Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by XB-STX

1) Message boards : Number crunching : getting no new workunits (Message 33405)
Posted 20 Nov 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Call me crazy, but if you read the home page of the project, I think you'll get a clue (or twelve) as to the fun and games that you missed whilst away, as well as a basic timeline of the events of the last eight days or so. That should answer your questions.

rgds
XB
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Strange things happen (credit) (Message 32974)
Posted 3 Nov 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Agreed! I have evidence that my account lost no less than 41,000 credits in the overnight crash. I believe this deserves at least some acknowledgement of a problem by Travis or the other admins.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : BOINC 6.10.6 released (Message 31349)
Posted 22 Sep 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
6.10.6 does indeed report correctly:

<core_client_version>6.10.6</core_client_version>
4) Message boards : Number crunching : WU abuse (Message 17137)
Posted 29 Mar 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Point well taken, correction made.

Rgds

Um, I can't. I am not a moderator here.

But you can still edit your previous post and take the offending quoted part out.

5) Message boards : Number crunching : WU abuse (Message 17133)
Posted 29 Mar 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Ageless, do me the favor of also hiding this post as well, why don't you?

Sheesh!

So why do you quote his post then?

6) Message boards : Number crunching : WU abuse (Message 17125)
Posted 29 Mar 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Extra Ball - this is a G-rated forum (i.e., kid-friendly), watch yer mouth, junior.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : GPU App + Other Projects (Message 12788)
Posted 25 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
OK, guess I was not entirely clear here. On the quad it either runs 4 MW and no other project tasks (effectively using just 25% of total CPU), or four tasks that are NOT MW (effectively using 100% of CPU), but nothing in between. I'd like to think that there are shades of grey here, and not an entirely binary solution.

Is there, for example, specific settings in either the app_info.xml file for MW, the app_info.xml files for the other projects, or the BOINC cc_config.xml file that would, for example, allow the running of three tasks on the other three projects, and one (or more) task on the fourth core / GPU?

Before you ask, yes, all resource shares for the projects are set at 25% each, and other than the HP tasks (which switch off from HP about halfway through the quota run, before swithing over entirely to the other projects), all other things are as I believe they should be.

Realize that this is still in the experimental phases (MW GPU processing), but if anyone has any tricks or tips to share, I'm listening.

Rgds
XB
8) Message boards : Number crunching : GPU App + Other Projects (Message 12349)
Posted 22 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Probably has to do with the "detatch from project" that I had to do when I installed the ATI card, but MW is still running in High Priority mode - meaning that if I let things work the way they should, I will have to wait until it's no longer considered HP.

I'll see what happens over the next couple of weeks.

XB
9) Message boards : Number crunching : GPU App + Other Projects (Message 12278)
Posted 22 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Someone out there already knows the answer, so in advance, let me thank you for your insight.

Have recently installed the GPU app on my quad-core, but it seems to ONLY want to run MW-GPU for now - leaving all other projects waiting to run. This leaves open a lot of CPU cycles.

I've read with interest the developing threads on the GPU app, and other related threads, but to date, I've not found anything that gives me suffienct clues to help me run MW-GPU plus each of the four other apps in my projects file.

Ideally, I'd like to have one of each of the four tasks running on the CPU cores, plus have a MW-GPU task running on the GPU - all at the same time.

Is there a simple way to do this, or do I need to make other decisions about what I can (or cannot) run on the quaddy?

Thanks in advance for your insight.
XB
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 12216)
Posted 21 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
That it is, CP, that it is. :)

XB
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 12185)
Posted 21 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Several additional interesting observations.

1) Variations in WU run times (by stripe) are greatest on my Intel-based machines. The AMD-based machines are all within a couple percentages points of completion time; the Windows based machines (Q6600 Vista 32, P4 XP Pro) can sometimes vary by more than two to three-fold.
2) Problems have been most pronounced with the opti-apps; last two versions I have run were Gispel's. When I detached from the project, and re-attached, and ran a couple dozen off the stock app, the run times (by stripe) again were within a couple percentage points of each other (Q6600).
3) Later, re-loaded v0.19 opti app (Gispel), fresh download, and again, variations between run times went way up again (Q6600).
4) Further, time to read the parameter files on the stock app were <1 second, however, back under the opti app, they varied wildly - sometimes to over 90 seconds, which is ridiculous (Q6600).

Again, these are merely observations, and in no way should be considered judgements. We all know that the unique combination of HW + OS + SW can often give different results for some. In other words, your mileage may vary.

Perhaps due to the continuing frustration of all of the above, I decided to give the GPU app a try. Still have a couple of kinks to work out, but judging by the stability and consistency (and, to be honest, speed of credit!), I'm gonna put my frustrations aside, and stay with the GPU app instead.

Now, if only we could get a CUDA version so I can run it on three of my other boxes!

Rgds
XB
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 11990)
Posted 21 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
As a test, I suspended all other projects, moved Boinc Projects to a different physical disk, then restarted BOINC. So, the only projects in memory are one GPU Grid task (CUDA) and four MW tasks. As each task completes, I monitor the start-up progress of the new task. If it looks like it will complete in a reasonable time period, I let it run to completion. If it appears it will run for more than 45 minutes, I kill it.

Boincmgr.exe is, however, eating up around 4% of the CPU, which is also strange, since it should be around 1% or less.

There might still be something throttling the CPU (which I concur, can be seem by the larger differentials between the CPU time and the clock time on completed tasks), but for the life of me, I cannot find anything in either the BIOS or in the running tasks that would do so. I also disable many of the Windows services that might otherwise gobble up resources.

However, none of this would explain the large CPU time indicated on the post earlier. Yes, the differential is large, but the basis is huge as well.

Puzzling.
XB
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 11942)
Posted 21 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Task Manager reports that all tasks are running a consistent 24-25% each, so there are no other tasks hogging CPU cycles in the background.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 11927)
Posted 21 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Well, I'm running (on this box) equal shares for ABC, Einstein, Cosmology, plus a reduced share for Climate Prediction. Any possibility there are conflicts between projects...?

Strangely, if I'm actually sitting at the machine, and I see a task taking longer than it should, and I suspend the task for a few minutes, then restart it, everything runs just the way it should. But since I'm not constantly sitting at this particular machine all day, it's tough to monitor it in that fashion. Should I get more than one (such as today, when FOUR WU's were all running excessively at the same time), it pretty much negates any real progress on this (or any other) project.

I'm open to suggestions - when I posted a similar thread a couple months back, it was suggested that the CPU was running too hot, so I upgraded the cooler, and now the cores run between 55-62 C. Hot, but within spec limits. So, it has to be something else that I have not considered.

XB
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 11911)
Posted 20 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Made the changes, and still am getting excessive times for the run:

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=6110598 ran > 3.5 hours, and got 8.18 credits on a Q6600

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=6002848 ran > 5.5 hours, and got 12.35 credits on a Q6600

Plus three more currently running, all three of which will be over 4+ hours, all on the same Q6600.

Strangely, most other WU's run in around 12-15 minutes for 21/22/23, and 6-10 minutes for 79/82/86.

Travis (or anyone else, for that matter) - any ideas? What makes some WU's run extraordinarily long, and others right in line with expectations?

Thanks
XB
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 11725)
Posted 20 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
Did not even think about that one... DOH!

Will see what happens now that the change has been made.

Much obliged!
XB
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Very Strange Time To Competion (Message 11699)
Posted 20 Feb 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
This workunit - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=5847786 - shows 307 seconds of CPU time, however, the client records nearly 25 times that amount (verified, since these ultra-long running WU's tend to p*ss me off royally).

Any ideas...?

I get maybe one in ten like this on my quad-core, but nothing like this on any of the other boxes.

Thx
XB
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Long-Running Work Units (Message 8282)
Posted 13 Jan 2009 by XB-STX
Post:
On my Q6600, *most* work completes in just over 1 hour, however, occasionally, I get work units that take 4, or 6, or even eight hours to complete.

I've noticed in the past that if I temporarily suspend a running workunit that appears to be running slower than normal, and then restart the work unit, it runs to completion in the normal fashion.

Anyone have any ideas? I can point you to a couple WU's it that will help...

TIA
XB




©2022 Astroinformatics Group