Welcome to MilkyWay@home

More Invalid wu's

Message boards : Number crunching : More Invalid wu's
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
paris
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Apr 08
Posts: 87
Credit: 64,801,496
RAC: 0
Message 26387 - Posted: 24 Jun 2009, 17:37:35 UTC

Invalid ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_4147052_1245758465_0 on an old iMac here.


Plus SETI Classic = 21,082 WUs
ID: 26387 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Cluster Physik

Send message
Joined: 26 Jul 08
Posts: 627
Credit: 94,940,203
RAC: 0
Message 26409 - Posted: 24 Jun 2009, 23:23:55 UTC
Last modified: 24 Jun 2009, 23:24:39 UTC

As I said already, the invalid WUs have nothing to do with the application you use. It can be the stock app for a Mac, you will still have some invalid WUs. It is simply the "plausibility check" of the result on the server that sometimes decides the result can't be true (even if it is completely correct). That is probably caused by some strange parameter combinations in a WU, which delivers an extremely bad fitness. You shouldn't worry about this.
ID: 26409 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile banditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
Message 26412 - Posted: 24 Jun 2009, 23:46:21 UTC - in response to Message 26409.  

You shouldn't worry about this.

But we need something to worry and complain about! ;-)
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 26412 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile The Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
Message 26417 - Posted: 25 Jun 2009, 0:20:26 UTC - in response to Message 26412.  

You shouldn't worry about this.

But we need something to worry and complain about! ;-)

The error rate I'm seeing adds up to about 2000 credits a day lost.....now that is something to complain about!
ID: 26417 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Conan
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 122
Credit: 69,480,206
RAC: 1,380
Message 26424 - Posted: 25 Jun 2009, 2:25:17 UTC

I have only noticed a few of these faulty work units.

So far all the ones I have caught have been on my Pentium 4 Windows machine and each time the Work Unit in question has been a "ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_" type.

Instead of running for 1 1/2 to 2 hours as normal they run for up to 8 hours.
Always finish and don't error out during whilst running, but I aborted one at 5 1/2 hours last night and another ran for over 8 hours after I had gone to bed, giving zero credit as classed as invalid.

Have probably had more but work units don't hang round all that long.
ID: 26424 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
PeteS

Send message
Joined: 19 Mar 09
Posts: 27
Credit: 117,670,452
RAC: 0
Message 26431 - Posted: 25 Jun 2009, 7:02:54 UTC

I have also problems with some WU's. I don't mind the loss of credit, but when I get "display driver stopped responding" the astronomy_0.19_ATI_x64f.exe process starts eating 100% of CPU time! As I can't babysit the computers all the time, I have 100% CPU load for long times and BOINC not doing any work until I kill that process or restart BOINC.

This is an example of it: http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=88488548

Using Win7 64bit, Cat 9.5, 3850. Often the WU's that jam up are not shown on the list, as after restart processing starts fromn 0% again and might go through the second time. Have tried to change f and w parameters, but just get low GPU utilization and problems still appear.. Current settings: <cmdline>n1 w1.7 f100</cmdline>

Any chance of getting the ATI-app to notice it's jammed up and auto-kill itself? Any idea why I'm getting these problems?

Oh and sometimes no credit is granted for succesfull WU's: http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=86663177
ID: 26431 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile GalaxyIce
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 08
Posts: 2018
Credit: 100,142,856
RAC: 0
Message 26438 - Posted: 25 Jun 2009, 8:07:14 UTC - in response to Message 26431.  

Any chance of getting the ATI-app to notice it's jammed up and auto-kill itself?

I had this problem only yesterday - but I hope my cards don't get it into their heads to commit suicide, they're too young to go just yet ;)



ID: 26438 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Conan
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 122
Credit: 69,480,206
RAC: 1,380
Message 26599 - Posted: 27 Jun 2009, 12:05:23 UTC - in response to Message 26424.  

I have only noticed a few of these faulty work units.

So far all the ones I have caught have been on my Pentium 4 Windows machine and each time the Work Unit in question has been a "ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_" type.

Instead of running for 1 1/2 to 2 hours as normal they run for up to 8 hours.
Always finish and don't error out during whilst running, but I aborted one at 5 1/2 hours last night and another ran for over 8 hours after I had gone to bed, giving zero credit as classed as invalid.

Have probably had more but work units don't hang round all that long.


Just killed another one of these 210F5_3s work units at over 5 hours run time.
Interesting that the reported result shows Zero CPU time not the 5 hours I have been running.

My output on this P4 has dropped a lot recently and i now put it down to this same WU type that is taking so long to run and then gives Zero Credit for the effort, so I know I am getting more than the couple that I have been able to catch.
ID: 26599 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile banditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
Message 26604 - Posted: 27 Jun 2009, 13:51:36 UTC

huh finally had one, waste of 85 min. :
ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_6368068_1246063275_0
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=89593602

Since the error rate is higher with this bunch, couldn't the code for this series of wu's be checked if it's correct or too strict? Or has it?
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 26604 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Dan T. Morris
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Mar 08
Posts: 165
Credit: 410,228,216
RAC: 0
Message 26657 - Posted: 28 Jun 2009, 19:37:33 UTC

Did the work but no credit...HUH?

DD,


90683000
Name ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_7397059_1246214151_0
Workunit 88832145
Created 28 Jun 2009 18:35:52 UTC
Sent 28 Jun 2009 18:37:09 UTC
Received 28 Jun 2009 18:50:06 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Success
Client state Done
Exit status 0 (0x0)
Computer ID 84507
Report deadline 1 Jul 2009 18:37:09 UTC
CPU time 211.5469
stderr out

<core_client_version>6.6.36</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
Running Milkyway@home ATI GPU application version 0.19f by Gipsel
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+ (2 cores/threads) 2.16499 GHz (313ms)

CAL Runtime: 1.3.145
Found 1 CAL device

Device 0: ATI Radeon HD 3800 (RV670) 1024 MB local RAM (remote 28 MB cached + 256 MB uncached)
GPU core clock: 759 MHz, memory clock: 504 MHz
320 shader units organized in 4 SIMDs with 16 VLIW units (5-issue), wavefront size 64 threads
supporting double precision

3 WUs already running on GPU 0
No free GPU! Waiting ... 63.9688 seconds.
Starting WU on GPU 0

main integral, 320 iterations
predicted runtime per iteration is 473 ms (33.3333 ms are allowed), dividing each iteration in 15 parts
borders of the domains at 0 112 216 320 432 536 640 752 856 960 1072 1176 1280 1392 1496 1600
Calculated about 9.89542e+012 floatingpoint ops on GPU, 1.23583e+008 on FPU. Approximate GPU time 211.547 seconds.

probability calculation (stars)
Calculated about 2.46469e+009 floatingpoint ops on FPU.

WU completed.
CPU time: 63.6719 seconds, GPU time: 211.547 seconds, wall clock time: 703.21 seconds, CPU frequency: 2.165 GHz

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Validate state Invalid
Claimed credit 0.883484783514827
Granted credit 0
application version 0.19
ID: 26657 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile banditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
Message 26662 - Posted: 28 Jun 2009, 20:23:18 UTC

Can I suggest that a post be made on the homepage that mentions this problem. People might read that.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 26662 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile The Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
Message 26664 - Posted: 28 Jun 2009, 20:30:02 UTC - in response to Message 26409.  

Cluster Physik said....

As I said already, the invalid WUs have nothing to do with the application you use. It can be the stock app for a Mac, you will still have some invalid WUs. It is simply the "plausibility check" of the result on the server that sometimes decides the result can't be true (even if it is completely correct). That is probably caused by some strange parameter combinations in a WU, which delivers an extremely bad fitness. You shouldn't worry about this.

ID: 26664 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile banditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
Message 26871 - Posted: 2 Jul 2009, 1:30:33 UTC

Another one, forgot to abort first.

Task ID 92773155
Name ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_9406080_1246479241_0
Workunit 90841166
ID: 26871 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
6dj72cn8

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 07
Posts: 41
Credit: 2,582,082
RAC: 0
Message 26878 - Posted: 2 Jul 2009, 3:53:23 UTC - in response to Message 26664.  

I dispute Cluster Physik's 'you shouldn't worry about this'. I only crunch during the eight-hour working day and these invalid tasks can run for almost two hours. It peeves me mightily when 25% of my crunch time is discarded for zero credit. It might not be a worry for those with GPU where only a few minutes worth of crunch is discarded but we don't all have that option.

And another thing. All of these 3s tasks run 20-40% longer than 2s tasks. For no extra credit.
ID: 26878 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Cluster Physik

Send message
Joined: 26 Jul 08
Posts: 627
Credit: 94,940,203
RAC: 0
Message 26882 - Posted: 2 Jul 2009, 5:35:45 UTC - in response to Message 26878.  

And another thing. All of these 3s tasks run 20-40% longer than 2s tasks. For no extra credit.

Of course they give about a third more credits than the 2s WUs!
2s: 55.52 credits
3s: 74.24 credits

74.24/55.52 - 1 = 33.7% more
ID: 26882 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile GalaxyIce
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 08
Posts: 2018
Credit: 100,142,856
RAC: 0
Message 26889 - Posted: 2 Jul 2009, 6:53:36 UTC - in response to Message 26878.  

I dispute Cluster Physik's 'you shouldn't worry about this'. I only crunch during the eight-hour working day and these invalid tasks can run for almost two hours. It peeves me mightily when 25% of my crunch time is discarded for zero credit. It might not be a worry for those with GPU where only a few minutes worth of crunch is discarded but we don't all have that option.

I run both GPU and CPU-only on some boxes and see I have some WUs returning zero credit and appreciate the disappoitment when PCs have been running on 'wasted' WUs. However, as much as I want to amass as many credits as possible because it looks good and I like to see that progress in my science contributions when I check my stats - as much as all that, this is still an alpha project and participation still comes with all the server downtimes, problematic WUs and all the other glitches and gremlins that come with it. Fortunately we have gremlins like Cluster Physik to help us out ;)


ID: 26889 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
6dj72cn8

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 07
Posts: 41
Credit: 2,582,082
RAC: 0
Message 26895 - Posted: 2 Jul 2009, 8:18:15 UTC - in response to Message 26882.  

Of course they give about a third more credits than the 2s WUs!

With an exclamation mark, no less.

OK, scratch that. Correct to read: 'Some 3s, while not invalidating, run 20–40% longer than others'. On my CPU, since The Great Credit Adjustment of February (or whenever it was), I get about 50cr/hr. Except for quite a few of the recent 3s which seem to run over time and deliver 35-40cr/hr. Not that I am getting all bent out of shape over it. It was just the 'there is no problem' assertion earlier in this thread that I felt like swatting.
ID: 26895 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Rob.B

Send message
Joined: 21 Mar 09
Posts: 15
Credit: 1,545,913
RAC: 0
Message 27039 - Posted: 4 Jul 2009, 12:13:38 UTC

Still getting frequent 0 credit wu's (see previous posts) the latest is http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=92341139 . Is this issue going to be adressed?
ID: 27039 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
Message 27233 - Posted: 7 Jul 2009, 13:15:15 UTC
Last modified: 7 Jul 2009, 13:15:54 UTC

Out of curiosity, has anyone noticed any of these invalid tasks showing up on an AMD system AND said system is NOT using the GPU app? I hadn't seen any on my Athlon64 3700+, but I attached my P4 yesterday and already have one. Additionally, everyone in this thread who has mentioned getting them has an Intel system. Further, Conan has so far only mentioned that the issue has only been on his P4... Only Dan Morris has mentioned an AMD, but he is using the GPU app on that one...
ID: 27233 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
Message 27379 - Posted: 9 Jul 2009, 14:53:54 UTC - in response to Message 27233.  

Out of curiosity, has anyone noticed any of these invalid tasks showing up on an AMD system AND said system is NOT using the GPU app? I hadn't seen any on my Athlon64 3700+, but I attached my P4 yesterday and already have one. Additionally, everyone in this thread who has mentioned getting them has an Intel system. Further, Conan has so far only mentioned that the issue has only been on his P4... Only Dan Morris has mentioned an AMD, but he is using the GPU app on that one...


Answering my own question:

I finally did see one on my AMD...

The one that failed was: ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_14747556_1247129544
Valid just before it was : ps_sgr_210F5_3s_hiw_14747555_1247129544

Maybe that will help someone narrow down the issue...
ID: 27379 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : More Invalid wu's

©2024 Astroinformatics Group