Message boards :
Number crunching :
Version 3.20 on Linux
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Darren Send message Joined: 2 Jul 99 Posts: 259 Credit: 280,503 RAC: 0 |
I updated one of my hosts today to the latest self-compile (boinc 3.20, seti 3.10), which seems a little better and a little worse at the same time. On the better side, it benchmarked with a better whetstone. P4 3.06 1024 RAM with whetstone of 917 as compared to 813 on self-compiled version 3.18 (compiled from the June 24 source code). Also on the better side, while it was finishing the 2 work units already in the cache, boincgui was reporting the "to completion" times correctly, instead of running it all the way up to 50% done in the first minute, then taking a few hours to do the other 50%. These work units, of course, ran using seti 3.08 though. Now that it's gone on to a work unit downloaded after the upgrade and processing with seti 3.10, none of the gui add-ons show the progress (they read just like predictor units do on linux gui add-ons (such as "to completion 0-21467484....."). Lastly, the work units themselves seem to be processing a slight bit faster. It could have just been a fluke and I had 2 that happened to really be just a bit shorter, but since the upgrade the 2 work units that have finished were done in 2:58 and 3:00 - normally this system takes about 3:20 per work unit. Anyone else do the upgrade and seeing anything similar, or am I the first guinea pig here? |
Darren Send message Joined: 2 Jul 99 Posts: 259 Credit: 280,503 RAC: 0 |
Well, I guess I am the only guinea pig here. Just an FYI for anyone thinking about upgrading, the low-water mark feature doesn't seem to be working in this version. It does access the preferences and reports that it is using them, but a request for more work is only made when the last work unit finishes. And I guess it was just a 2-shot streak of luck with the 2 work units that finished in 3 hours. The next one took - just like normal - 3 hours and 20 minutes. |
Alex Send message Joined: 26 Sep 01 Posts: 260 Credit: 2,327 RAC: 0 |
I'm going to assume they made a couple of fixes with the latest version. They might have some open bug reports for less critical features. Hopefully they fixed a few bugs related to 'Preferences' (ie.. client looks at General Prefs instead of Work, Detaching from Projects, etc) |
WerK Send message Joined: 30 Jun 02 Posts: 26 Credit: 221,390 RAC: 0 |
> I updated one of my hosts today to the latest self-compile (boinc 3.20, seti > 3.10), which seems a little better and a little worse at the same time. > > On the better side, it benchmarked with a better whetstone. P4 3.06 1024 RAM > with whetstone of 917 as compared to 813 on self-compiled version 3.18 > (compiled from the June 24 source code). Also on the better side, while it > was finishing the 2 work units already in the cache, boincgui was reporting > the "to completion" times correctly, instead of running it all the way up to > 50% done in the first minute, then taking a few hours to do the other 50%. > These work units, of course, ran using seti 3.08 though. > > Now that it's gone on to a work unit downloaded after the upgrade and > processing with seti 3.10, none of the gui add-ons show the progress (they > read just like predictor units do on linux gui add-ons (such as "to completion > 0-21467484....."). > > Lastly, the work units themselves seem to be processing a slight bit faster. > It could have just been a fluke and I had 2 that happened to really be just a > bit shorter, but since the upgrade the 2 work units that have finished were > done in 2:58 and 3:00 - normally this system takes about 3:20 per work unit. > > Anyone else do the upgrade and seeing anything similar, or am I the first > guinea pig here? > > > > Yep, the GUI's dont show the progress because BOINC v3.19 is using slightly different format in .xml's than the v3.18 |
WerK Send message Joined: 30 Jun 02 Posts: 26 Credit: 221,390 RAC: 0 |
> I updated one of my hosts today to the latest self-compile (boinc 3.20, seti > 3.10), which seems a little better and a little worse at the same time. > > On the better side, it benchmarked with a better whetstone. P4 3.06 1024 RAM > with whetstone of 917 as compared to 813 on self-compiled version 3.18 > (compiled from the June 24 source code). Also on the better side, while it > was finishing the 2 work units already in the cache, boincgui was reporting > the "to completion" times correctly, instead of running it all the way up to > 50% done in the first minute, then taking a few hours to do the other 50%. > These work units, of course, ran using seti 3.08 though. > > Now that it's gone on to a work unit downloaded after the upgrade and > processing with seti 3.10, none of the gui add-ons show the progress (they > read just like predictor units do on linux gui add-ons (such as "to completion > 0-21467484....."). > > Lastly, the work units themselves seem to be processing a slight bit faster. > It could have just been a fluke and I had 2 that happened to really be just a > bit shorter, but since the upgrade the 2 work units that have finished were > done in 2:58 and 3:00 - normally this system takes about 3:20 per work unit. > > Anyone else do the upgrade and seeing anything similar, or am I the first > guinea pig here? > > > > Could you please post your app_info.xml file and binaries placement ?? I was trying to get my compiled s@h 3.20 to work but i'm getting some execv error :[ thx |
Darren Send message Joined: 2 Jul 99 Posts: 259 Credit: 280,503 RAC: 0 |
> Could you please post your app_info.xml file and binaries placement ?? I was > trying to get my compiled s@h 3.20 to work but i'm getting some execv error :[ Here's the app_info.xml file. As to "binaries placement", I'm gonna need that worded for a little bit dumber person - which binaries and placement in relation to what? If you're simply asking where I put the binaries that were compiled, I put the boinc_client file in my main boinc directory (on my system, /home/darren/boinc/) and the setiathome-3.10.i686-pc-linux-gnu file in the ~/projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/ subdirectory along with the app_info.xml file. (app_info) (app) (name)setiathome(/name) (/app) (file_info) (name)setiathome-3.10.i686-pc-linux-gnu(/name) (/file_info) (app_version) (app_name)setiathome(/app_name) (version_num)310(/version_num) (file_ref) (file_name)setiathome-3.10.i686-pc-linux-gnu(/file_name) (main_program/) (/file_ref) (/app_version) (/app_info) |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.