Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by Cameron

1) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.70 release (Message 67644)
Posted 2 Jul 2018 by Cameron
Post:
Just restarted accepting Nbody work

Application is version 1.70 although the workunits indicate *_v168_20k*.

This is alright?
2) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.68 release (Message 67538)
Posted 26 May 2018 by Cameron
Post:
I think the N-body Simulations are a multi-threaded task and will use many cores if available.

After you log in edit your Milkyway@home preferences

Run only the selected Applications: Milkyway@home: yes
Milkyway@home N-Body Simulation: no

Save your preference changes

send an update request from your BOINC client.
3) Message boards : News : New Separation Runs 7 May (Message 67454)
Posted 14 May 2018 by Cameron
Post:
Any particular reason these runs are bundled in 4s rather than 5s?


They appear to have 26 parameters instead of 20 in the previous tasks. And, judging by the elapsed time for these new tasks on my GPU it looks as if 4*26 parameters takes about the same time as 5*20 (!)

Obviously, this consistency of run time would be more significant for folks running CPU tasks - an increase of about 25% CPU time (likely with 5 per batch) might not go down quite so well there!...


I've always been a CPU only contributer to Milkyway.

but if it's a workunit flop size for the generator to handle that makes sense.
4) Message boards : News : New Separation Runs 7 May (Message 67450)
Posted 11 May 2018 by Cameron
Post:
Any particular reason these runs are bundled in 4s rather than 5s?
5) Message boards : News : Validation Inconclusive Errors (Message 66965)
Posted 15 Jan 2018 by Cameron
Post:
Anything going to happen to the inconclusive.... Cancelled Results?

some of the 35 I have

workunit 1551469684
workunit 1555077585
workunit 1555224430
workunit 1555253384
workunit 1555405588
6) Message boards : News : New Badges for Membership Time (Message 66871)
Posted 19 Dec 2017 by Cameron
Post:
saw the new badge passing by one of the stat sites.
They look good.
While I'm here time to get the 500K badge.
7) Message boards : News : Update on This Weeks Errors (Message 66755)
Posted 29 Oct 2017 by Cameron
Post:

Our project has been running for upwards of 10 years now and we have been crunching literally billions of workunits over those years. As a result of all of your hard work and dedication, we have actually calculated enough results that we have run out of room to store the IDs of all of these results in a normal unsigned integer value (the default data type used for storing IDs in BOINC databases). As a result, on Tuesday night, I updated our database to be able to store IDs in a much larger data type to prevent this issue from happening again during the remaining life of the project. As a result, I also had to quickly patch the BOINC code we run on the server to allow it to use this newly available data type in the database.


Just wondering If you know how much longer the project plans to run?
8) Message boards : Number crunching : cpu is desapear ? (Message 66126)
Posted 20 Jan 2017 by Cameron
Post:
Computing Preferences are common across all your BOINC Projects so changing it elsewhere may have affected how many CPUs MilkyWay will use.

What are your Computing Preferences set at for


On multiprocessors, use at most: n processors

and

On multiprocessors, use at most: % of the Processors


I'd suggest either explicitly stating the number of proccessors (eg 4 and 100%) or setting the numbers to 0 which will let the projects use all processors.
9) Message boards : News : Nbody Release 1.62 (Message 64770)
Posted 29 Jun 2016 by Cameron
Post:
I've been back for four of five days after a bit of an absence and had been recieving 1.60 during that time.

Anyway always nice to see a meaningful version bump.

Do these changes affact the actual science modelling or does it just improve the model througput validation/error ratio.
10) Message boards : News : New Nbody version 1.46 (Message 62908)
Posted 29 Dec 2014 by Cameron
Post:
Returned ps_nbody_12_20_orphan_sim_2_1413455402_1482094 and it can't validate because of too many results.

de_nbody_08_05_orphan_sim_0_1413455402_1236584 looks like going the same way.

How can 6 or 4 (mt) apps not come up with a qurom between them and my standard app is the odd one out making up the numbers.

Should 1.46 be taking 90 minutes to reach the first checkpoint on a single core of
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/show_host_detail.php?hostid=496692
11) Message boards : News : New Nbody version 1.46 (Message 62865)
Posted 20 Dec 2014 by Cameron
Post:
Just Retuned de_nbody_12_19_orphan_sim_1_1413455402_1432766_0 due to Computational error running 1.46.

<core_client_version>7.4.27</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
The system cannot find the drive specified.
(0xf) - exit code 15 (0xf)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
<search_application> milkyway_nbody 1.46 Windows x86_64 double , Crlibm </search_application>
Error reading histogram line 37: 1 -48.5294117647 0.0439655511 0.0013148967
21:05:57 (4564): called boinc_finish

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Appeared to have run ps_nbody_08_05_orphan_sim_0_1413455402_1036953_3 successfully with 1.46 (just awaiting validation)
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Why so short Workunits? (Message 62839)
Posted 15 Dec 2014 by Cameron
Post:
Aside from the new _fast_ runs as mentioned.

Milkyway have always had short workunits with fast turn around times so that the eveloving testing parameters are checked and that any particular result does not become stale.

Just Running on a CPU the Milkyway@home Simulation could take an hour or so. and the Usually Seperation or Seperation(Modified Fit) takes about 2 hours.

The N-Body Simulation might be a bit different.

Double Precision GPUS the Only GPUs that Milkyway utilies a MultiThreading are probably much faster.

It's just the way the Milkyway Project utilises the volunteered resources.
13) Message boards : News : New Nbody version (Message 62751)
Posted 28 Nov 2014 by Cameron
Post:
Greetings!

<first day to post this, found this thread dealing with N-body - as it may have the proper thread subjects from the issues I have trying to run Milkyway@Home>

I'm finding messages from BOINC telling me...

Milkyway@Home: Notice from server
Your app_info.xml file doesn't have a useable version of Milkyway@Home Separation (Modified Fit). and message containing N-body Simulation - same context...
DTD Tue 25 Nov 2014 03:40.36 AM EST

This is two notices each day, process I do is...
Reset Project>>Update

Continuing issue starting back in November 5th or thereabouts...

Searching Linux Mint V17 [Quiana]

Locates this xml file...

/user/share/boinc-app-milkyway
and file contents...
<app_info>
<app>
<name>milkyway</name>
</app>
<file_info>
<name>milkyway</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<app_version>
<app_name>milkyway</app_name>
<version_num>18</version_num>
<file_ref>
<file_name>milkyway</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
</app_version>
</app_info>

Seems either I need this file, or I already have a file or do I need to delete this file so the system can sense this and reinstall?

Trying to help you run stuff but I'm not sure how to fix the above...

Any suggestions?
Regards!
:+> Andy <+:


I think you should delete the file and then reset the project. It sounds as though it is behaving like an local override file and the server is saying it does not match the current app version but is being prevented from auto updating the app.

If Resetting does not work you might need to detach [Remove] and (Re)join the Poject
14) Message boards : News : New Nbody version (Message 62724)
Posted 20 Nov 2014 by Cameron
Post:
de_nbody_08_05_orphan_sim_0_1413455402_195772_3 was progressing slower than the previous N-Body Task at .37%/hr.

I've aborted it after 24 hours[9.08%] and won't do N-body Tasks until a new app version is released.
15) Message boards : News : New Nbody version (Message 62715)
Posted 19 Nov 2014 by Cameron
Post:
I am aborting de_nbody_08_05_orphan_sim_0_1413455402_345349_0

which after 16.5 hours at 0.411%/hr has achieved 6.78%.

I also have another N-Body workunit [de_nbody_08_05_orphan_sim_0_1413455402_195772_3]

If this one is similarly 0.4%/hr I shall be aborting it as well.
16) Message boards : News : Award Badges Going Live Soon! (Message 60851)
Posted 28 Jan 2014 by Cameron
Post:
I currently have over 2 million credits on the books for Milkyway WUs. When the awards get posted, will these credits be recognized or will everyone be starting from zero?

Thanks



Gandalf, Matt mentioned earlier in the thread [page 1] that the current cobblestone|credit values will be used and the appropriate badges will be displayed once the badge system is live so your current 2 million credits will grant you a 2M badge and when you've done a total of 3 millions credits worth you'll have a 3 million badge instead.
17) Message boards : News : Award Badges Going Live Soon! (Message 60703)
Posted 8 Jan 2014 by Cameron
Post:
A question more relevent for 2016 but will you be adding badge pairs for extened years of service after platinum?

(bronze),(silver),(gold),(platinum),(rarer metal),(unobtainium)

or adjusting the service ranges for (bronze),(silver),(gold),(platinum) in the future?
18) Message boards : News : Award Badges Going Live Soon! (Message 60658)
Posted 26 Dec 2013 by Cameron
Post:
Is it possible to include a badge to indicate a CPU contribution of 50%/75%/100% to a participants contribution to the project?
19) Message boards : Cafe MilkyWay : Definately not Seti....... (Message 44005)
Posted 21 Nov 2010 by Cameron
Post:
I'm doing some Cosmology@Home (Who's boards are even quieter than here)

until I find out MilkyWay has fixed Completed CPU Work Granted Credits or Credit is Pending until another CPU can Validate.

(I might be a MW Minority Group using only the CPU but I can't be the only one)

that or SETI@Home Returns

-- To Summarise --

I would like to know what's happened at MW over the last month or perhaps what about to happen over the next few weeks.

I'd started returning Completed MW WUs at the start of November everything looking fine.

Then About 10/11 November I suddenly got fewer credits for returning completed work (have been returning 4-6 WUs a Day [within deadline])

Camerons Daily Milkyway Granted Credit for November 2010

I want to know Why I've had nearly two weeks of historically consistant CPU WU Returned Milky Way Credit Granted (which I'm happy with) and then overnight suddenly the granted credit drop (I've been returning completed CPU Workunits)

The reason best I can tell is that the tasks that are generated after I return my WU that has been crunched by my CPU are taken by GPUs and they form the quorum.
20) Message boards : News : an update on the credit issue (Message 43907)
Posted 17 Nov 2010 by Cameron
Post:
If tasks that have be validated by CPUs can also be validated by CPUs rather than being dropped because the quorum is met by two GPUs *AFTER* the CPU Task has been returned than that would be great.

Really annoying for doing tasks *_0 and *_1 when the next task for the workunit is not generated until the return of the workunit sent out.

Started Happening to me on the 10th-11th November. The week before CPU Tasks were being accepted and credit being granted normally.

I may have mis-posted the message on the Science Board but This is the thread I started


Next 20

©2020 Astroinformatics Group