Welcome to MilkyWay@home

"High-Priority" tag?


Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : "High-Priority" tag?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Ocean Archer

Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 09
Posts: 3
Credit: 81,863
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 51830 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 0:01:35 UTC

It's been quite a while since I've done any 'crunching' for this project, and I do have a question ... The WU (an N-Body Simulation) has a high-priority tag on it and an estimated time in excess of 156 hours and a ten day window to complete. Early response of the BOINC manager suggests the estimated time to be high by a factor of 10. None of my other projects are in time crunch, so Im just going to let it run. Is this an anomaly limited to my machine alone, or has thee been issues of this in the past?
ID: 51830 · 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 51831 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 0:28:21 UTC
Last modified: 5 Dec 2011, 0:28:57 UTC

See any of the other numerouts posts on this. Why no mention is made on the site, I don't know.

N-body tasks have a poor estimate time. The best way is to let it run a few and calculate it out to see if you want to run it. They are all like this. I have had 2hours to 80+ hours on these tasks.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 51831 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Ocean Archer

Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 09
Posts: 3
Credit: 81,863
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 51832 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 0:34:56 UTC

Thanks for the quick reply there, Bandit ...

As I mentioned previously, none of my other works are in time pressure, so I'm going to let it go (should be finished in the morning). Then, I'll re-evaluate
ID: 51832 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Link
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Jul 10
Posts: 356
Credit: 16,317,754
RAC: 0
10 million credit badge9 year member badge
Message 51834 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 9:50:58 UTC - in response to Message 51832.  

Once you have 10 valid WUs for the n-body application, the "server side DCF" kicks in, and the estimates will be (or should be) close enough to the real runtimes, so they should not run in high-priority mode all the time (after the client side DCF has adjusted to the new estimates).
.
ID: 51834 · 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 51835 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 16:00:15 UTC - in response to Message 51834.  

Once you have 10 valid WUs for the n-body application, the "server side DCF" kicks in, and the estimates will be (or should be) close enough to the real runtimes, so they should not run in high-priority mode all the time (after the client side DCF has adjusted to the new estimates).


I've run dozens and it only dropped from ~850 hours to ~450 hours even though my longest has been ~80 hours. Mw has the n-body really overestimated. The ps-tasks corrected to the right time long ago.

@Ocean: MW has almost always ran in high priority mode for me. It doesn't bother me as I seem to have my computer set how it works for me. If you don't want to run the n-body you can set yourself to only run ps tasks, which for now are shorter tasks. I believe you need an app_info file for that.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 51835 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Link
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Jul 10
Posts: 356
Credit: 16,317,754
RAC: 0
10 million credit badge9 year member badge
Message 51839 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 19:10:06 UTC - in response to Message 51835.  

I've run dozens and it only dropped from ~850 hours to ~450 hours even though my longest has been ~80 hours. Mw has the n-body really overestimated. The ps-tasks corrected to the right time long ago.

???

On the applications page for your only host I see just one completed task for "MilkyWay@Home N-Body Simulation 0.66". OTOH, with 2 consecutive valid tasks and only 1 completed, it looks somehow broken and might explain why the server side DCF didn't kick in yet.
.
ID: 51839 · 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 51840 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 20:01:55 UTC

That is most likely because I had to restore my computer last week. It only give a few tasks completed total, and that is about all I have done this week since MW came back online. I haven't had any invalids since the new apps came out. I do check each task to see they validate and I get credit. This has to do with the settings of MW/Boinc since numerous other people keep posting this very question about multi-hundred hour tasks.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 51840 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Link
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Jul 10
Posts: 356
Credit: 16,317,754
RAC: 0
10 million credit badge9 year member badge
Message 51842 - Posted: 5 Dec 2011, 20:27:40 UTC - in response to Message 51840.  

This has to do with the settings of MW/Boinc since numerous other people keep posting this very question about multi-hundred hour tasks.

Wrong estimates for a new host or app are not suprising, but if that stays that way after 10 validated results, than that seems to be indeed some milkyway/n-body problem.
.
ID: 51842 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : Number crunching : "High-Priority" tag?

©2019 Astroinformatics Group