Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by [B^S] Astral Walker

1) Message boards : Number crunching : New Work (Message 7397)
Posted 4 Dec 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
I'm currently choking on an orbit WU. After 46 hours I'm 22% through with an estimated completion time of 85 hours. Good thing it's not due until february.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : credit comparison to other projects (Message 7350)
Posted 3 Dec 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
Maybe we need a separate BOINC project to determine how credit should be awarded.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : work availability (Message 7246)
Posted 2 Dec 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
Just checking out my recent tasks on this machine I see I completed 13 tasks with the new client so far (or at leasts thats all I see) and my estimated time to completion with 5 tasks in the cache is still around 3 hours.

My Q6700 (@2.66GHz) took about 44 minutes per new WU (roughly 4X as you said). On this machine I have not seen any of the WUs that are 2.5X as long. This dual core (T2300@1.6GHz) runs about 1.7 hours per WU, a bit more than twice as long as the Q6700. It still has a bit of catching up to do and while I suppose I could change the setting which makes the estimated times change faster, I'm wary of nasty surprises (e.g. Sztaki).
4) Message boards : Number crunching : work availability (Message 7172)
Posted 1 Dec 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
No it has work from other projects and for now, BOINC is estimating the time to completion around 7.5 hours on a dual core and won't download more than a couple of WUs at a time. :p Once that ceases to be a problem my work download will have other issues.

This system completes WUs in twice as long as my Q6700. If MW is run exclusively then the machine I'm typing on can get max 12 hours of work with the limit and the quad which is not permanently connected to the internet can only have 6 hours of work at one time. This machine is permanently connected so it's not a big problem. Getting all 8X4=32 WUs at once on my quad before I leave my apartment each morning will be necessary.

I am working on getting all my machines some sort of permanent connection but without Cable or DSL my options are somewhat limited (I use a cellular 3G connection). It would be nice if the WU limits allowed for keeping a cache with 24 hours of work at one time (based on average completion times I guess). :p
5) Message boards : Number crunching : work availability (Message 7132)
Posted 1 Dec 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
Thanks, it worked - sorry for not thinking fo that myself. :)

I presumed resetting the project would work but it didn't. The odd thing is that deleting all the files manually worked on another system, just not on this one.
6) Message boards : Number crunching : work availability (Message 7097)
Posted 1 Dec 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
Do I have to enable the test app to get workunits? Or will the production application be replaced with the new application? If yes - when?


It should automatically download for you.


It worked fine for my Vista x64 machine but I am trying to d/l it to an XP 32 bit machine but it's not downloading the new app. I reset the project and deleted everything in the folder (same as the other machine but all I get is this.

11/30/2008 10:56:36 PM|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 80587 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
11/30/2008 10:56:41 PM|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks
11/30/2008 10:56:41 PM|Milkyway@home|Message from server: No work sent

Edit: Well this is strange, I deleted all the files in the milkyway project folder but I just downloaded 2 new WUs when there aren't supposed to be any, nor do I have the app file. I must have another project folder somewhere (the version is 6.2.19).

11/30/2008 11:08:09 PM|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 80673 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
11/30/2008 11:08:14 PM|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 2 new tasks
11/30/2008 11:08:16 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227852900_66214
11/30/2008 11:08:16 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227852901_66221
11/30/2008 11:08:17 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227852900_66214
11/30/2008 11:08:17 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227852901_66221
11/30/2008 11:08:19 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of stars_82.txt
11/30/2008 11:08:25 PM|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 103197 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
11/30/2008 11:08:30 PM|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks


Well for some reason I downloaded 2 of the old WUs despite not having an app nor an app_info.xml file. When they ran I got a computation error.

11/30/2008 11:18:34 PM|Milkyway@home|Starting gs_625_1227852900_66214_1
11/30/2008 11:18:34 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:35 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:35 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:36 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:37 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:38 PM|Milkyway@home|Computation for task gs_625_1227852900_66214_1 finished
11/30/2008 11:18:38 PM|Milkyway@home|Output file gs_625_1227852900_66214_1_0 for task gs_625_1227852900_66214_1 absent
11/30/2008 11:18:38 PM|Milkyway@home|Starting gs_629_1227852901_66221_1
11/30/2008 11:18:38 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:38 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:39 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:39 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:39 PM|Milkyway@home|[error] Process creation failed: The system cannot find the file specified. (0x2)
11/30/2008 11:18:40 PM|Milkyway@home|Computation for task gs_629_1227852901_66221_1 finished
11/30/2008 11:18:40 PM|Milkyway@home|Output file gs_629_1227852901_66221_1_0 for task gs_629_1227852901_66221_1 absent

And some more.

11/30/2008 11:40:28 PM|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: Requested by user. Requesting 116560 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
11/30/2008 11:40:33 PM|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 8 new tasks
11/30/2008 11:40:36 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855187_75889
11/30/2008 11:40:36 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855187_75890
11/30/2008 11:40:38 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855187_75889
11/30/2008 11:40:38 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855187_75891
11/30/2008 11:40:39 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855187_75890
11/30/2008 11:40:39 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855187_75891
11/30/2008 11:40:39 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855189_75896
11/30/2008 11:40:39 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855182_75818
11/30/2008 11:40:40 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855189_75896
11/30/2008 11:40:40 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855182_75818
11/30/2008 11:40:40 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855189_75899
11/30/2008 11:40:40 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855184_75844
11/30/2008 11:40:41 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855189_75899
11/30/2008 11:40:41 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855184_75844
11/30/2008 11:40:41 PM|Milkyway@home|Started download of parameters_generated_1227855184_75845
11/30/2008 11:40:42 PM|Milkyway@home|Finished download of parameters_generated_1227855184_75845
11/30/2008 11:40:44 PM|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 111925 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
11/30/2008 11:40:49 PM|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks
11/30/2008 11:40:49 PM|Milkyway@home|Message from server: No work sent
11/30/2008 11:40:49 PM|Milkyway@home|Message from server: (reached per-CPU limit of 8 tasks)
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Error on connect can't attach shared memory (Message 6597)
Posted 24 Nov 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
The feeder is down. Is that in response to the problem or is it something else?
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Faster application (links inside) (Message 5869)
Posted 3 Nov 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
I guess this makes the issue of whether the WUs are reported fast enough for the science moot at this time until the work generator can keep up with the tremendous gain in efficiency. :)


ATM the new work waiting server is keeping up with the demand OK. But this is for those who have D/Led the Milksop fast client.

The real problem may occur when Dave, and the Admins, release the new client based, to some extent, on Milksop's work. All the community will move across eventually and the demand will be from everyone, not just the ones using the current fast client (just a few).

I wonder what proportion of the crunching community is actually currently using the fast client?


Hmm.. well I wasn't able to get any new WUs yesterday after downloading the app to most of my computers. Currently I see 56 WUs available with 70k in progress. I guess I'll have to see if I can get some work later on (this computer uses the old app for now since it doesn't have access to file sharing sites).
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Faster application (links inside) (Message 5856)
Posted 3 Nov 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
Btw. as it is now possible again, I've updated my profile.
The files linked there contain a fixed app_info.xml.

Or as a short cut:
application for Windows 32 and 64Bit versions
application for Linux 32 and 64Bit versions

Thanks for the great app. I guess this makes the issue of whether the WUs are reported fast enough for the science moot at this time until the work generator can keep up with the tremendous gain in efficiency. :)
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Electrical Fire-Box #13791 (Message 3228)
Posted 16 Apr 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
Do I need to buy a fire extinguisher for my apartment?


Yes, all humans should have one.


Good that disqualifies me.
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Electrical Fire-Box #13791 (Message 3218)
Posted 15 Apr 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
All WU's in progress for this rig should be recycled asap. Motherboard failure. Gigabyte GA P35-DS3L (refurb) from NE. Melted components near 4 pin power connector. Health of remaining components TBD. If there is any good news, I was granted an RMA for credit. Crunch on.

Thanks to all who got the Server back!

Voltron


wow...Gigabytes are usually pretty stable. I usually go with Asus or Abit myself.


I've heard of about a dozen newer Gigabyte boards that have caught fire or had melting where the MOSFETS are. It was always with boards that where overclocked. I don't know what caused this one.

I'll be adding extra cooling on my Asus MOSFETS soon.


Sorry to hear about your board. I have a GB GA-P35-DS3R. Do I need to buy a fire extinguisher for my apartment?
12) Message boards : Number crunching : 20 workunit limit (Message 3206)
Posted 14 Apr 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
I don't know if there are any statistics on how often computers connect to BOINC (let alone this project) so for me this is more of a theoretical discussion.

In recent memory I have not been a very staunch defender of project decisions. But, there are cases where short deadlines are needed for the project to accomplish its goals. The fact that these deadlines conflict with your needs as a participant is unfortunate and not necessarily a bad design choice.

Note that I'm not saying this is a bad decision per se, but that a project with such short deadlines is just not suitable for BOINC in general. Even if you are connected to the net permanently, you essentially have to run the project exclusively. At some point the project becomes a standalone client. If you absolutely positively need those results that quickly, maybe, just maybe, distributed computing is the wrong way to go.

It just means that you, like all participants, has to decide if the project's parameters meets your capabilities.

Like I said, I would have to detatch. How many others would have to detatch? Is the shorter duration of WUs really worth this loss of crunching power?

There are a half a dozen projects that I wish I could contribute to ... but I cannot because they don't have a version for OS-X ... and that cuts most of my processing power right out. And so, I have to suffer ...

Not having an OS-X version is a programming limitation, not a design choice, so it's not really relevant.

If you do not have "always on" Internet, then this may not be a project that is suitable for your systems.

Why not? This discussion has been around for a long time on other projects (or at least on LHC as I'm sure you've seen). I've yet to see a good argument. This is not the only project that uses existing WUs to generate new ones and they work fine without having very short deadlines.

At the moment, I have been toying with this project and a couple of others on my Mac Pro and with my Cable modem always on ... well, I am constantly seeing large shifts in work and fast turn-around on the tasks issued ... well, there is this one CPDN task that JUST WON'T FINSIH ... 1,000 hours to go ... :)

I crunched for CPDN in the past but my older computers apparently were not stable enough and could never finish a WU so I stopped out of frustration. I believe my newest systems could crunch it now without a problem but this is jsut the opposite extreme. :)

As John has mentioned there is the one minor issue with BOINC's design that can also cause problems ...

But, I don't suppose any of this is going to make you feel better about the deadlines ...

And projects with short deadlines, participants with fast machines and always on Internet are ideally suited for BOINC ... were they not having a minor issue with the system I would still be blowing through tasks for this project ...

The problem I have is that there are no VISTA x64 drivers for my wireless access devices. The only way I can get my main machine to connect is to tether it through my blackberry. It's a royal pain so I only do it when I have a lot of work to report (and when there is so much the system starts getting sluggish). Trust me, I would like to be able to be "always on" but I can't. It's particularly frustrating for me since this is my team's POTM and of course as this is my old school I'd like to support this project more than I can currently.

In any case I completely disagree with you about short deadline projects being ideally suited for BOINC for reasons I stated above. Without the problems you're referring to, you wouldn't be going through WUs any faster than now no matter how short the deadlines were. Instead, I would rather see the length of WUs increased. That's a much better goal in my opinion.

P.S. I was able to return work. :D
13) Message boards : Number crunching : 20 workunit limit (Message 3133)
Posted 13 Apr 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:
What about shrinking the deadline a bit. BOINC can be very casual about reporting work if the deadline is a long ways away. Somewhat tighter deadlines seem to be what the project needs. If you really generate the next round from the current round, I would suggest something like 25 or 26 hours. This gives at least some intermittently connected users to do some work. If you connect by hand and typically do it when you get home from work or some such, 24 hours exactly is a pain as you have to report just a few minutes earlier each day.

I for one would be forced to detatch from the project as I cannot guarantee that my machine connects every 24 hours as in general it does not. Any project that absolutely requires such short deadlines is not suited for BOINC.

Edit: Manually tinkering with a project on a daily basis was fine when POEM was our POTM and I could tinker with the project to make sure I only had long WUs (POEM had a 7/core limit) even though it had reasonable deadlines. But requiring it on a permanent basis due to short deadlines is simply a poor design.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Poll: How much credit do you think is fair? (Message 2777)
Posted 24 Mar 2008 by Profile[B^S] Astral Walker
Post:




©2022 Astroinformatics Group