Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by Cherokee150

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem Getting Multiple Tasks per Scheduler Reauest (Message 70915)
Posted 25 Jun 2021 by Cherokee150
Post:
Thank you very much, Keith. Now I understand how it works.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem Getting Multiple Tasks per Scheduler Reauest (Message 70906)
Posted 23 Jun 2021 by Cherokee150
Post:
Keith, you found the answer to my "6 units per request" problem!

I set up BOINC Manager's preferences for each computer years ago, when disk drives didn't have so much space. It was so long ago that I didn't think of it when I was trying to debug this. With your help, I updated the "Disk and memory" preferences for each computer. The problem was immediately solved!

I am still wondering how the scientists at MilkyWay benefit from our processing, since no result files are ever sent back to them. Is there some other way they are able to get the units' results? Do you, or does anyone, know how this works in MilkyWay?

Thank you once again, Keith, for guiding me to the right path!
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem Getting Multiple Tasks per Scheduler Reauest (Message 70905)
Posted 23 Jun 2021 by Cherokee150
Post:
Thank you very much for explaining the reason I can't get more than 300 units per day.

Keith found the answer to my "6 per" problem. It was due to disk limits that I set in BOINC Manager years ago when space was much more of an issue for everyone. I updated those to values appropriate for today.

I am still trying to understand why output files are never sent to MilkyWay. If MilkyWay doesn’t get output from us, how does our processing help them? Do you, or does anyone, know how our results get back to MilkyWay?

Thanks!
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem Getting Multiple Tasks per Scheduler Reauest (Message 70892)
Posted 21 Jun 2021 by Cherokee150
Post:
I have looked through all the preferences, but I don't see any caches that would appear to impact how many units would be sent per scheduler request. Can you specify to which cache size parameter you are referring, and in which XML file it resides?

Perhaps an example of the different way MilkyWay handles the PCs will help.

Due to circumstances, only one PC at a time can access the Internet, so I must swap the connection as needed.

1. I swap the Internet to PC 879281, which has completed 300 units. The PC reports those 300 units, then requests new units. MilkyWay sends 125 new units. About 95 seconds later the PC makes a second request for units. MilkyWay sends another 125 units. About 95 seconds later a third request gets 50 units, completing the replacement of the 300 completed units. Total elapsed time is just a little more than 3 minutes.

2. I swap the Internet to PC 879005. It has also completed 300 units. The PC reports those 300 units, then requests new units. MilkyWay sends 6 new units. About 95 seconds later the PC makes a second request for units. MilkyWay sends another 6 units. This cycle repeats about 50 times until the 300 units have been replaced. Total elapsed time is over 1 hour and 20 minutes.

Can you see what is causing this behavior and, hopefully, a way to fix it?

Thanks!
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem Getting Multiple Tasks per Scheduler Reauest (Message 70888)
Posted 20 Jun 2021 by Cherokee150
Post:
One of my computers, 879281, can receive up to 125 GPU work units per scheduler request. My other two computers, 879005 and 596332, are never able to get more than 6 tasks per request.

Does anyone know why this is? How can I raise the number of units per request on my two "6 per" computers?

Also, is there a reason why I can only get 300 GPU units per day for my 879281 and 879005 computers? My 879005 and my 879281 computer can process hundreds of GPU units per day. Is there a way to raise this limit? I don’t want them to sit idle.

Oh, and one final question. Why are there never any output files returned to Milky Way when units complete? Without receiving output from us, what does our processing accomplish for their project?

Thank you very much for any help you can give me with these questions.
6) Message boards : News : Windows Users-please abort Nbody tasks (Message 63669)
Posted 4 Jun 2015 by Cherokee150
Post:
Hi Sidd.
I have windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit) running on a Toshiba laptop (computer 596332) with an Intel Celeron 900 2.20 Ghz processor with 2.00 GB RAM. The OS has Service Pack 1 installed on it along with all MS OS updates up to, but not including, those released on or after 2015-04-14.

To acquire data on the problem, I ran three tests. For the first two tests, I let a specific Nbody simulation run twice, with the second run continuing non-stop, lasting approximately 168 hours. During all three of these tests the laptop was left entirely to itself almost the entire run, with the units getting an average of nearly 95% CPU over the course of the tests. Here is what I observed.

1. Neither of the two units took any checkpoints during any of the runs.

2. Attempting to stop and restart the first unit on the first run resulted in no data saved from the first run. I restarted it by shutting down and restarting BOINC normally. The restarted unit began at 0.000% processed.

3. On both runs of the first unit it appeared to run fairly normally until it passed approximately 95% processed. At that point the percentage processed slowed to a crawl, advancing only .001% about every five minutes or so.

4. On both runs of the first unit it eventually reached the point where BOINC reported 100% processed with estimated time remaining showing "---". Still no checkpoint was taken, nor were any data files saved. This state of nearly 100% CPU processing the unit and 100% processed, with no time remaining, continued for dozens of hours.

5. Processing continued until the deadline had passed. At that time I shut down BOINC and restarted it to see if the unit would save any files and/or report as completed. Neither occurred. When I restarted BOINC the unit reported as a task that was "Not started by deadline - canceled".

6. I then started a second nBody unit. It ran for over 20 hours with over 18 hours CPU time. It exhibited the same symptoms. After 20 hours I aborted the unit.

I might add that I have had no observable problems processing any Milkyway@Home units on this laptop since I joined your project.

I hope this information might provide some insight as to what is occurring, Sidd. Good luck!




©2023 Astroinformatics Group