Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by Cameron

1) Message boards : News : New Separation Runs 6/9/2021 (Message 70913)
Posted 25 Jun 2021 by Cameron
Had one Error on me

Workunit 119867095
name de_modfit_84_bundle4_4s_south4s_gapfix_bgset2_1621277702_21732796

Task in Question 229042440
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Nbody 1.80 errors (Message 70832)
Posted 24 May 2021 by Cameron
I know not too worry about them cause we're not wasting CPU time. But after noticing a few errors yesterday checking the thread and then examining the n-body work queued up on the machine. You do have workunits for 1.76 being run on 1.80.

I thought Boinc could support two versions of the same science app anyway so that you could have n-body 1.76 and n-body 1.80.
As you migrated the app towards more robust output, but still had earlier work that had been previously generated.

I like finishing resends and it seems a waste of that earlier modelled run if you're going to let them error out on the server,
Even if you're discarding a trivial fraction of the run.
3) Message boards : News : New Milkyway Badges Online (Message 70441)
Posted 26 Jan 2021 by Cameron
More badges... Thanks.
4) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.70 release (Message 67644)
Posted 2 Jul 2018 by Cameron
Just restarted accepting Nbody work

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

This is alright?
5) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.68 release (Message 67538)
Posted 26 May 2018 by Cameron
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.
6) Message boards : News : New Separation Runs 7 May (Message 67454)
Posted 14 May 2018 by Cameron
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.
7) Message boards : News : New Separation Runs 7 May (Message 67450)
Posted 11 May 2018 by Cameron
Any particular reason these runs are bundled in 4s rather than 5s?
8) Message boards : News : Validation Inconclusive Errors (Message 66965)
Posted 15 Jan 2018 by Cameron
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
9) Message boards : News : New Badges for Membership Time (Message 66871)
Posted 19 Dec 2017 by Cameron
saw the new badge passing by one of the stat sites.
They look good.
While I'm here time to get the 500K badge.
10) Message boards : News : Update on This Weeks Errors (Message 66755)
Posted 29 Oct 2017 by Cameron

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?
11) Message boards : Number crunching : cpu is desapear ? (Message 66126)
Posted 20 Jan 2017 by Cameron
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


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.
12) Message boards : News : Nbody Release 1.62 (Message 64770)
Posted 29 Jun 2016 by Cameron
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.
13) Message boards : News : New Nbody version 1.46 (Message 62908)
Posted 29 Dec 2014 by Cameron
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
14) Message boards : News : New Nbody version 1.46 (Message 62865)
Posted 20 Dec 2014 by Cameron
Just Retuned de_nbody_12_19_orphan_sim_1_1413455402_1432766_0 due to Computational error running 1.46.

The system cannot find the drive specified.
(0xf) - exit code 15 (0xf)
<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


Appeared to have run ps_nbody_08_05_orphan_sim_0_1413455402_1036953_3 successfully with 1.46 (just awaiting validation)
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Why so short Workunits? (Message 62839)
Posted 15 Dec 2014 by Cameron
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.
16) Message boards : News : New Nbody version (Message 62751)
Posted 28 Nov 2014 by Cameron

<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...

and file contents...

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?
:+> 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
17) Message boards : News : New Nbody version (Message 62724)
Posted 20 Nov 2014 by Cameron
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.
18) Message boards : News : New Nbody version (Message 62715)
Posted 19 Nov 2014 by Cameron
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.
19) Message boards : News : Award Badges Going Live Soon! (Message 60851)
Posted 28 Jan 2014 by Cameron
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?


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.
20) Message boards : News : Award Badges Going Live Soon! (Message 60703)
Posted 8 Jan 2014 by Cameron
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?

Next 20

©2021 Astroinformatics Group