Message boards :
Number crunching :
What the heck has happen to workunit credits?
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Keith White Send message Joined: 29 May 99 Posts: 392 Credit: 13,035,233 RAC: 22 |
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 |
HAL9000 Send message Joined: 11 Sep 99 Posts: 6534 Credit: 196,805,888 RAC: 57 |
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 [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[ |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
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). |
Mike Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 34253 Credit: 79,922,639 RAC: 80 |
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. Agreed. Just checked another cuda alpha host with same result. 10-30% causes in low credit. With each crime and every kindness we birth our future. |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
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. 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. |
Mike Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 34253 Credit: 79,922,639 RAC: 80 |
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. You have some as well. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2461040880 With each crime and every kindness we birth our future. |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
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. 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. |
Mike Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 34253 Credit: 79,922,639 RAC: 80 |
Look at this example no Windows server involved. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=997649948 With each crime and every kindness we birth our future. |
Mike Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 34253 Credit: 79,922,639 RAC: 80 |
I think the servers messed up. Look at reported times and credits. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=998136901 With each crime and every kindness we birth our future. |
Area 51 Send message Joined: 31 Jan 04 Posts: 965 Credit: 42,193,520 RAC: 0 |
I think the servers messed up. Good spot. At least is shows that x41x isn't the only application demonstrating these characteristics. Question is, how widespread is this issue...... |
Mike Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 34253 Credit: 79,922,639 RAC: 80 |
I think the servers messed up. At least all wingmen were cuda. Not one ATI result messed up. With each crime and every kindness we birth our future. |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
I think the servers 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 |
skildude Send message Joined: 4 Oct 00 Posts: 9541 Credit: 50,759,529 RAC: 60 |
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. In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. Diogenes Of Sinope |
[B^S] madmac Send message Joined: 9 Feb 04 Posts: 1175 Credit: 4,754,897 RAC: 0 |
|
Area 51 Send message Joined: 31 Jan 04 Posts: 965 Credit: 42,193,520 RAC: 0 |
|
Mike Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 34253 Credit: 79,922,639 RAC: 80 |
I think the servers messed up. I reported 587 at once yesterday without a problem. scratching head. With each crime and every kindness we birth our future. |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13720 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
I reported 587 at once yesterday without a problem. 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 |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
I reported 587 at once yesterday without a problem. 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. |
Mike Send message Joined: 17 Feb 01 Posts: 34253 Credit: 79,922,639 RAC: 80 |
Sure i do. I report more than 70 twice a day (at least). Only on GPU of course. With each crime and every kindness we birth our future. |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
Sure i do. And what are you seeing at the moment? Forget the games, that's a serious question. I checked not long after the servers came back up last night. At 20:12:51 last night (that's 19:12 UTC), I reported 98 tasks. I got 64 acknowledgements, and 20 resent lost tasks. At 21:03:35 - deliberately almost an hour later, to avoid credit loss for myself and my wingmates, I reported 42 completed tasks. That's the 34 left over reports not accepted by the server, 7 delayed uploads because of the congestion, and one newly completed (and uploaded) result. There are reports today that some hosts are getting more than 64 tasks reported and acknowledged in one go. Can you confirm that? My queues are drained, so I'm blind for the time being. |
©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.