Message boards :
News :
Separation updated to 0.80
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 8 Feb 08 Posts: 261 Credit: 104,050,322 RAC: 0 |
The initial sleep time is always 0. Hypothetically it should slightly reduce the CPU usage, but if I tried anything more than 0 it always ended up noticeably slower. The default is still to do 1ms polling. It shouldn't be doing busy waiting (unless you tell it to); It isn't for me, and I just checked out your tasks and the reported used CPU time isn't consistent with busy waiting. There still is a burst of 100% CPU at the end about 2 seconds long, so you might have seen it then. The busy wait shows as system time used, not showing up at process cpu time; so you will not find it in the log but see it in task manager. For the logs I checked, the estimated time is ~5% less than the average time per iteration. That looks like a good value. Only the last 5% of an iteration the cpu would actively wait for a reply from the gpu. Did you see my last comment about the command line param leading to errors? I edited it in while you replied. |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
When I put something in theYep. That looks broken. I suppose I should get around to actually implementing preferences correctly... I really wish BOINC would prepend arguments where they belong... |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
The busy wait shows as system time used, not showing up at process cpu time; so you will not find it in the log but see it in task manager. The accuracy varies greatly between different GPUs it seems |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
I'm running a Mac mini core duo (NOT core 2 duo) with OS X Tiger (10.4.11). Everything errors out immediately with the following stderr text:That's probably because I think I built it against the Leopard/10.5 SDK. I'll try again after I install the 10.4 SDK. |
Send message Joined: 26 Apr 08 Posts: 87 Credit: 64,801,496 RAC: 0 |
That's probably because I think I built it against the Leopard/10.5 SDK. I'll try again after I install the 10.4 SDK. Wow, thanks for the quick reply. You are probably right - I read something a while ago about needing to use the 10.4 SDK because the 10.5 did not compile properly for the Tiger applications. No rush. I'll be here when it is ready to go. Plus SETI Classic = 21,082 WUs |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
I'm also seeing an issue on Linux with the GPU applications getting permission denied when trying to set the process priority, even though it works fine outside of the manager. I'll try to get everything that's broken fixed by tomorrow... |
Send message Joined: 4 Sep 09 Posts: 20 Credit: 187,688,252 RAC: 0 |
Hello! With app_info.xml placed below, my computer became a computation errors generator: <app_info> When I remove <cmdline> tags computations run normally, but GUI works slow... |
Send message Joined: 11 Nov 07 Posts: 232 Credit: 178,229,009 RAC: 0 |
Seams to work fine now, only 2 marked as 'invalid' on HD 5870. Using Vista 64 and HD4870, HD5870 & HD6970. |
Send message Joined: 22 Mar 09 Posts: 99 Credit: 503,422,495 RAC: 0 |
No problems so far with the 0.80 on two 5850 on crossfire. (Win7-64, Boinc 6.12.28) Calculation-time seems to be 3 to 4 seconds shorter than with 0.62. For me it looks like that depends on the final cpu-calculation time, which is now closer. Thank you, Matt! |
Send message Joined: 11 Dec 07 Posts: 11 Credit: 95,037,645 RAC: 0 |
How can we use the flag --process-priority (-b) ? I tried to add it on my app_info like this : <cmdline>--process-priority=0</cmdline> or this <cmdline>--process-priority (-0)</cmdline> or this <cmdline>-b0</cmdline> Is it correct ? Apparently not because wu goes in error immediately If I remove this flag, it's ok but I only have 1 wu, only 1 by 1, in priority high |
Send message Joined: 2 Nov 10 Posts: 731 Credit: 131,536,342 RAC: 0 |
Finished WUs, but I'm not getting more now! No error messages! How can it say not requiring tasks, when I have no WUs for two 5870s? 6/13/2011 4:22:24 AM Milkyway@home Sending scheduler request: Requested by user. 6/13/2011 4:22:24 AM Milkyway@home Not reporting or requesting tasks 6/13/2011 4:22:26 AM Milkyway@home Scheduler request completed |
Send message Joined: 20 Sep 08 Posts: 1391 Credit: 203,563,566 RAC: 0 |
o.8 workunits validating OK on HD4770, Win 7 64 bit Ultimate, BM 6.12.28. However there is an error reported in the output file Error loading Lua script 'astronomy_parameters.txt': [string "number_parameters: 4..."]:1: '<name>' expected near '4' |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
o.8 workunits validating OK on HD4770, Win 7 64 bit Ultimate, BM 6.12.28.That's fine. That's fine. It will go away when the new parameters file is actually used. |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
How can we use the flag --process-priority (-b) ?Any arguments are broken. I'll have the fix release later today |
Send message Joined: 18 Feb 09 Posts: 9 Credit: 20,005,162 RAC: 0 |
I'm also seeing an issue on Linux with the GPU applications getting permission denied when trying to set the process priority, even though it works fine outside of the manager. I am getting this message for all my Linux AMD WUs (not Windows) so I have stopped requesting work on my Linux host. Stderr output <core_client_version>6.10.58</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <message> process exited with code 22 (0x16, -234) </message> <stderr_txt> execv: No such file or directory </stderr_txt> ]]> |
Send message Joined: 26 Apr 08 Posts: 87 Credit: 64,801,496 RAC: 0 |
That's probably because I think I built it against the Leopard/10.5 SDK. I'll try again after I install the 10.4 SDK. OK, I tried it with the new update and it seems to be working just fine. I won't know until I actually have a unit complete and return for credit but it looks promising. Thanks again. Plus SETI Classic = 21,082 WUs |
Send message Joined: 2 Nov 10 Posts: 731 Credit: 131,536,342 RAC: 0 |
Finished WUs, but I'm not getting more now! No error messages! How can it say not requiring tasks, when I have no WUs for two 5870s? Resetting the project fix my problem. Edit: Only got new WUs that one time! |
Send message Joined: 15 Jul 08 Posts: 383 Credit: 729,293,740 RAC: 0 |
Switched one machine over to .82. This is what i get: <core_client_version>6.12.28</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <message> Maximum elapsed time exceeded </message> <stderr_txt> Error loading Lua script 'astronomy_parameters.txt': [string "number_parameters: 4..."]:1: '<name>' expected near '4' Error reading astronomy parameters from file 'astronomy_parameters.txt' Trying old parameters file Using SSE3 path Found 2 CAL devices Chose device 1 Device target: CAL_TARGET_770 Revision: 62 CAL Version: 1.4.900 Engine clock: 835 Mhz Memory clock: 500 Mhz GPU RAM: 512 Wavefront size: 64 Double precision: CAL_TRUE Compute shader: CAL_TRUE Number SIMD: 8 Number shader engines: 1 Pitch alignment: 256 Surface alignment: 4096 Max size 2D: { 8192, 8192 } Estimated iteration time 371.049775 ms Target frequency 30.000000 Hz, polling mode 1 Dividing into 11 chunks, initially sleeping for 0 ms Integration range: { nu_steps = 640, mu_steps = 1600, r_steps = 1400 } Using 11 chunk(s) with sizes: 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 160 Integration time = 221.760294 s, average per iteration = 346.500459 ms Integral 0 time = 224.180060 s Likelihood time = 2.649498 s <background_integral> 0.000921986123313 </background_integral> <stream_integral> 306.928839958010830 217.682575146146350 1604.083839551776500 </stream_integral> <background_likelihood> -3.624712177160628 </background_likelihood> <stream_only_likelihood> -30.318720303955470 -4.078689643335152 -4.493778141271900 </stream_only_likelihood> <search_likelihood> -3.101747195361835 </search_likelihood> <search_application> milkywayathome_client separation 0.82 Windows x86_64 double CAL++ </search_application> 18:13:19 (5924): called boinc_finish </stderr_txt> All WUs abort at about 70% with "Maximum elapsed time exceeded". Going back to .62. |
Send message Joined: 2 Apr 11 Posts: 14 Credit: 4,527,461 RAC: 0 |
The PowerPC Mac OS build of 0.80 appeared to be perfectly happy running in Mac OS 10.4.11 and BOINC 6.10.58, completing a work unit previously flunked by two Windows 7 machines running ati14 apps. However, the task's been given an inconclusive validation. Stderr output shows several iterations of the "Error loading Lua script…" message reported by others above. The intial completion time estimate was about 8.5 hours, but it actually finished in exactly 14 hours 38 minutes. The older app typically took about 25 hours 40 minutes. I now have a 0.82 task waiting to start which also had an initial time estimate of 8.5 hours until the 0.80 task completed, but has now changed its estimate to exactly 14 hours 38 minutes too! |
Send message Joined: 15 Jul 08 Posts: 383 Credit: 729,293,740 RAC: 0 |
Switched one machine over to .82. This is what i get: Update, this was caused by the coincidental running of many of the bad test WUs in a row immediately after switching to v.82. It's working OK now. |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group