1) Message boards : Number crunching : Ugh! (Message 28380) Posted 26 Jul 2009 by Wang Solutions Post: Nice fairy, but the problem still exists for me.

2) Message boards : Number crunching : Ugh! (Message 28377) Posted 26 Jul 2009 by Wang Solutions Post: Now can't post either. (Well obviously it worked eventually)

3) Message boards : Number crunching : Ugh! (Message 28376) Posted 26 Jul 2009 by Wang Solutions Post: Ditto for last 40 minutes or so.

4) Message boards : Number crunching : App v0.10 (Message 8643) Posted 19 Jan 2009 by Wang Solutions Post: I found that v0.09 took more than twice as long as 0.07. v0.10 is possibly faster than 0.09 but still a lot slower than 0.07.

5) Message boards : Number crunching : app v0.9 (Message 8545) Posted 17 Jan 2009 by Wang Solutions Post: I am getting 81 minutes to completion now on 0.09 versus 38 minutes with 0.07. Q6600 on Kubuntu 7.10 64-bit.

6) Message boards : Number crunching : Clearing results from database quickly? (Message 4240) Posted 19 Jul 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: Thanks, I was not really worried about it from my point of view, but just wondering if anyone else was experiencing it and if in fact it needed to be checked on for reasons of data integrity.

7) Message boards : Number crunching : Clearing results from database quickly? (Message 4232) Posted 18 Jul 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: I have now had time to look into the first problem a little more, and I still cannot explain it. According to the host record here: http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/results.php?hostid=11188 I still have 5 tasks in cache, with the other ones listed having not been returned by deadline. But this PC actually has NO Milky Way work on it currently, and has not done so for several days. I suspect that the database might have been corrupted and that these tasks are actually from some other host, or have in fact been completed and returned by this host but not recognised for some reason (or were listed twice). Does anyone have any other thoughts?

8) Message boards : Number crunching : Clearing results from database quickly? (Message 4208) Posted 17 Jul 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: Since the change to the longer units I have been noticing a few things that are a little strange. Firstly, in my results I am seeing a lot of tasks supposedly not returned by deadline, but I have not seen any evidence of this actually happening on my machines. Indeed, one machine supposedly had 17 results not returned by deadline, but it had been set to no new work for several weeks and hasn't had anything to return! The others have all been going through work steadily and returning promptly, yet all are shown as having work not returned by deadline. I cannot work it out. Secondly, are you removing finished results from the database very quickly now? I just completed a few tasks, and within 5 minutes went to see the credit that they received but could find no trace of ANY completed tasks in my results. How long are you planning to leave the results in the database?

9) Message boards : Number crunching : Hopefully... (Message 4067) Posted 14 Jul 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: The fastest I have completed so far is 10,612 seconds (just under 3 hours) on a stock Q9300 on 64-bit Linux. Previous tasks on this computer took about 160 seconds. Don't know what the credit is like as yet as so far everything has gone into pending. On my slower AMD X2 4200+ on 32-bit Windows XP, it is currently looking like taking 12 hours.

10) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem with new W/Us (Message 3611) Posted 31 May 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: The odd ones are still coming through - about one every hour or two - but they are now all up to _3 or _4 so hopefully the end is near.

11) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem with new W/Us (Message 3591) Posted 30 May 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: It looks like we have new work starting to come through, hopefully all clean this time. Thanks Travis. EDIT: But no, the first one I got was a dud. :(

12) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem with new W/Us (Message 3537) Posted 28 May 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: It could not be something as simple as the name of the text file associated with this series of work, could it? The other units all seem to link to files with the words convolved or unconvolved in them, and this one doesn't. It is just called stars_82.txt.

13) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2638) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by Wang Solutions Post: Here's my 2 cents worth. I have been crunching this project since I first found it. I like it. I loved it when the apps were optimised and did the same amount of work in half the time and loved the credit boost that gave. But I am also the first to concede that the credit became too high and had to change. By my measurements, the performance boost with the optimisations was that they were done in about half the time they were before, so I would have thought it appropriate to halve the credit, not divide by 3. On my testing now, on my slower PCs the credit for MW is now lower than Spinhenge and Proteins, which are my "benchmarks" for the lowest credit. On my faster machines, the credit is in the mid range of all projects or slightly on the lower side. I will continue crunching this project as I consider it one of the worthy ones, but it will have to get a lower share if I am to maintain my desired daily credit output (yes, perhaps selfish, but I think you have to balance things - choose the projects you think worthy then allocate them time according to the rewards is my method). So to summarise, I would have thought about 3.25 would have been the right level to aim for (ie half what it was).

©2024 Astroinformatics Group