Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by Ray Murray

1) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.06 (Message 57147)
Posted 2 Feb 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Bet you were hoping all the very long ones had been weeded out but I've just aborted this one after spotting it at 1.1% after 14hrs with estimate having increased from an initial 135hrs to 165hrs and climbing when I pulled the plug on it.
2) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.06 (Message 57127)
Posted 1 Feb 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Maybe there needs to be a front page announcement or whatever method there is to post a Notice in everyone's Boinc Manager as there will be users who do not read these boards. Others may run "headless" and simply "set and forget", only checking their machines occasionally and be oblivius to the problem. The wingman I cited below has now munched his/her way through 2000 WUS and counting.
3) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.06 (Message 57113)
Posted 31 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Should the corrected dlls be going out with any new WUs or are people who got the faulty ones now stuck with them until they either reset the project (as I did to get the corrected dlls as shown in the posts below) or 1.07 is issued? The reason I ask is after looking at my only invalid task. All others who got that WU errored out, voiding the WU. One wingman there who got the task after me presumably still has the faulty dlls so errored out, but he has over 1000 errors with 1.06.
4) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.06 (Message 57108)
Posted 31 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Just did another reset to force download of the new/old dlls and all seems to be working fine again.
I missed the estimate of the first one that finished in one minute but of those I've paid attention to so far;
1+3/4 hour estimate finished in 2 mins
4+1/2 hour estimate finished in 6 mins
8 hour estimate finished in 8 mins
10+1/4 hour estimate finished in 10 mins
10+1/2 hour estimate finished in 12 mins
No rouge, huge estimates and ticks down rather than up.

A 113 hour estimate just in. Estimate ticks up between progress steps but drops at each progress update. If there is a similar initial overestimate of c.60X then I expect this to finish after 113mins rather than 113Hours which would sit about right compared to the Wingman's faster machine finishing in 89 mins.
5) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.06 (Message 57097)
Posted 31 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Did the reset just now and got 3 more (estimates of 40s - 40hrs) and got the same error.
The accompanying downloads were:

libgomp_64-1_nbody_1.06.dll
pthreadGC2_64_nbody_1.06.dll
milkyway_nbody_1.06_windows_x86_64__mt.exe

Is that what you expect or should there be something else?
6) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.06 (Message 57089)
Posted 30 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
All 5 of my 1.06s failed on startup with -1073741511 (0xffffffffc0000139) Unknown error number
I was going to try a project reset in case the new ones had missed something in the download but I've got a couple of ordinary 1.00s running so won't be able to reset for a couple of hours until they've finished.

Win 7 (64)
7) Message boards : News : New Stream Fit (Separation) Runs (Message 57008)
Posted 24 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Hi again Dreighton,
I think it's probably time to lay that WU to rest 8¬( Check what % progress it has but with completion time still increasing, I suspect it may never finish successfully. Some have had problems if there has been a break in the computation eg. a machine reboot, and the task hasn't properly picked up from it's last checkpoint. These 1.04 tasks have been "Beta test" units and I'm sure the guys have learned enough from them to improve the application but from Jake's post here "...abort them if you so desire. They won't be helping us anymore." I aborted 2 long ones but they had both only done a few hours. It's a shame to lose so much time but maybe better not to waste any more. That's my opinion, but I'm not on staff so you have to decide for youself.

Other tasks have been multithreaded but these ones have been single thread only, probably to simplify debugging and eliminate some reasons for errors. (They could probably be fooled into running multithread but only by those more savvy than me 8¬)
8) Message boards : News : Stopped N-Body Runs (Message 56989)
Posted 22 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Do you want us to kill those in progress or run them to completion. Eg. I've got a couple of 100+hr estimate WUs with only a few hrs done so I wouldn't mind aborting them, but someone with 100hrs invested in a WU would rather let theirs run such as dhrosier whom I have just replied to in another thread
9) Message boards : News : New Stream Fit (Separation) Runs (Message 56986)
Posted 22 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Hi DH,
Your post would sit better in one of the N_body threads; perhaps some nice moderator could move it there for you.

In reply meanwhile:
The run time estimates here have been way out for a while. I have found that once those with an increasing estimate get to about 45% or so progress, the time remaining starts to come down again, and tends to accelerate so if it's about that Progress then you may not have as long to go as it's telling you. My longest one estimated 300+hrs at one point but finished in 112hrs. Currently I have one with 270+hrs to completion (increasing) after <1% but completed in 184Hrs for my wingman. Others have had similar and even longer.
I'm guessing it's de_nbody_100K_104_1_1356215205_101619 which has already timed-out for your wingman so maybe it is just far too big. Maybe somebody in Admin can help you further as to what to do with it. If it's still chugging along happily, it would be a shame to lose it. If you keep it going, it might be prudent to increase the space allowed for Boinc, just in case the logs get too big.
Good luck with it.

(Edited for typo and bad grammar)
10) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.04 (Message 56833)
Posted 11 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
This long one, 112hrs, surprisingly didn't return an error even after being stopped a number of times, with machine restarts to allow various windows and driver updates. It does, however, show as validation inconclusive, which isn't uncommon. Just have to wait and see how GLNilsen fares with it.
11) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.04 (Message 56776)
Posted 6 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
This one has gone 39 hrs with about 2 hrs left. Progress % is increasing (and it's checkpointing) and estimate to finish is decreasing (although not incrementally with elapsed time) so it isn't stuck so I'm just letting it run to completion. It hasn't been sent to anyone else yet.

It's a de_nbody_100K_104 rather than ps_.....
12) Message boards : News : Nbody 1.04 (Message 56774)
Posted 6 Jan 2013 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Only wu 290721561 for me out of 47 completed.
2 wingmen with the same -1073741571 (0xffffffffc00000fd) Unknown error number and 1 with -1073741515 (0xffffffffc0000135) Unknown error number and zero runtime.

2 other WUs are so far inconclusive.
13) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2720)
Posted 24 Mar 2008 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
I'm one of those would like to see a standard grant of credits per work done across all projects so that there can be a comparison between projects and a fairer camparison of total credits gained across multiple projects. I stopped crunching for Cosmology due to the obscenely high credits granted there which for me devalues an otherwise worthwhile project.
I'm for science first, but want any credits I get to be earned fairly.
It's been a problem since Boinc's inception of how to add apples and pears without people going bananas. Then there was the problem of people cheating their benchmarks and other ways to get more credit than others playing fair.

All my recent 12 minute wus have claimed 1.47 credits or thereabouts. 6.5 was way too high although if the wus were to take 50 mins it'd be about right, so if there are longer wus planned then credit would need to be adjusted accordingly. 2.17 will probably chase some users away but it's probably closer to a realistic value.

Emmanuel said
But what annoys me is seeing the posts above where people say "I joined this for the credits, now it sucks, bye-bye." I think you can at least pick projects based on the science they do, then prioritize between them using credits if you can't decide how else.

I totally agree.
14) Message boards : Cafe MilkyWay : Asteroid on its way to Mars (Message 1590)
Posted 25 Jan 2008 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
The Mars one is going to miss and this one is going to miss us. And the JPL version.
The worrying thing is that both of these were only discovered a few months ago. Maybe these are what has prompted the much awaited funding for Orbit to finally be granted.
15) Message boards : Number crunching : downloads failing (Message 1579)
Posted 23 Jan 2008 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
I've just had 7 download failures with these kind of messages:

23/01/2008 17:00:44|Milkyway@home|Giving up on download of parameters_generated_1200663811_50130: file not found
23/01/2008 17:00:44|Milkyway@home|Giving up on download of parameters_generated_1200663818_50328: file not found

All those since then have been fine.

After looking deeper it seems that everyone else assigned these wus had similar failures.
16) Message boards : Cafe MilkyWay : Asteroid on its way to Mars (Message 1159)
Posted 22 Dec 2007 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
1 in 75 chance of an asteroid hitting Mars on Jan 30 '08.

Nasa article and The Times' version, and a podcast and transcript from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Wonder if this might prompt some more funding towards NEO research as they only spotted this one in late November. Personally I'd like a little more warning if something is headed this way. :shock:
17) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Milkyway@Home 1.07 (Message 650)
Posted 27 Nov 2007 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Thanks Mateusz,
At least I know now that it isn't something I'm doing wrong. I'm already over my free bandwidth for the month so I'll not be downloading any upgrade version just now. I only put it on here as a Virtual Machine so that it would show as a different host to get around a restictive wus-per-host limit on another project.
Will any newer version simply overlay onto what I have or will I have to reinstall Boinc as well? Like I said, totally new to Linux.
18) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Milkyway@Home 1.07 (Message 548)
Posted 23 Nov 2007 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
I'm a linux noobie and I've got Ubuntu 6.06 installed (not running as a live CD) as a Virtual Machine on a Windows XP host. This will happily run LHC, Cosmology and Pirates (on the rare occasion they're available) but all the Milkyway wus I have downloaded have errored out as soon as the wus start. I guess I'm missing some libraries, but which, where can I get them, and how would I go about installing them? Please be gentle with me.
19) Message boards : Cafe MilkyWay : ATA thread (Message 347)
Posted 10 Nov 2007 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
I would guess that all the usual suspects will make their way here, if they haven't done so already.
Is there an initiation test to go through for membership, or is simply signing up enough?
20) Message boards : Number crunching : exit code -2147483645 (0x80000003)) (Message 346)
Posted 10 Nov 2007 by ProfileRay Murray
Post:
Only got one duff one in the last batch I got. I ran each until they got past the previous blockage and then suspended them so I could see if any would fail, and only one did.

[Edit]Only thing is, when they do fail, they lock up Boinc so that it can't do anything else until the windows error box is closed. I got another duff one after reporting a success, but I feel the pub beckoning (9pm local) and don't want to leave the machine vulnerable to locking up overnight. Could you purge the broken ones, Travis, so they don't get reissued? [/Edit]

All those from gs_4_11947810xx seem to be OK, at least for me. They're quite a bit longer as well as Travis predicted in another thread. 6 times as long for me as the previous wus before the bunch of failures.


Next 20

©2019 Astroinformatics Group