Welcome to MilkyWay@home

app v12


Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : app v12
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
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 8684 - Posted: 19 Jan 2009, 21:28:30 UTC

Let me know if the performance issues have been fixed.

thanks!
ID: 8684 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
cwhyl

Send message
Joined: 11 Nov 07
Posts: 41
Credit: 1,000,181
RAC: 0
1 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8688 - Posted: 19 Jan 2009, 23:19:19 UTC

32-bit Linux a tiny bit slower than before
64-bit Linux 20% or 10 minutes slower than v0.07 (?) but much better than 0.10
ID: 8688 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
BarryAZ

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 08
Posts: 519
Credit: 282,956,756
RAC: 1,168
200 million credit badge10 year member badgeextraordinary contributions badge
Message 8691 - Posted: 19 Jan 2009, 23:36:45 UTC - in response to Message 8684.  

Hard to tell at the moment until there is new work to process....

Let me know if the performance issues have been fixed.

thanks!


ID: 8691 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileUBT - mickyb69
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 08
Posts: 8
Credit: 500,197
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8693 - Posted: 19 Jan 2009, 23:44:18 UTC

Hi there ... Im probs on the wrong thread.
I detached from the project to get rid of the sse3 app and load your standard new app.
Im running xp64 on my e4500 and now the WU's are taking about 59 mins for 39 credits compaired to 41 mins for 40 credits a week ago.

Anyone else having the same problems ?

ID: 8693 · 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 8694 - Posted: 19 Jan 2009, 23:56:46 UTC

@ Travis: Why don't you just put out test runs instead of screwing with everyones computers? You're the one who stresses the need for testing the new apps. 6 version in a few days is too many.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 8694 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
cwhyl

Send message
Joined: 11 Nov 07
Posts: 41
Credit: 1,000,181
RAC: 0
1 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8695 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 0:19:51 UTC - in response to Message 8694.  

Me likes testing new versions :-)
ID: 8695 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilespeedimic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Feb 08
Posts: 260
Credit: 57,387,048
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8696 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 0:41:23 UTC - in response to Message 8694.  

@ Travis: Why don't you just put out test runs instead of screwing with everyones computers? You're the one who stresses the need for testing the new apps. 6 version in a few days is too many.


this project is still alpha, which means the whole thing is a test - so, in my opinion, no need for tests inside a test...
mic.


ID: 8696 · 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 8698 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 0:59:53 UTC - in response to Message 8696.  

@ Travis: Why don't you just put out test runs instead of screwing with everyones computers? You're the one who stresses the need for testing the new apps. 6 version in a few days is too many.


this project is still alpha, which means the whole thing is a test - so, in my opinion, no need for tests inside a test...



I think more time should be spent on one version checking the changes to the code and not making a change or two at a time. And atleast test it on the lab's computers to see if it even runs before a release. It would help eliminate the times that the app doesn't run and causes a load of wu's to be rejected.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 8698 · 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 8703 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 1:34:33 UTC - in response to Message 8698.  

@ Travis: Why don't you just put out test runs instead of screwing with everyones computers? You're the one who stresses the need for testing the new apps. 6 version in a few days is too many.


this project is still alpha, which means the whole thing is a test - so, in my opinion, no need for tests inside a test...



I think more time should be spent on one version checking the changes to the code and not making a change or two at a time. And atleast test it on the lab's computers to see if it even runs before a release. It would help eliminate the times that the app doesn't run and causes a load of wu's to be rejected.


We're pretty limited with the different CPUs/architectures that we have to test on at the moment. The apps have been running fine for me, but it seems that it isn't the case for other people.

Updates to the stock app should not cause any WUs to be rejected, the only changes lately have been in compiler flags. If WUs are being rejected, let me know.
ID: 8703 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Jim Wilkins

Send message
Joined: 1 Jan 08
Posts: 40
Credit: 1,676,165
RAC: 0
1 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8717 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 3:53:06 UTC
Last modified: 20 Jan 2009, 3:54:23 UTC

On 1 sample, I have seen a 5% faster time with .12. Not sure if that is in the noise or not.

Jim

EDIT: Running Mac OS 10.5.6 using BOINC 6.2.18 on a 2 dual core MacPro.
ID: 8717 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile[AF>Occitania>Lengadocian] F5LCU

Send message
Joined: 30 Mar 08
Posts: 25
Credit: 75,915,107
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8723 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 6:47:32 UTC

Hy,

Ubuntu 64 bits version 0.12 around 5400 s 56 minutes much better than 0.10.
Still 0.07 the best in time around 42 minutes for my computer.

On vista 32 bits no change around same time 0.07, 0.10 and 0.12.
ID: 8723 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfilePaul D. Buck

Send message
Joined: 12 Apr 08
Posts: 621
Credit: 161,934,067
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8724 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 7:42:43 UTC

On my Mac Pro I have not seen that v0.12 is different from 0.10 ...

Roughly 23-24 minutes ... because there is some variation in the run times it is hard to pin down ... along with the fact that you don't leave much history in the database (I know, other problems, but it makes it hard to go back and calculate a real time average) ...

All in all, I would say that there has been no change ...
ID: 8724 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profileniterobin

Send message
Joined: 11 Mar 08
Posts: 28
Credit: 818,194
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8728 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 9:47:38 UTC

0.12 is running at about 57 minutes per woek unit, 0.07 was running at about 55 minutes per work unit. That's on an Athlon XP 3000+ clocked at 2.17 GHZ running Kubuntu 8.04.1

HTH,

Rob.
ID: 8728 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileConan
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 08
Posts: 105
Credit: 65,396,973
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8732 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 12:15:06 UTC

On AMD 285 Linux Fedora Core 6, times for v0.07 and v0.12 are the same, no change at all.
ID: 8732 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile[AF>HFR>RR] Sp0wn

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 08
Posts: 10
Credit: 59,990,626
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8735 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 12:59:04 UTC
Last modified: 20 Jan 2009, 13:17:53 UTC

Travis, do you know why, this host :

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/results.php?hostid=41246 ( Linux 64 )

has granted credit = 0 ???

I am using the offcial app V0.12 !

I try to detach and reattach but same problem. I try with Speedimic v0.12 optimized application but still no point ?

I put this machine in NMW until you can find what happens !

sp0wn

edit :

All those Wus are 0 Credit granted !

Those ones are using official V0.12 app :


http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63033709

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63033710

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63033711

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63033712

[url]http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63033713


Those one are using Speedimic SSE4.1_X86_64 optimized app :

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63040284

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63042064

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63042087

only that one receive credit !

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=63042065

Before asking, this machine is not O/C....
ID: 8735 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile[AF>HFR>RR] Black Hole Sun
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 08
Posts: 10
Credit: 8,126,465
RAC: 0
5 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8736 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 13:02:07 UTC

Hi,

Opteron 170, 2,0 GHz, XP 32 : 3300 sec average, v10 and V12
Core2Duo 4300, 2,0 GHz, Ubuntu 64 : 4600 sec average V12 (7300 sec average V10)
Core2Quad 6600, 2,4 HZz, Ubuntu 64 : 3900 sec average V12 (6200 sec average V10)

So, V12 is undoubtly faster.
From memories, I would say say V12 is faster than V7 under Windows XP 32.
For sure, and completion times show it, Linux 64 V12 is undoubtly slower than V7 (about 30% slower).

Other hint for compiling : I doubt that my old Opteron (server version of the socket 939 Athlon 64 x2) could beat my Quad 6600 (both @ stock clock). I know, architecture are not the same, but the gap is not normal. The Linux 64 version lacks optimizations.

Good luck
ID: 8736 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
paris
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Apr 08
Posts: 78
Credit: 30,710,670
RAC: 15,746
30 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8737 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 13:04:22 UTC

V.7 and v.12 are running the same on OS X for mini core duo and MacBook core 2 duo. This is back to twice as fast as the intervening versions.
ID: 8737 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile[AF>HFR>RR] Black Hole Sun
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 08
Posts: 10
Credit: 8,126,465
RAC: 0
5 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8738 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 13:05:28 UTC - in response to Message 8735.  

Travis, do you know why, this host :

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/results.php?hostid=41246

has granted credit = 0 ???

I am using the offcial app V0.12 !

I try to detach and reattach but same problem. I try with Speedimic v0.12 optimized application but still no point ?

I put this machine in NMW until you can find what happens !

sp0wn


Hi Sp0wn

Check the result ;)

Validate state is Invalid

May be a bad bunch of wus ?
ID: 8738 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile[AF>HFR>RR] Sp0wn

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 08
Posts: 10
Credit: 59,990,626
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8739 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 13:21:47 UTC - in response to Message 8738.  

Don't know , it's since this morning !

I did not change anything on the host !

Only when I started to get 0 pts , I tried differents app but look like a kind of bug.

Anf it happens only on that computer ...
ID: 8739 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile[AF>HFR>RR] Sp0wn

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 08
Posts: 10
Credit: 59,990,626
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 8741 - Posted: 20 Jan 2009, 13:29:37 UTC - in response to Message 8738.  
Last modified: 20 Jan 2009, 13:39:12 UTC

Travis, do you know why, this host :

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/results.php?hostid=41246

has granted credit = 0 ???

I am using the offcial app V0.12 !

I try to detach and reattach but same problem. I try with Speedimic v0.12 optimized application but still no point ?

I put this machine in NMW until you can find what happens !

sp0wn


Hi Sp0wn

Check the result ;)

Validate state is Invalid



Yes, but why the state is invalid ?

I make some research and my first Wu to get 0 credit was that one :

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=62999767

I was using speedimic app (SSE4.1) from that thread :

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=566&nowrap=true#8664
ID: 8741 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : app v12

©2019 Astroinformatics Group