Does this fix the problem of not getting credit for completed WUs that show "computation error"?
____________

Will it fix this problem, also?

feeder milkyway Not Running
transitioner milkyway Not Running
milkyway_purge milkyway Not Running
file_deleter milkyway Not Running
nbody_assimilator milkyway Not Running
separation_assimilator milkyway Not Running

Thanks Travis and I am sorry to hear that you had flu. I hold with Linus Pauling and vitamin C 500mg/diem that seems to keep away the worst of it.
I am not worried about lost credits what difference does that make to anything least of all if whether we figure out where the Sagittarius arm is going.
I do wish that my fellow contributors realised the difficulties that you guys are working under and how hard you work to send us stuff for free. If you were levying a charge for this service then maybe people would have a right to complain.
I will try the modified software when I run out of SETI stuff which I just received a load of.
Thanks again

Hi Travis,
thanks for the info. about 2 hours since I have no more error messages. I'm thrilled. A THANK YOU to those who found the BUG


regards Nekodemus
____________
regards
Nekodemus vom Wolkenstein

Hello community!

Please, can someone explain, why my team mate get this errors on his host (2x GTX295)?

'Error overview of host 218321'

What is the problem?

Thanks!

____________
Best regards!

Thank you, Travis. Sorry about the flu, that's never fun. I will cancel out of the affected WUs, which I had suspended, and try a new batch of MW after my slug of Cosmology finishes in about a week.

My credits have not changed for about ten days during which time I completed at least three WUs with over 60 hrs CPU time, my pending credits list shows 0, and my task list is blank. So, guess not... at least not as far as getting credit for the "lost WUs" is concerned. Oh well, life is a bitch, then you die. (Just kidding!!) I'll un-suspend the project and see what happens with new WUs.
____________

I think it should. If not, please let me know.

I just finished my first post fix WU and it completed and validated without any errors. Thanks for the fix! It's nice to be able to crunch for MW again. But I would have to concur that the WU's are now taking about 3X longer than they used to.
____________

I just finished my first post fix WU and it completed and validated without any errors. Thanks for the fix! It's nice to be able to crunch for MW again. But I would have to concur that the WU's are now taking about 3X longer than they used to.

Hi Travis (or anybody who knows),

after the fix was announced I downloaded a few new WUs and got to work. The first
de_14-2s_5_126674_1287400167_0 ran for 21+ hours and showed 16 still to go so I aborted it as it looked like a bad one the next de_14_2s_5_126673_1287400167_0 has been running for 17 hours and shows 27 hours to go.

Are these new WUs or still some from the bad batch. If they are the bad ones then no problem I will abort and download new ones. If they are not then I have a different problem and I don't know what to do with it. Both of these WUs showed a "to completion time" of about 18 hours so running for about c44 hours is way beyond what was expected. The Application running for both WUs is MW&H 0.04.

I am afraid that I am stumped HELP!!

BTW.

It's O.K. to use further the opt. CPU app from available 'here'?

In app_info.xml named as V0.21 ?

Like this:

Hi Travis (or anybody who knows),

after the fix was announced I downloaded a few new WUs and got to work. The first
de_14-2s_5_126674_1287400167_0 ran for 21+ hours and showed 16 still to go so I aborted it as it looked like a bad one the next de_14_2s_5_126673_1287400167_0 has been running for 17 hours and shows 27 hours to go.

Are these new WUs or still some from the bad batch. If they are the bad ones then no problem I will abort and download new ones. If they are not then I have a different problem and I don't know what to do with it. Both of these WUs showed a "to completion time" of about 18 hours so running for about c44 hours is way beyond what was expected. The Application running for both WUs is MW&H 0.04.

I am afraid that I am stumped HELP!!

BTW.

It's O.K. to use further the opt. CPU app from available 'here'?

In app_info.xml named as V0.21 ?

Like this:

<app_name>milkyway</app_name> <version_num>21</version_num>

The new stock/orig. MW@h CPU app have 0.04 ..?



From where we could DL the other new N-body CPU app?
And how this app should be named in the app_info.xml file?



I understood it correct, that MW@h have currently 2 CPU apps?

Hi Travis,
the application claims to be MW@H 0.04.not 0.4 Is that just a typo or does it have some meaning? The latest Wu has been running for 20 hours with 30 hours to completion that surely can't be right.

What do you advise?

O.K., it's now confusing..

'http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/apps.php'

For Windows (32bit) CPU now:
MW@h:
0.04
0.04 (SSE2)

MW@h N-body:
0.21 (SSE2)


I allowed now also CPU WUs and BOINC DLed: milkyway_0.4_windows_intelx86.exe .
In BOINCs Tasks overview shown as MW@h 0.04 .
In BOINCs Messages overview shown as milkyway version 4 .

This make us members confused.. ;-)

So, this is the 0.04 app, correct?


BTW. My E7600 can up to SSE4.1, but why he got the app without the SSE2 extension function?
____________
Best regards!

In the host overview here the WUs are also named as MilkyWay@Home v0.04 .


I tested the old opt. SSE3 CPU app, but after ~ 20 mins the process stayed still at 0 %. So this app shouldn't be used any longer.


All stock/orig. I got only the milkyway_0.4_windows_intelx86.exe, which is nonsense, if my CPU can up to SSE4.1, so I did..
I DLed manually (for my WinXP 32bit) the 'milkyway_0.4_windows_intelx86__sse2.exe', 'milkyway_nbody_0.21_windows_intelx86__sse2.exe' and made an app_info.xml with stock 0.24 cuda23 (GPU) and 0.4 + 0.21 (CPU) apps.

The 0.4 app is named:

It's supposed to be 0.4. However, this is mysteriously reported by the page and BOINC as 0.04.

O.K., here we go..

The first CPU WU with the new 0.4 SSE2 app finished: 'resultid=224519892'.
57,179 secs CPU time - ~ 16 hours on an Intel Core2 Duo E7600 @ 2x 3.06 GHz.

The 'wingman' use: Running Milkyway@home ATI GPU application version 0.23 (Win64, CAL 1.4) by Gipsel ..an old app.

Why the CPU get a new app, if the GPU have still the old - and the results are similar/match well?

Why we can't use longer the old opt. CPU app? The old GPU app work.


I don't know how much Cr. this WU'll get.. but if I compare with S@h.. ~ 16 hours S@h-WUs are ~ 800 Cr. . And MW@h give ~ double Cr./WU than S@h, so this MW@h CPU WU should get ~ 1,600 Cr. .
But I guess it'll get only ~ 220 Cr. .

Is there room for more opt. of the new CPU app?
____________
Best regards!

(...)
If I enable CPU + GPU in the prefs, my PC get only GPU WUs.
I need to disable GPU for to get CPU WUs.
Then after my PC DLed a few CPU WUs, I need to enable again the GPU.
It would be possible, to 'optimize' the scheduler?
Maybe 4 WUs/CPU-Core and 12 WUs/GPU (limit of tasks in progress)?

Soon we will see a new 0.41 (with and without sse2) CPU app?

It would be nice to know this, because I have an app_info.xml file with milkyway 0.4 sse2, milkyway_nbody 0.21 sse2 and milkyway 0.24 cuda23 apps. ;-)

This morning, my E7600 finished a 0.21 WU in ~ 45 mins. And got 18.11 Cr./WU.


I have not much knowledge about MW@h..
I don't understand why the CPUs got a new app and the GPUs not. If CPU and GPU results were compared, they have a similar result.
Why the GPUs didn't need a new app?

The old 0.21 (in the time of stock 0.19) SSE3 opt. app was very quick, ~ 2 hours/WU on my E7600 @ 3.06 GHz.
____________
Best regards!

(...)
If I enable CPU + GPU in the prefs, my PC get only GPU WUs.
I need to disable GPU for to get CPU WUs.
Then after my PC DLed a few CPU WUs, I need to enable again the GPU.
It would be possible, to 'optimize' the scheduler?
Maybe 4 WUs/CPU-Core and 12 WUs/GPU (limit of tasks in progress)?

Just curious..

I'm the only one which have probs to get CPU & GPU WUs simultaneously?

(with app_info.xml file)

If I enable CPU & GPU in the project prefs, my Intel Core2 Duo E7600 with GTX260-216 get only GPU WUs. Max. 12 WUs.

If BOINC DLed 12 GPU WUs, I need to disable GPU in the prefs.
BOINC DL then after every UL/report of a GPU result a new CPU WU.
If 10 GPU WUs were ULed/reported, and BOINC DLed 10 CPU WUs I enable again (also) GPU.

Then I have one GPU WU in calculation and one GPU WU prepared for calculation. And 2 CPU WUs in calculation and 8 CPU WUs prepared. If one CPU result ULed/reported, BOINC DL a new GPU WU. If only 2 CPU WUs in calculation, I need to disable again the GPU in the prefs.

How it's at your BOINC - how you do it?

Could be the MW@h scheduler do this better?
Like I mentioned.. 'reached limit of x tasks in progress' for CPU and GPU separated.
S@h have after the 3 day outages always a limit set, CPU and GPU separated. The server/scheduler could do it.
IIRC, the low limit is 40 WUs/CPU-Core and 320 WUs/GPU.

So here at MW@h maybe 2 WUs/CPU-Core and 6 WUs/GPU.

This would be possible?

This would be very helpful for us.

Thanks!

Yes, I know.. ;-)
This is currently.

But for us members which would like to crunch also on CPU simultaneously to the GPU, this is not well.

I don't know if other members get enough CPU and GPU WUs simultaneously continuously, if they set CPU + GPU in the prefs (and in 'auto mode').
Or if they need also change like I always the prefs.
Please let a message here how - you do it/it work for you all..

If the MW@h admins would like that the members crunch also on CPU, they should change the 'scheduler laws'.. ;-)

Maybe 2 WUs/CPU-Core and 6 WUs/GPU (this would be more correct).
Then I/we wouldn't need to use/do my/the upper mentioned instructions and could let run the project in 'auto mode'. ;-)
____________
Best regards!

Maybe 2 WUs/CPU-Core and 6 WUs/GPU (this would be more correct).
Then I/we wouldn't need to use/do my/the upper mentioned instructions and could let run the project in 'auto mode'. ;-)

No, the new 'scheduler law' should be separated for CPU and GPU.

If, 2 WUs/CPU-Core and 6 WUs/GPU..
If you have a Duo-CPU and one GPU, this are 4 CPU WUs and 6 GPU WUs in BOINC.

Your 12 thread CPU with 4 GPUs would have then 24 CPU WUs and 24 GPU WUs in BOINC.

About how high the limit, the admins will have to decide.
My idea is only to get a separate CPU and GPU limit, that the CPU get also autom. WUs.
The S@h scheduler can do this, so the MW@h scheduler could do this also.. ;-)

____________
Best regards!

I disagree.

If they change it, the amount of WUs per GPU needs to be raised significantly.

I have never run the CPU app here at Milky Way, but by what I have read, it takes somewhere between 7 to 15 hours to complete one workunit. Having 2 workunits per CPU would give you a 14 to 30 hour cache. Right now you have a cache of 42 to 90 hour cache per CPU depending on how long a CPU task takes to run.

If it is changed, the GPU cache should be the same length of time.

But, like I said, it won't happen, either way. Why? Because it would require a significant change to the database and the admins have resisted this kind of change in the past.

About the limit we don't need to 'argue'.. ;-)
..the admins will have to decide.

You have currently 18 WUs/GPU.
Why you need then now hundreds of WUs..?

O.K., maybe 2 WUs/CPU-Core (one in calculation, one prepared) and 18 WUs/GPU (one in calculation, 17 prepared)..
____________
Best regards!

You have currently 18 WUs/GPU.
Why you need then now hundreds of WUs..?

From where you know, that the most members of MW@h crunch only on the GPU?

An other question, if you have a CPU, why you don't want to crunch on?

I see, you have no experiences with the MW@h CPU apps.
In past with the stock 0.19 app a MW@h WU needed ~ 10 hours on my E7600 @ 3.06 GHz.
After installation of the opt. SSE3 MW@h 0.21 app, ~ 2 hours/WU.

Now, the new Windows 0.4 app have a BUG. The Linux app is ~ 200 % faster.
The new Windows 0.4 app should be ~ 30 % faster, than the old 0.19.
The admins need to look again to the app.
Then the stock 0.41 app would need ~ 7 hours.
If then a coder will look to the app and will release again opt. CPU apps, with SSE3 usage like in past, maybe this time also SSSE3 and SSE4.1 extension usage, the calculation time will be again ~ 2 hours/WU..

Change it only for me?
MW@h would profit from all CPUs out there.
Much more if they would send out autom. opt. CPU apps to all members (if enabled in the prefs).
BOINC is now smart to read the extensions of the CPUs.

I don't know if you understood my question..
Not hundreds/thousands of WUs/host..

After 18 WUs/GPU on your host.. and ..my question of 2 WUs/CPU-Core.
My E7600 with GTX260 would have 4 CPU WUs and 18 GPU WUs in BOINC.
Your 12 thread CPU with 4 GPUs would have 24 CPU WUs (additional) and 72 GPU WUs (like now) in BOINC.
..not more.
____________
Best regards!

BTW.

Since 19 Oct 2010, MW@h have CPU-only apps.
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/apps.php

There is no MilkyWay@Home N-Body Simulation GPU app.

On my E7600 @ 3.06 GHz, this kind of WU need ~ 45 mins with 0.21 sse2 app.

____________
Best regards!

@ admins

Please let us know, if it will be possible in future, that MW@h have a separate CPU and GPU WU limit in progress. Thanks!
(Like I mentioned it in the upper messages)


I read about GPU- and CPU- only user, they have no probs.. ;-)

To now, I didn't saw someone with CPU + GPU simultaneously and it work or not.
For me, it don't work well autom. simultaneously.
If CPU + GPU enabled, only GPU WUs in BOINC.
____________
Best regards!