Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Problem with tiny cache in MW


Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : Problem with tiny cache in MW
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8

AuthorMessage
ProfileBerserk_Tux
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 79
Credit: 365,471,675
RAC: 0
300 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 34024 - Posted: 30 Nov 2009, 21:07:33 UTC - in response to Message 34015.  
Last modified: 30 Nov 2009, 21:08:40 UTC

I am happy here if work units going to be 4 times bigger, as told on the front page.


Thanks Travis.
ID: 34024 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profileverstapp
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Jan 09
Posts: 589
Credit: 497,834,261
RAC: 0
300 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 34027 - Posted: 30 Nov 2009, 21:22:40 UTC

Hi Travis,

Could you post a couple of paragraphs to the Science topic explaining what 'bigger' means in the context of these WUs.

Thanks.
Cheers,

PeterV

.
ID: 34027 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileThe Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
200 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 34031 - Posted: 30 Nov 2009, 21:47:32 UTC
Last modified: 30 Nov 2009, 21:55:58 UTC

There we go. A bigger cache! WOOHOO!

Let's see, 24 wu's @ 190sec avg with 2 GPUs = 38 min!

LOL, but much better than previously where 24 wu's @ 48 sec avg with 2 GPUs = 9.6 min!

A step in the right direction. Mind you I haven't seen any web site slowness or wu unavailability that I've been concerned about.

Mind you on my old P4 with the 3850 I now have a 2hr cache! And on my dual core CPU only machines the cache is going to blow out to 32hrs for 12 wu's and that is without taking into account resource share....so much for fast turn around times.

Wow! Here's a thought, the project may need to start considering checkpointing! ;)

Travis, time to go to a GPU only project?

Live long and BOINC.
ID: 34031 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Wolmari

Send message
Joined: 18 Sep 09
Posts: 4
Credit: 22,446,667
RAC: 0
20 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 34041 - Posted: 1 Dec 2009, 0:14:16 UTC

Forum feels like its working faster now. :)
ID: 34041 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 34047 - Posted: 1 Dec 2009, 1:55:15 UTC - in response to Message 34041.  

Yeah, the server isn't getting nailed nearly has hard as it was :)
ID: 34047 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileKevint
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Nov 07
Posts: 285
Credit: 1,076,786,368
RAC: 0
1 billion credit badge10 year member badge
Message 34048 - Posted: 1 Dec 2009, 2:05:50 UTC - in response to Message 34047.  

Yeah, the server isn't getting nailed nearly has hard as it was :)



Not only that,
My network connection is now working much better..

How about making them double the size they are now :)
I don't mind 6 min Wu's.. would bring back memories of the old days on MW before GPU.. when we had 6 min WU's.

.
ID: 34048 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 34049 - Posted: 1 Dec 2009, 2:11:18 UTC

The larger WUs are definitely helping here too. The cache on my X2 is up to 42 minutes and a whopping 84 minutes on the quads. They aren't hammering the server every minute now. Still though, in order to allow BOINC to work correctly and do it's scheduling job, WUs would either have to be larger still or allow enough of them to be able to schedule out at least 6-8 hours.

But don't get me wrong, this is an appreciated improvement!
ID: 34049 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35116 - Posted: 6 Jan 2010, 19:16:49 UTC

It looks like some shorter WUs are working there way back into the system. If the WUs are allowed revert back to the smaller size, the GPU clients will start hammering the server every minute and the crashes will resume. The 4x longer WUs helpped but between the WU size and tiny allowed cache for GPU machines, BOINC is still unable to schedule this project properly unless other GPU projects are suspended. Please consider increasing the WU size even more and increasing the WU queue size, at least for GPUs. Thanks.
ID: 35116 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Matthew
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 6 May 09
Posts: 217
Credit: 6,856,375
RAC: 0
5 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35118 - Posted: 6 Jan 2010, 20:01:35 UTC - in response to Message 35116.  

Thank you for your concern, Beyond. The work load of the server is one of our major concerns right now, so we are being careful to keep it down. Right now the server is running very smoothly, but we are able to adjust the WUs in short notice, if necessary. Just keep us posted if something gets bad. Thanks!
ID: 35118 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileDavid Glogau*
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Aug 09
Posts: 172
Credit: 645,240,165
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35135 - Posted: 7 Jan 2010, 0:52:23 UTC - in response to Message 35118.  

Hi Matthew, the problem is for those of us with high end GPU's we hammer the server every minute or so looking for more work with the 1 stream WU's.

Is there any way the 1 stream WU's can be restricted to boxes with CPU only?

This would achieve two things:
1. It would keep the low end boxes happy by giving them WU's they can complete in a reasonable time, not feel unwanted by the project, and;
2. It would keep demand down on the server keeping the high end people like myself happy as well.

Thanks for the quick responses to everyone's comments. It makes us all feel wanted.
ID: 35135 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35193 - Posted: 8 Jan 2010, 10:28:40 UTC

Second night in a row that my x2 box with HD4770 GPU ran out of work because of the 39-55 second WUs. Then the server tells the machine not to retry WU fetch for an hour and it sits idle. I'm REALLY REALLY tired of checking it every 10 minutes to see if it has work so it's back to Collatz with that machine. Why the short WUs have been brought back hasn't even been explained to us :-(
ID: 35193 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35201 - Posted: 8 Jan 2010, 12:59:35 UTC - in response to Message 35193.  

Somebody didn't pay attention and put them at the previous size.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 35201 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileThe Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
200 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35205 - Posted: 8 Jan 2010, 13:18:25 UTC - in response to Message 35193.  

Second night in a row that my x2 box with HD4770 GPU ran out of work because of the 39-55 second WUs. Then the server tells the machine not to retry WU fetch for an hour and it sits idle. I'm REALLY REALLY tired of checking it every 10 minutes to see if it has work so it's back to Collatz with that machine. Why the short WUs have been brought back hasn't even been explained to us :-(

That's what update scripts are for! An update every 10 minutes ensures your cache is never dry for long and gets around the project maintenance backoff and doesn't hit the server too hard.
ID: 35205 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35212 - Posted: 8 Jan 2010, 17:32:23 UTC - in response to Message 35205.  

Second night in a row that my x2 box with HD4770 GPU ran out of work because of the 39-55 second WUs. Then the server tells the machine not to retry WU fetch for an hour and it sits idle. I'm REALLY REALLY tired of checking it every 10 minutes to see if it has work so it's back to Collatz with that machine. Why the short WUs have been brought back hasn't even been explained to us :-(

That's what update scripts are for! An update every 10 minutes ensures your cache is never dry for long and gets around the project maintenance backoff and doesn't hit the server too hard.

Why not just set the back-off at 10 minutes instead of an hour. Having to run scripts to defeat the server settings is a slippery slope and will most likely lead to abuse in the long run. If the server is set up thoughtfully the work outages simply won't happen, much more work will be processed and users won't give up in frustration and leave.

ID: 35212 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileThe Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
200 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35218 - Posted: 8 Jan 2010, 19:54:09 UTC - in response to Message 35212.  

Second night in a row that my x2 box with HD4770 GPU ran out of work because of the 39-55 second WUs. Then the server tells the machine not to retry WU fetch for an hour and it sits idle. I'm REALLY REALLY tired of checking it every 10 minutes to see if it has work so it's back to Collatz with that machine. Why the short WUs have been brought back hasn't even been explained to us :-(

That's what update scripts are for! An update every 10 minutes ensures your cache is never dry for long and gets around the project maintenance backoff and doesn't hit the server too hard.

Why not just set the back-off at 10 minutes instead of an hour. Having to run scripts to defeat the server settings is a slippery slope and will most likely lead to abuse in the long run. If the server is set up thoughtfully the work outages simply won't happen, much more work will be processed and users won't give up in frustration and leave.


I can't disagree with that approach, but what we've seen is a lack of understanding by the project admins on the nuances of setting up BOINC server side.

Script use was quite common during the period when work was very difficult to get and I know I had mine set up to update at a period just a little longer than the 'just got work' backoff. With the introduction of the short wu's I wonder if we are going to hit server load issues again?
ID: 35218 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profileverstapp
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Jan 09
Posts: 589
Credit: 497,834,261
RAC: 0
300 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35220 - Posted: 8 Jan 2010, 22:56:40 UTC

I'm still running my scrip too, I just set the delay a bit longer.
Cheers,

PeterV

.
ID: 35220 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 35238 - Posted: 9 Jan 2010, 7:15:26 UTC

OK, I gave up and installed a script that updates all my MW boxes every 10 minutes. Took a while to get it running the way I wanted and updating all the machines with one script though...
ID: 35238 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8

Message boards : Number crunching : Problem with tiny cache in MW

©2020 Astroinformatics Group