ummm...how much longer?
I have a couple running.
One after 4 hrs only 6% complete.
Another after 4 hrs 15% complete.
Another after 3 hrs 70% complete.

Most (about 70%) abort in the first second.

On my two systems, they are taking 20-40 minutes, of the few that don't abort immediately.

And I have had a couple of 'runaways', that completed less than 1% after 20-25 minutes, with an ever increasing estimated time of completion well over an hour.
I aborted these manually

These are indeed taking quite a bit longer. I have one that has been running for 25 hours and is just about completed and I have 8 cores running 90% utilized.

Most are estimated at about 10-12 hours though.

well for me the new workunits go hell faster
normal unit works for 15-18 hours and the nbody just TWO hours to do-isn't it wieerd?

My workunits abort either immediately or after no more than 5 seconds. What`s going on?

I got my first workunits tonight for N-Body Simulation v0.04. The outcome was rather odd: Three workunits were from the de_nbody_test_10 series and they were all completed and validated. The five others were from the de_nbody_model1_1 series and they all crashed after one or two seconds. Looking on the wingmen I can not see any pattern. Sometimes they crash also on a wingman, sometimes they seem to finish without error.

Well, I try to get some more, maybe I catch a good one *g* ...

Regards

List of Error results

Update: Five more workunits, all de_nbody_model1_1, and for a change all now completed, four of them already validated. Run time between 30 and 60 minutes. Still don't have a clue why some crash and others not.

Well, I had one yesterday that had run 20-some hours and showed 137 hours remaining! I aborted it. Another has been running about 8 hours and shows another 23 hours to go. Guess I'll leave that one alone and see what happens. I'm running a dual core 2.4 GHz AMD CPU. My GPU won't handle milkyway WWs.

____________

Could someone please post a download-link for the actual version?

THX
Alexander

Update: Five more workunits, all de_nbody_model1_1, and for a change all now completed, four of them already validated. Run time between 30 and 60 minutes. Still don't have a clue why some crash and others not.

Well, I had one yesterday that had run 20-some hours and showed 137 hours remaining!

The Windows checkpointing is currently broken (it will always restart from the beginning), but I think I've fixed all the problems with it. (...) I'll try to update the binaries sometime today.

Hi my latest one is a de_12 and has run 2 hours and is showing 9.259% done so this looks to be going to take over 200 hours it is due by 21/9 so I will need be running for 24 hours a day to get it done in time or should I abort it.

regards Paul

has run 2 hours and is showing 9.259% done

Hi it is nealy midnight in the UK so my maths have gone up the creek today

thanks

I currently have the longest running workunit up to now. 7 h run time were already done and approx. 8 h were still to go, when I had to close BOINC. After restart, it started again at 0 % progress, but run time started at the approx. 7 h were I stopped it before. So currently I am at 5.4 % again and the total run time has risen from 15 h to approx. 22 h now.

Checkpoint: tnow = 1.20291. time since last = 360.466s
Checkpoint: tnow = 1.22032. time since last = 361.073s
Checkpoint: tnow = 1.238. time since last = 360.637s
Checkpoint: tnow = 1.25557. time since last = 362.311s
Checkpoint exists. Attempting to resume from it.
Thawing state
Didn't find header for checkpoint file.
Number of bodies in checkpoint file does not match number expected by context.
Got checkpoint file for wrong type. Expected sizeof(real) = 8, got 0
Trying to read interrupted checkpoint file
Failed to find end marker in checkpoint file.
Failed to resume checkpoint
Removing checkpoint file 'nbody_checkpoint'
Starting fresh nbody run
Starting nbody system
<plummer_r> -38.146212235604 2.2104695431195 32.223568725294 </plummer_r>
<plummer_v> 69.480777935001 95.95483517654 -100.99755377651 </plummer_v>
Checkpoint: tnow = 0.0197762. time since last = 903435s
Checkpoint: tnow = 0.0406272. time since last = 394.064s
Checkpoint: tnow = 0.0593286. time since last = 366.626s

Are you seeing a lot of WUs with granted credit much lower than the claimed credit?

Is this new, drastically longer nbody search in preparation for new GPU apps, or are they just longer to keep less load on the server?

Yeah, I'm being a intentionally aannoying about wanting a GPU app because quite frankly, I'd like to be putting my processing power towards something a bit more important than trying to prove/disprove a mathematical conjecture.

We're also talking about doing the rough phases of the search with single precision which would allow more GPUs to work on it.

Hi

My one finally finished at 25 hours 27 minutes with a CPU time of just under 17 hours and got 213 points or just over 8 points an hour. this seems very low as I think most other projects give more than this.
what do others think?

regards Paul

No. I only know a little bit about the search; this is Travis' area. It would be more like double precision results would only be needed as the likelihoods get closer. The float result is significantly different from the double result, but still close enough to be sort of useful. Lots of float results could be used to do a rough search, and then as the fitnesses get closer, double results would be needed.

Yeah, I'm being a intentionally aannoying about wanting a GPU app because quite frankly, I'd like to be putting my processing power towards something a bit more important than trying to prove/disprove a mathematical conjecture.

some wu's were not validated due to 'Checked, but no consensus yet'
One example:
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=196605674

Alexander

some wu's were not validated due to 'Checked, but no consensus yet'
One example:
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=196605674

Alexander

my latest one took 26 hours so you can see it has hogged one of my cpus for a whole 24 hours and I just get credits of 213 again
this seems very low and I may be detaching soon although I have done this project for 17 months

paul

Same here 90 hours for one and 75 for an other,
But that's a lot of data :->
____________

as an example I have just got 141 credits on another project for 7 hours so they a giving 20 credits an hour not 8
Paul

boinc manager do not manage to download the apps for uts 64 b 0.06 No body, why do you think?

I app_info this file, maybe that comes from there?

<app_info>
<app>
<name>milkyway</name>
</app>
<file_info>
<name>astronomy_0.21_x64_SSE3.exe</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>

<app_version>
<app_name>milkyway</app_name>
<version_num>21</version_num>
<file_ref>
<file_name>astronomy_0.21_x64_SSE3.exe</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
</app_version>

<app_version>
<app_name>milkyway</app_name>
<version_num>20</version_num>
<file_ref>
<file_name>astronomy_0.21_x64_SSE3.exe</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
</app_version>

<app_info>
<app>
<name>milkyway_nbody</name>
</app>
<file_info>
<name>milkyway_nbody_0.06_windows_x86_64__sse2.exe</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<app_version>
<app_name>milkyway_nbody</app_name>
<version_num>6</version_num>
<file_ref>
<file_name>milkyway_nbody_0.06_windows_x86_64__sse2.exe</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
</app_version>
</app_info>


<app>
<name>milkyway</name>
</app>
<file_info>
<name>milkyway_0.24_windows_intelx86__cuda23.exe</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<file_info>
<name>cudart.dll</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<file_info>
<name>cutil32.dll</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<app_version>
<app_name>milkyway</app_name>
<version_num>24</version_num>
<plan_class>cuda23</plan_class>
<avg_ncpus>0.040000</avg_ncpus>
<max_ncpus>0.040000</max_ncpus>
<coproc>
<type>CUDA</type>
<count>1</count>
</coproc>
<file_ref>
<file_name>milkyway_0.24_windows_intelx86__cuda23.exe</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
<file_ref>
<file_name>cudart.dll</file_name>
</file_ref>
<file_ref>
<file_name>cutil32.dll</file_name>
</file_ref>
</app_version>

<app>
<name>milkyway</name>
</app>
<file_info>
<name>milkyway_0.03_windows_intelx86__cuda23.exe</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<file_info>
<name>cudart.dll</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<file_info>
<name>cutil32.dll</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<app_version>
<app_name>milkyway</app_name>
<version_num>3</version_num>
<plan_class>cuda23</plan_class>
<avg_ncpus>0.040000</avg_ncpus>
<max_ncpus>0.040000</max_ncpus>
<coproc>
<type>CUDA</type>
<count>1</count>
</coproc>
<file_ref>
<file_name>milkyway_0.03_windows_intelx86__cuda23.exe</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
<file_ref>
<file_name>cudart.dll</file_name>
</file_ref>
<file_ref>
<file_name>cutil32.dll</file_name>
</file_ref>
</app_version>

</app_info>
____________
Team Alliance francophone, boinc: 7.0.18

GA-P55-UD5, i7 860, Win 7 64 bits, 8g DDR3, GTX 470

We're at v0.07 for Windows already, please see here: http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=1917

my latest one took 26 hours so you can see it has hogged one of my cpus for a whole 24 hours and I just get credits of 213 again
this seems very low and I may be detaching soon although I have done this project for 17 months

paul

my latest one took 26 hours so you can see it has hogged one of my cpus for a whole 24 hours and I just get credits of 213 again
this seems very low and I may be detaching soon although I have done this project for 17 months

paul

That's strange ... I just completed a WU that took 8.15 hrs total run time and 7.53 hrs CPU time on a dual core 2.4Ghz AMD running Windows XP 32 and was granted 213.76 points.