What the heck has happen to workunit credits?

Message boards : Number crunching : What the heck has happen to workunit credits?

Author	Message
Keith White Send message Joined: 29 May 99 Posts: 271 Credit: 1,568,094 RAC: 3,912	Message 1239427 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 13:28:25 UTC
	Suddenly I'm getting squat credits (4-13) for workunits that use to give me 80 or more (based on how long it takes to crunch). I don't check in here as often as I should but did something recently (last 3 months) change in how it gets calculated? In both of these cases the workunit was crunched by the same wingman using "SETI@home Enhanced Anonymous platform (NVIDIA GPU)" on their GTX 590. So is it something wonky with his cruncher or did the credit calculations get tweaked again? ____________ "Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh." - The Doctor
	ID: 1239427 ·

HAL9000 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 11 Sep 99 Posts: 3274 Credit: 76,424,175 RAC: 75,625	Message 1239429 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 13:31:59 UTC
	A year, or was it two, they changed things with CreditNew. Which has its ups and down. There are a few topics on the subject. ____________ SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!
	ID: 1239429 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7451 Credit: 39,519,780 RAC: 32,286	Message 1239431 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 13:41:17 UTC - in response to Message 1239427.
	In both of these cases the workunit was crunched by the same wingman using "SETI@home Enhanced Anonymous platform (NVIDIA GPU)" on their GTX 590. Morten Ross is running an extremely recent 'Multibeam x41x Preview, Cuda 4.20' test application on all six GTX 590 devices in his Longhorn server. I think this must be a hand-picked test unit - hopefully it is being closely monitored (not least, for side-effects of the current server bug).
	ID: 1239431 ·

Mike Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 19449 Credit: 21,034,841 RAC: 26,447	Message 1239434 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 13:51:43 UTC - in response to Message 1239431.
	In both of these cases the workunit was crunched by the same wingman using "SETI@home Enhanced Anonymous platform (NVIDIA GPU)" on their GTX 590. Morten Ross is running an extremely recent 'Multibeam x41x Preview, Cuda 4.20' test application on all six GTX 590 devices in his Longhorn server. I think this must be a hand-picked test unit - hopefully it is being closely monitored (not least, for side-effects of the current server bug). Agreed. Just checked another cuda alpha host with same result. 10-30% causes in low credit. ____________
	ID: 1239434 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7451 Credit: 39,519,780 RAC: 32,286	Message 1239443 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 14:10:05 UTC - in response to Message 1239434.
	In both of these cases the workunit was crunched by the same wingman using "SETI@home Enhanced Anonymous platform (NVIDIA GPU)" on their GTX 590. Morten Ross is running an extremely recent 'Multibeam x41x Preview, Cuda 4.20' test application on all six GTX 590 devices in his Longhorn server. I think this must be a hand-picked test unit - hopefully it is being closely monitored (not least, for side-effects of the current server bug). Agreed. Just checked another cuda alpha host with same result. 10-30% causes in low credit. Well, I'm running the same application myself (which is how I know how new it is), and I don't see any sign of lowered credits on my hosts. I don't think it's an application issue, but I wondered if the overall performance of BOINC on a host with that many devices was being monitored.
	ID: 1239443 ·

Mike Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 19449 Credit: 21,034,841 RAC: 26,447	Message 1239500 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 16:21:10 UTC - in response to Message 1239443.
	In both of these cases the workunit was crunched by the same wingman using "SETI@home Enhanced Anonymous platform (NVIDIA GPU)" on their GTX 590. Morten Ross is running an extremely recent 'Multibeam x41x Preview, Cuda 4.20' test application on all six GTX 590 devices in his Longhorn server. I think this must be a hand-picked test unit - hopefully it is being closely monitored (not least, for side-effects of the current server bug). Agreed. Just checked another cuda alpha host with same result. 10-30% causes in low credit. Well, I'm running the same application myself (which is how I know how new it is), and I don't see any sign of lowered credits on my hosts. I don't think it's an application issue, but I wondered if the overall performance of BOINC on a host with that many devices was being monitored. You have some as well. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2461040880 ____________
	ID: 1239500 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7451 Credit: 39,519,780 RAC: 32,286	Message 1239503 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 16:30:34 UTC - in response to Message 1239500.
	In both of these cases the workunit was crunched by the same wingman using "SETI@home Enhanced Anonymous platform (NVIDIA GPU)" on their GTX 590. Morten Ross is running an extremely recent 'Multibeam x41x Preview, Cuda 4.20' test application on all six GTX 590 devices in his Longhorn server. I think this must be a hand-picked test unit - hopefully it is being closely monitored (not least, for side-effects of the current server bug). Agreed. Just checked another cuda alpha host with same result. 10-30% causes in low credit. Well, I'm running the same application myself (which is how I know how new it is), and I don't see any sign of lowered credits on my hosts. I don't think it's an application issue, but I wondered if the overall performance of BOINC on a host with that many devices was being monitored. You have some as well. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2461040880 Interestingly, my wingmate (the valid one) on that one was another server OS. That's one of the major weaknesses of 'CreditNew' - we can no longer see which member of the quorum pair is making the low claim, which makes it much harder to analyse whether a host has a consistent problem. But thanks - I'll keep an eye on it.
	ID: 1239503 ·

Mike Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 19449 Credit: 21,034,841 RAC: 26,447	Message 1239507 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 16:52:53 UTC
	Look at this example no Windows server involved. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=997649948 ____________
	ID: 1239507 ·

Mike Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 19449 Credit: 21,034,841 RAC: 26,447	Message 1239515 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 17:31:30 UTC
	I think the servers messed up. Look at reported times and credits. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=998136901 ____________
	ID: 1239515 ·

Area 51 Send message Joined: 31 Jan 04 Posts: 965 Credit: 42,193,520 RAC: 0	Message 1239519 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 17:37:46 UTC - in response to Message 1239515.
	I think the servers messed up. Look at reported times and credits. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=998136901 Good spot. At least is shows that x41x isn't the only application demonstrating these characteristics. Question is, how widespread is this issue...... ____________
	ID: 1239519 ·

Mike Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 19449 Credit: 21,034,841 RAC: 26,447	Message 1239525 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 17:45:29 UTC - in response to Message 1239519.
	I think the servers messed up. Look at reported times and credits. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=998136901 Good spot. At least is shows that x41x isn't the only application demonstrating these characteristics. Question is, how widespread is this issue...... At least all wingmen were cuda. Not one ATI result messed up. ____________
	ID: 1239525 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7451 Credit: 39,519,780 RAC: 32,286	Message 1239568 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 18:21:30 UTC - in response to Message 1239525.
	I think the servers messed up. Look at reported times and credits. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=998136901 Good spot. At least is shows that x41x isn't the only application demonstrating these characteristics. Question is, how widespread is this issue...... At least all wingmen were cuda. Not one ATI result messed up. That particular case is exactly the one I wrote up on Monday in Host falling back to CPU processing... (the thread title is from an earlier mis-diagnosis). It comes - or came then - when you report more than 64 tasks at once, and request new work at the same time. Maybe no ATI cards could complete 64 tasks during the outage? :P
	ID: 1239568 ·

skildude Send message Joined: 4 Oct 00 Posts: 8940 Credit: 36,326,353 RAC: 53,348	Message 1239595 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 19:12:42 UTC - in response to Message 1239568.
	I'd like ot know why I got over 2000WU's after the previous outage. Suddenly using BOINC 7.0.28 gives me an enormous cache. ____________ Proud member of TSWB. End terrorism by building a school
	ID: 1239595 ·

[B^S] madmac Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Feb 04 Posts: 1102 Credit: 2,500,977 RAC: 1,583	Message 1239600 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 19:20:05 UTC
	I used to get around 90 for each WU now with my WU with either Fermi or Cuda I only get 30 so I have lost two thirds of my credits I have only noticed this since the outage ____________
	ID: 1239600 ·

Sten-Arne Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 1 Nov 08 Posts: 2681 Credit: 7,567,026 RAC: 23,433	Message 1239612 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 19:58:41 UTC - in response to Message 1239515. Last modified: 1 Jun 2012, 20:03:49 UTC
	I think the servers messed up. Look at reported times and credits. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=998136901 Now that's a weird one. Run time was 323.00 Seconds, but CPU time was 6,747.00 seconds, still it was finished and uploaded in just over 5 minutes. Sent from SETI 1 Jun 2012 \| 1:10:18 UTC Time reported: 1 Jun 2012 \| 1:15:41 UTC It's definitely something very strange going on there. Edit: Just noticed Richard's explanation for this one. Consider this entire message of mine, as a waste of bandwidth. LOL ____________ /The grumpy old Swede. "I'm so old, that 98% of all trees in the forest, are younger than I am"
	ID: 1239612 ·

Area 51 Send message Joined: 31 Jan 04 Posts: 965 Credit: 42,193,520 RAC: 0	Message 1239616 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 20:04:29 UTC - in response to Message 1239600.
	I used to get around 90 for each WU now with my WU with either Fermi or Cuda I only get 30 so I have lost two thirds of my credits I have only noticed this since the outage I think we are definitely in the realm of unintended consequences..... ____________
	ID: 1239616 ·

Mike Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 19449 Credit: 21,034,841 RAC: 26,447	Message 1239680 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 21:33:23 UTC - in response to Message 1239568.
	I think the servers messed up. Look at reported times and credits. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=998136901 Good spot. At least is shows that x41x isn't the only application demonstrating these characteristics. Question is, how widespread is this issue...... At least all wingmen were cuda. Not one ATI result messed up. That particular case is exactly the one I wrote up on Monday in Host falling back to CPU processing... (the thread title is from an earlier mis-diagnosis). It comes - or came then - when you report more than 64 tasks at once, and request new work at the same time. Maybe no ATI cards could complete 64 tasks during the outage? :P I reported 587 at once yesterday without a problem. scratching head. ____________
	ID: 1239680 ·

Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 5057 Credit: 40,639,072 RAC: 52,729	Message 1239694 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 21:54:45 UTC - in response to Message 1239680.
	I reported 587 at once yesterday without a problem. scratching head. I was reporting hundreds of WUs at a time yesterday, but only 64 would actually be reported with each contact with the Scheduler. And luckily at the time there were hundreds of WUs still uploading while i was hammering the update button so i didn't request new work while trying to report. ____________ Grant Darwin NT.
	ID: 1239694 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7451 Credit: 39,519,780 RAC: 32,286	Message 1239699 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 22:14:21 UTC - in response to Message 1239680.
	I reported 587 at once yesterday without a problem. scratching head. Check - count, even - the number of 28-May-2012 10:11:47 [SETI@home] [sched_op] handle_scheduler_reply(): got ack for task 16dc10ac.2114.14009.12.10.195_0 you get in reply to your 587. You run <sched_op_debug>, I'm sure? It's the only way to keep an eye on what's happening round here.
	ID: 1239699 ·

Mike Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 19449 Credit: 21,034,841 RAC: 26,447	Message 1239701 - Posted: 1 Jun 2012, 22:23:26 UTC
	Sure i do. I report more than 70 twice a day (at least). Only on GPU of course. ____________
	ID: 1239701 ·

1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : What the heck has happen to workunit credits?