 each. That changes the $/PPD calculation enormously. I can get either 4 or 5, for a total of $880 or $1100:
- 4 - GTX 660Ti ($220 each) (37k PPD x 4 = 148k PPD)
- 5 - GTX 660Ti ($220 each) (37k PPD x 5 = 185k PPD)
At the risk of sounding like a broken record (that expression really dates me, huh?), thanks again for all the great work!art_l_j_PlanetAMD64 wrote:After the SMP WU was completed, I changed to smp:8 and restarted, here is the data from that configuration:Total for this configuration is 88395 PPD.
- smp:8 - PRCG 7809 (2, 5, 104), 3600MHz, 47C, TPF 12:52, 11553.49 PPD
- gpu0 - PRCG 7623 (311, 0, 126), 1175MHz, 57C, TPF 5:22, 37814.76 PPD
- gpu1 - PRCG 7625 (440, 1, 34), 1228MHz, 55C, TPF 5:12, 39026.77 PPD
You are quite welcome! Right now, the best and most practical thing I see that I can use my time and skills for is to help the Folding@Home project with this databaseart_l_j_PlanetAMD64 wrote:At the risk of sounding like a broken record (that expression really dates me, huh?), thanks again for all the great work!
Thanks for the dateart_l_j_PlanetAMD64 wrote:Added the above GPU data to compdewd's Folding@Home GPU Statistics Database, 2013-01-30.
I am very busy and still have not got around to adding that date saving feature... Anyway, thanks for the contribution, I will get to adding it within the next couple days.
.