Quota and credit calculations. Not bad, not bad at all.

Message boards : Number crunching : Quota and credit calculations. Not bad, not bad at all.
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile Area 51
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 31 Jan 04
Posts: 965
Credit: 42,193,520
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1005179 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 10:16:36 UTC - in response to Message 1005177.  


The quota thing, also looks promising. Over time it looks as if it is going to reward those that takes care of their WU's, and punishing those who deliberately abort them, or constantly turns in WU's that error out for one reason or another.


I agree that it looks promising, but I can't help feeling that the GPU crunchers are going to get hit when they generate -12 errors (something that can't be avoided).
ID: 1005179 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 14650
Credit: 200,643,578
RAC: 874
United Kingdom
Message 1005187 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 11:06:59 UTC - in response to Message 1005177.  

It's going to be interesting to follow this over time.

I followed it over time: Beta message 39533.

Note that since that was posted, the number he first thought of has been doubled. So the intial spike should be even higher, and the long-term average should be lifted. But I expect the variability to remain.
ID: 1005187 · Report as offensive
Profile Francesco Forti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 May 00
Posts: 334
Credit: 204,421,005
RAC: 15
Switzerland
Message 1005306 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 15:44:17 UTC - in response to Message 1005179.  


The quota thing, also looks promising. Over time it looks as if it is going to reward those that takes care of their WU's, and punishing those who deliberately abort them, or constantly turns in WU's that error out for one reason or another.


I agree that it looks promising, but I can't help feeling that the GPU crunchers are going to get hit when they generate -12 errors (something that can't be avoided).

Even the autokill function should't penalize us.
Because now SETI knows the application we use (CPU or GPU) and must be able not to send VLAR to GPU. So we have not to kill them.
Who can agree?
FF

ID: 1005306 · Report as offensive
Profile Area 51
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 31 Jan 04
Posts: 965
Credit: 42,193,520
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1005313 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 16:12:27 UTC - in response to Message 1005306.  

Nice idea, but it doesn't work like that. I have received over 100 VLARs for my GPU today. Also, I think I am right in saying that the stock CUDA application can handle VLARs, so as far as SAH is concerned, there is no issue.
ID: 1005313 · Report as offensive
Profile perryjay
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 02
Posts: 3377
Credit: 20,676,751
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1005316 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 16:17:44 UTC

Over time it looks as if it is going to reward those that takes care of their WU's, and punishing those who deliberately abort them, or constantly turns in WU's that error out for one reason or another.


I messed up a few days ago and lost a little over 100 WUs. They should start timing out over the next month and a half. The first of them on the 22nd of this month, the last of them on the 30th of July. By then everything should be running however they are trying to make it run so I guess these WUs will tell me what's what.

My apologies to my wingmen by the way but right after I lost them I got a new bunch to replace them so I really can't detach to clear them.


PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC
ID: 1005316 · Report as offensive
Profile perryjay
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 02
Posts: 3377
Credit: 20,676,751
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1005344 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 18:19:29 UTC

Wonder when the storm from the members of other projects starts after they see some of us getting somewhere around 500 or 600 credits for one GPU WU? (I got one that paid 580 credits!}


PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC
ID: 1005344 · Report as offensive
gomeyer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 21 May 99
Posts: 488
Credit: 50,370,425
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1005350 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 18:36:14 UTC
Last modified: 17 Jun 2010, 18:37:04 UTC

I may have missed this in the plethora of opinion about the new scheduler setup, but my question is, now that the server is keeping track of CPU/GPU assignment what happens to work units that are reassigned using the rescheduler when they have been returned having been run by other than the platform to which they were originally assigned? Are they still valid?
ID: 1005350 · Report as offensive
Josef W. Segur
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Oct 99
Posts: 4504
Credit: 1,414,761
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1005352 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 18:57:24 UTC - in response to Message 1005350.  

I may have missed this in the plethora of opinion about the new scheduler setup, but my question is, now that the server is keeping track of CPU/GPU assignment what happens to work units that are reassigned using the rescheduler when they have been returned having been run by other than the platform to which they were originally assigned? Are they still valid?

Still valid, yes. The statistics of work done and how long it took are probably applied to the application to which they were originally assigned, though. Reassigning VLARs to the CPU may not be much problem, the run time may be similar to what they would have been on GPU. General rebalancing could have far more impact.
                                                                  Joe
ID: 1005352 · Report as offensive
gomeyer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 21 May 99
Posts: 488
Credit: 50,370,425
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1005356 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 19:18:49 UTC - in response to Message 1005352.  

I may have missed this in the plethora of opinion about the new scheduler setup, but my question is, now that the server is keeping track of CPU/GPU assignment what happens to work units that are reassigned using the rescheduler when they have been returned having been run by other than the platform to which they were originally assigned? Are they still valid?

Still valid, yes. The statistics of work done and how long it took are probably applied to the application to which they were originally assigned, though. Reassigning VLARs to the CPU may not be much problem, the run time may be similar to what they would have been on GPU. General rebalancing could have far more impact.
                                                                  Joe

Understood. Thanks Joe.
ID: 1005356 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 65709
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 1005357 - Posted: 17 Jun 2010, 19:25:42 UTC
Last modified: 17 Jun 2010, 20:18:24 UTC

ID: 1005357 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Number crunching : Quota and credit calculations. Not bad, not bad at all.


 
©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.