Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by Campion

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Per Host Limit (Message 657)
Posted 27 Nov 2007 by ProfileCampion
Post:
20 sounds like a good comprimise for everyone.

Thanks!

2) Message boards : Number crunching : So you want us to try to beat your supercomputer. (Message 656)
Posted 27 Nov 2007 by ProfileCampion
Post:


If you guys don't think 1 credit is sufficient for the current workunit size, i was thinking about bumping it up to 2.



That being said, a buffer of 8 workunits might not be enough. I'm trying to find a balance between fast turn around and not having results be lost on the server due to the fact we don't use a quorum. I'll try bumping it up to 20 and maybe that way machines won't be sitting around doing nothing.



Please consider bumping credits up to 2.

It just feels like a waste of CPU time to be granted 1.00 credits when claiming 1.46 credits. That .46 credit "loss" per unit just rubs the wrong way and while we are here for the science and not the credits, it does make it harder to be here when other favourite projects will grant more credit.

A big THANK YOU for listening and raising the quota from 8 to 20. Doing that at least will make me give Milkyway@Home a second chance as I won't have to worry about running out of work --- same situation as Bigred, quad core running out of work and being idle.


3) Message boards : Number crunching : Per Host Limit (Message 518)
Posted 20 Nov 2007 by ProfileCampion
Post:


The only people that might have a major problem with this would be those that don't have a continuous connection and run this project exclusively.


You got that right!

Short units running at about 6 mins per unit.
Quad core that could run 4 units at a time.
12 minutes to complete a cycle of units.

I don't know who set this, I don't think it is anything that I can control, but BOINC is set to contact the server 20 minutes after it realizes that host is at its 8 unit limit.

So its either run other projects or have your machine idle for 8 minutes.

Add being on a dial up connection and you have to log on multiple times to get more work. Its ok if you happend to be doing something online for a while, but it is becoming almost too much of a effort to keep BOINC running Milkyway@Home units to make it worthwhile / enjoyable. If anyone asks from my team about signing up for this project I would have to advise them against it at the moment.

4) Message boards : Number crunching : Breakpoint Encountered (0x80000003) (Message 517)
Posted 20 Nov 2007 by ProfileCampion
Post:
Have been getting this pop up too.

Usually happens if I have to suspend BOINC for a moment.

Other times it just happens out of the blue for no apparent reason.

Is anyone else seeing their BOINC client going into a not responding mode for a few seconds now and then? Seems to do this a lot now and it started about the same time that I attached to Milkyway.

5) Message boards : Number crunching : appcrash (Message 516)
Posted 20 Nov 2007 by ProfileCampion
Post:
I see it a lot when I have to suspend Boinc / or Milkyway itself.

Does not seem to like that.

Is anyone seeing their Boinc client not responding for a couple of seconds at a time ? Mine has been doing that a lot since signing up with Milkyway.

6) Message boards : Cafe MilkyWay : ATA thread (Message 423)
Posted 12 Nov 2007 by ProfileCampion
Post:
Hi my name is Campion and I have an Alpha Testing problem...

7) Message boards : Number crunching : Computational Errors (Message 358)
Posted 10 Nov 2007 by ProfileCampion
Post:
10/11/2007 5:10:32 PM|Milkyway@home|Starting gs_5_1194773887_24_1
10/11/2007 5:10:32 PM|Milkyway@home|Starting task gs_5_1194773887_24_1 using astronomy version 107
10/11/2007 5:10:55 PM|Milkyway@home|Computation for task gs_5_1194773887_24_1 finished
10/11/2007 5:10:55 PM|Milkyway@home|Output file gs_5_1194773887_24_1_0 for task gs_5_1194773887_24_1 absent
10/11/2007 5:10:55 PM|Milkyway@home|Starting gs_4_1194786143_828_0
10/11/2007 5:10:55 PM|Milkyway@home|Starting task gs_4_1194786143_828_0 using astronomy version 107


Only seems to be the units named "gs_5..." that I am getting the error with.




©2019 Astroinformatics Group