Panic Mode On (72) Server problems?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (72) Server problems?

Previous · 1 . . . 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 . . . 11 · Next
Author Message
zoom314Project donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 47730
Credit: 37,281,757
RAC: 4,884
United States
Message 1209633 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 13:25:53 UTC - in response to Message 1209614.

?...

In which case I'm setting NNT + going back to 6.12.34.

Just look at the top hosts.......are they running recent Boincs?

Whatever the f/.


Serve the slave, not the master.

Yep, I can't stand how 6.12.xx works either Mark, I like My 6.10.58...
____________
My Facebook, War Commander, Under Dog

Dave
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 02
Posts: 774
Credit: 23,193,139
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1209641 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 13:37:16 UTC

6.10.60 it is then :).

However I am going to pioneer having both BOINCs going at once so I get some 6.x.x productivity whilst NNT-ing the 7.0.23.

Dave
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 02
Posts: 774
Credit: 23,193,139
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1209644 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 13:46:25 UTC

Ok it just replaces the existing version. Can't get any tasks anyway. Just 7.0.23 NNT.

Profile Khangollo
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 1 Aug 00
Posts: 245
Credit: 36,410,524
RAC: 0
Slovenia
Message 1209776 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 19:53:49 UTC

Whoa.
From shortie straight to vlar storm.
I do wish they had some kind of "smarter" splitters that would shuffle tasks more.
____________

Sten-Arne
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 1 Nov 08
Posts: 3984
Credit: 22,673,987
RAC: 27,256
Sweden
Message 1209778 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 20:05:22 UTC - in response to Message 1209776.
Last modified: 24 Mar 2012, 20:07:14 UTC

Whoa.
From shortie straight to vlar storm.
I do wish they had some kind of "smarter" splitters that would shuffle tasks more.


Well, I did get a ton of shorties/VHAR's, and all of them for my poor Q8200 CPU, which hates to do them. On the Q8200 CPU, a shortie becomes the longest running WU available, especially if you run four of them at the same time. If you run only one at a time on the CPU, it'll take 50 minutes or less. If you run 4 of those buggers, they can take 5 to six hours.

I rescheduled the lot of them to the ATI GPU.
____________
I'm only running one computer. Using 2 cores of an old Q8200 CPU for CPU tasks, and 2 cores feeding a single Mid-range GPU, ATI HD7870.
Look at the RAC folks, and ask yourselves why it beats so many multi GPU monster computers :-)

Dave
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 02
Posts: 774
Credit: 23,193,139
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1209791 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 21:05:01 UTC

Sounds like HT or app_info.xml is a bad idea in that scenario. Swings & roundabouts overall.

I'm still burning off my 7.0.23 tasks before I get with you lot on proper food...

msattlerProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 39320
Credit: 625,742,226
RAC: 438,567
United States
Message 1209820 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 22:32:01 UTC

Holey smoley......
Better turn the cooling fans on high before I go to Lori's for the evening.
Out of about 1500 MB GPU tasks cached on my top rig the Frozen 920, over 1000 are shorties now. It's gonna be a hard crunching night for the ol' beastie.
____________
*********************************************
Embrace your inner kitty...ya know ya wanna!

I have met a few friends in my life.
Most were cats.

Grant (SSSF)
Send message
Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 6026
Credit: 64,331,830
RAC: 46,122
Australia
Message 1209822 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 22:34:52 UTC - in response to Message 1209778.

Well, I did get a ton of shorties/VHAR's, and all of them for my poor Q8200 CPU, which hates to do them. On the Q8200 CPU, a shortie becomes the longest running WU available, especially if you run four of them at the same time. If you run only one at a time on the CPU, it'll take 50 minutes or less. If you run 4 of those buggers, they can take 5 to six hours.

Odd.
I'm running the Lunatics applications.
My E8400 does 2 shorties at a time in about 40min. VLARs take about 3hrs 2 at a time. I wouldn't have thought 333MHz would make that much difference.
____________
Grant
Darwin NT.

Sten-Arne
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 1 Nov 08
Posts: 3984
Credit: 22,673,987
RAC: 27,256
Sweden
Message 1209827 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 22:42:43 UTC - in response to Message 1209822.
Last modified: 24 Mar 2012, 22:43:41 UTC

Well, I did get a ton of shorties/VHAR's, and all of them for my poor Q8200 CPU, which hates to do them. On the Q8200 CPU, a shortie becomes the longest running WU available, especially if you run four of them at the same time. If you run only one at a time on the CPU, it'll take 50 minutes or less. If you run 4 of those buggers, they can take 5 to six hours.

Odd.
I'm running the Lunatics applications.
My E8400 does 2 shorties at a time in about 40min. VLARs take about 3hrs 2 at a time. I wouldn't have thought 333MHz would make that much difference.


It's not about the Mhz, it's about how the Q8200 handles the memory sub system I think. It's only the VHARs that behaves like this. VLAR's and normal AR's are done in around 3 hours give or take 30 minutes, depending upon the AR's.

I'm not the only one here, who have seen this behaviour from the Q type CPU's, where they really struggles with VHAR's.
____________
I'm only running one computer. Using 2 cores of an old Q8200 CPU for CPU tasks, and 2 cores feeding a single Mid-range GPU, ATI HD7870.
Look at the RAC folks, and ask yourselves why it beats so many multi GPU monster computers :-)

Richard HaselgroveProject donor
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 8911
Credit: 55,002,246
RAC: 33,677
United Kingdom
Message 1209896 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 0:58:52 UTC - in response to Message 1209827.

Well, I did get a ton of shorties/VHAR's, and all of them for my poor Q8200 CPU, which hates to do them. On the Q8200 CPU, a shortie becomes the longest running WU available, especially if you run four of them at the same time. If you run only one at a time on the CPU, it'll take 50 minutes or less. If you run 4 of those buggers, they can take 5 to six hours.

Odd.
I'm running the Lunatics applications.
My E8400 does 2 shorties at a time in about 40min. VLARs take about 3hrs 2 at a time. I wouldn't have thought 333MHz would make that much difference.

It's not about the Mhz, it's about how the Q8200 handles the memory sub system I think. It's only the VHARs that behaves like this. VLAR's and normal AR's are done in around 3 hours give or take 30 minutes, depending upon the AR's.

I'm not the only one here, who have seen this behaviour from the Q type CPU's, where they really struggles with VHAR's.

Agreed. I've seen this effect ever since I first got my dual E5320 octo-core - that predates the consumer Qs by about 9 months, but is very similar core2 technology.

It's specific to the VHAR tasks, but I've never seen it to anything like the degree that Sten is reporting. An increase from 30 minutes to 50 minutes (double that - those are the old-style tasks), maybe - with 8-way contention on the bus. But six or seven times the runtime? No way. You have some other problem there, or simply not enough memory.

Sten-Arne
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 1 Nov 08
Posts: 3984
Credit: 22,673,987
RAC: 27,256
Sweden
Message 1209899 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 1:12:29 UTC - in response to Message 1209896.
Last modified: 25 Mar 2012, 1:20:09 UTC

Well, I did get a ton of shorties/VHAR's, and all of them for my poor Q8200 CPU, which hates to do them. On the Q8200 CPU, a shortie becomes the longest running WU available, especially if you run four of them at the same time. If you run only one at a time on the CPU, it'll take 50 minutes or less. If you run 4 of those buggers, they can take 5 to six hours.

Odd.
I'm running the Lunatics applications.
My E8400 does 2 shorties at a time in about 40min. VLARs take about 3hrs 2 at a time. I wouldn't have thought 333MHz would make that much difference.

It's not about the Mhz, it's about how the Q8200 handles the memory sub system I think. It's only the VHARs that behaves like this. VLAR's and normal AR's are done in around 3 hours give or take 30 minutes, depending upon the AR's.

I'm not the only one here, who have seen this behaviour from the Q type CPU's, where they really struggles with VHAR's.

Agreed. I've seen this effect ever since I first got my dual E5320 octo-core - that predates the consumer Qs by about 9 months, but is very similar core2 technology.

It's specific to the VHAR tasks, but I've never seen it to anything like the degree that Sten is reporting. An increase from 30 minutes to 50 minutes (double that - those are the old-style tasks), maybe - with 8-way contention on the bus. But six or seven times the runtime? No way. You have some other problem there, or simply not enough memory.


Well, 4GB of memory, but it's only single channel and 400MHZ. It's been like this with VHAR's on the CPU from the beginning, so I simply do not run them on the CPU. This is the main reason why I will only run AP's, and I will go back to AP only when I can install an opt AP V6 (which will not happen until I at the same time can install opt MB 7.)
____________
I'm only running one computer. Using 2 cores of an old Q8200 CPU for CPU tasks, and 2 cores feeding a single Mid-range GPU, ATI HD7870.
Look at the RAC folks, and ask yourselves why it beats so many multi GPU monster computers :-)

Profile Michel448a
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 27 Oct 00
Posts: 1201
Credit: 2,891,635
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1209946 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 4:09:29 UTC
Last modified: 25 Mar 2012, 4:46:47 UTC

i have a Q , 9650 but it s a QX. but i never OC my CPU.
i dont have problem on those. usually a vhar is 23 to 32 mins. but maybe it s less good than a i5-i7 wingman. dunno

the normal and vlar takes 1:30 to 2hrs, sometimes i get some strange ones that last 2:30hrs.
____________

Profile Wiggo
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 8680
Credit: 102,010,688
RAC: 65,443
Australia
Message 1209949 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 4:23:16 UTC - in response to Message 1209946.

My i5 2500K @ stock does a VHAR in 20mins and VLARs take no longer than 1hr 15mins, regular units take about 50mins. :)

Cheers.
____________

Profile Michel448a
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 27 Oct 00
Posts: 1201
Credit: 2,891,635
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1209956 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 4:47:57 UTC - in response to Message 1209949.

My i5 2500K @ stock does a VHAR in 20mins and VLARs take no longer than 1hr 15mins, regular units take about 50mins. :)

Cheers.


your 2500k is OC'ed (turbo'ed) at max ?
____________

Profile Wiggo
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 8680
Credit: 102,010,688
RAC: 65,443
Australia
Message 1209959 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 4:59:46 UTC - in response to Message 1209956.

Its running stock so far with turbo boost off. ;)

Cheers.
____________

Dave
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 02
Posts: 774
Credit: 23,193,139
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1210119 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 19:15:06 UTC

Well I've just loaded the GPUs up with PrimeGrid while I'm waiting to burn off these 7.x.x CPU MBs & I got one eorld record prime unit that's been round the world 21 times, so I'll be busy elsewhere for a bit.

Profile Ageless
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 99
Posts: 12527
Credit: 2,733,627
RAC: 696
Netherlands
Message 1210154 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 21:14:56 UTC - in response to Message 1209959.

I thought mine was as well, but apparently it's not. According to Intel's Turbo Boost Technology Monitor, it runs at 3.40Ghz, not the stock 3.30GHz.
____________
Jord

Fighting for the correct use of the apostrophe, together with Weird Al Yankovic

Profile Wiggo
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 8680
Credit: 102,010,688
RAC: 65,443
Australia
Message 1210167 - Posted: 25 Mar 2012, 22:06:04 UTC - in response to Message 1210154.

I thought mine was as well, but apparently it's not. According to Intel's Turbo Boost Technology Monitor, it runs at 3.40Ghz, not the stock 3.30GHz.

Yes you're right, it does run a 100MHz overclock with those settings, but once I get it in a HAF-X I'll turn that up by around 1GHz which should make an even bigger difference.

Cheers.
____________

Profile Wiggo
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 8680
Credit: 102,010,688
RAC: 65,443
Australia
Message 1210216 - Posted: 26 Mar 2012, 4:06:58 UTC - in response to Message 1210167.
Last modified: 26 Mar 2012, 4:08:23 UTC

I thought mine was as well, but apparently it's not. According to Intel's Turbo Boost Technology Monitor, it runs at 3.40Ghz, not the stock 3.30GHz.

Yes you're right, it does run a 100MHz overclock with those settings, but once I get it in a HAF-X I'll turn that up by around 1GHz which should make an even bigger difference.

Cheers.

But then again with those settings that I have that is still considered as stock.

Cheers.
____________

Profile Keith T.
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 99
Posts: 740
Credit: 233,572
RAC: 16
United Kingdom
Message 1210258 - Posted: 26 Mar 2012, 11:15:01 UTC
Last modified: 26 Mar 2012, 11:17:21 UTC

26/03/2012 12:05:47 SETI@home Sending scheduler request: To fetch work.
26/03/2012 12:05:47 SETI@home Requesting new tasks
26/03/2012 12:05:55 SETI@home Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
26/03/2012 12:05:55 SETI@home Message from server: Project has no tasks available
26/03/2012 12:11:01 SETI@home Sending scheduler request: To fetch work.
26/03/2012 12:11:01 SETI@home Requesting new tasks
26/03/2012 12:11:04 SETI@home Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
26/03/2012 12:11:04 SETI@home Message from server: Project has no tasks available


SETI@home server status information is also available in XML.

[As of 26 Mar 2012 | 11:00:04 UTC]

Results ready to send 241,023

My local TZ is UTC+1, BST (UK daylight savig time)

Previous · 1 . . . 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 . . . 11 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (72) Server problems?

Copyright © 2015 University of California