Anyone else not getting work???

Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone else not getting work???

Author	Message
Donald L. Johnson Send message Joined: 5 Aug 02 Posts: 4127 Credit: 379,102 RAC: 658	Message 1277343 - Posted: 29 Aug 2012, 23:43:18 UTC
	Just received 8 MBs for my ancient dual-P4 4 are VLARs, and downloads are sloooow, but they are coming. Quess it's time to say it again- Around here, patience is not just a virtue, it's a requirement. ____________ Donald Infernal Optimist / Submariner, retired
	ID: 1277343 ·

T. Moe Send message Joined: 31 May 12 Posts: 144 Credit: 862,949 RAC: 292	Message 1277354 - Posted: 30 Aug 2012, 0:59:36 UTC
	I just got 3 WU after I restarted my PC. ____________
	ID: 1277354 ·

Interstel Send message Joined: 29 Nov 01 Posts: 23 Credit: 2,212,360 RAC: 126	Message 1277686 - Posted: 30 Aug 2012, 17:58:00 UTC
	After my shutdown and restart of the BOINC program I go in a bunch of a whole slew of Einstein's and some LHC's. But only 5 new SETI's 1 6.04, and 4 6.09's. I haven't changed my setting since synching them all up months ago creating essentially 4 types none, home, school and work. that way I could assign each machine into a category that best fit what it had and how long it takes to run things. My primary workstation has dual CPU's with dual cores and hyperthreading for 8 CPU Cores, 16 gigs of RAM, a GeForce 250 GTS the first that runs openCLl, and U320 15,000 RPM SCSI hard disks. In the past I was doing around 4000-4400 credit average for just SETI. Since Aug 8th when I added the extra projects the number of SETI 6.03-6.09 WU's has dropped and dropped with the only things coming through being the Astropulse 6.01's. Yet I set the RESOURCE SHARE to 1400 on SETI to force supposedly 70% to SETI and 5% to everything else but it runs more like I've set SETI to 5%. I know this is the 2nd time I've put this out here but I've been pretty much trouble free for a decade. If it means I have to drop these other projects I will in order to maintain my SETI ever increasing WU count. Jame ____________ Joined SETI@Home in 2001 Online since ArpNET days First activity on Honeywell 1648 Series Mainframe in 1975 at age 12.
	ID: 1277686 ·

Sunny129 Send message Joined: 7 Nov 00 Posts: 190 Credit: 3,163,755 RAC: 0	Message 1277718 - Posted: 30 Aug 2012, 18:54:20 UTC - in response to Message 1277686. Last modified: 30 Aug 2012, 18:56:19 UTC
	After my shutdown and restart of the BOINC program I go in a bunch of a whole slew of Einstein's and some LHC's. But only 5 new SETI's 1 6.04, and 4 6.09's. I haven't changed my setting since synching them all up months ago creating essentially 4 types none, home, school and work. that way I could assign each machine into a category that best fit what it had and how long it takes to run things. My primary workstation has dual CPU's with dual cores and hyperthreading for 8 CPU Cores, 16 gigs of RAM, a GeForce 250 GTS the first that runs openCLl, and U320 15,000 RPM SCSI hard disks. In the past I was doing around 4000-4400 credit average for just SETI. Since Aug 8th when I added the extra projects the number of SETI 6.03-6.09 WU's has dropped and dropped with the only things coming through being the Astropulse 6.01's. Yet I set the RESOURCE SHARE to 1400 on SETI to force supposedly 70% to SETI and 5% to everything else but it runs more like I've set SETI to 5%. I know this is the 2nd time I've put this out here but I've been pretty much trouble free for a decade. If it means I have to drop these other projects I will in order to maintain my SETI ever increasing WU count. Jame as BillBG previously mentioned in the Bug in server affecting older BOINC clients with NVIDIA GPUs thread, BOINC is upposed to respect resource share in the long term, which means that its effects won't be immediately noticeable. as i also previously mentioned in that same thread, i used to have 90% of the CPU in one of my machines allocated to LHC@Home SixTrack (in hopes that on the rare occasion SixTrack WU's became available, my host would download a bunch and give them priority), and the remaining 10% allocated to a handful of other projects. it actually worked the exact opposite as i expected - BOINC wouldn't even bother to download LHC@H work despite the massive 90% resource allocation to the project, and all other projects would continue downloading/crunching/uploading/reporting/invoking scheduler requests like they always do. i then decided to split the resources evenly between all projects, and all of the sudden i started getting LHC@H work! perhaps you should try splitting resource share evenly between all projects on that host, instead of giving 70% to SETI and the remaining 30% to all other projects, and see what happens? it might not do anything for you, but it sure couldn't hurt to try... ____________
	ID: 1277718 ·

Interstel Send message Joined: 29 Nov 01 Posts: 23 Credit: 2,212,360 RAC: 126	Message 1279050 - Posted: 1 Sep 2012, 23:13:37 UTC - in response to Message 1277718.
	as BillBG previously mentioned in the Bug in server affecting older BOINC clients with NVIDIA GPUs thread, BOINC is upposed to respect resource share in the long term, which means that its effects won't be immediately noticeable. as i also previously mentioned in that same thread, i used to have 90% of the CPU in one of my machines allocated to LHC@Home SixTrack (in hopes that on the rare occasion SixTrack WU's became available, my host would download a bunch and give them priority), and the remaining 10% allocated to a handful of other projects. it actually worked the exact opposite as i expected - BOINC wouldn't even bother to download LHC@H work despite the massive 90% resource allocation to the project, and all other projects would continue downloading/crunching/uploading/reporting/invoking scheduler requests like they always do. i then decided to split the resources evenly between all projects, and all of the sudden i started getting LHC@H work! perhaps you should try splitting resource share evenly between all projects on that host, instead of giving 70% to SETI and the remaining 30% to all other projects, and see what happens? it might not do anything for you, but it sure couldn't hurt to try... Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James ____________ Joined SETI@Home in 2001 Online since ArpNET days First activity on Honeywell 1648 Series Mainframe in 1975 at age 12.
	ID: 1279050 ·

Sunny129 Send message Joined: 7 Nov 00 Posts: 190 Credit: 3,163,755 RAC: 0	Message 1279069 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 0:42:02 UTC - in response to Message 1279050.
	yes, its entirely possible that switching drivers can effect the run times of GPU tasks. i don't know about the specific driver versions you speak of, but there might be a thread here that talks about driver versions and which ones work best for specific applications and/or GPU architectures. if you're talking about one of the latest driver releases, i don't know if there will be much info in the server database yet...but a search should dig up something. ____________
	ID: 1279069 ·

rob smith Volunteer moderator Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 5572 Credit: 22,641,470 RAC: 39,132	Message 1279139 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 7:20:20 UTC
	Interstel - Just a quick note about Nvidia driver versions - al versions above 301.42 are marked as "BETA", in other words they are being tested, that is they are NOT certified as being "good to use". They may be Windows certified, but that only means they are compatible with the windows api. Nvidia use "WHQL" to indicate a driver that is stable, and has passed its Beta test phase. ____________ Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
	ID: 1279139 ·

msattler Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 34720 Credit: 355,414,014 RAC: 375,403	Message 1279175 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 8:59:43 UTC
	I am getting work... Built about 1000 in cache over the last few hours. Cricket is block-solid. ____________ ****** "Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty." As it is kitten, so shall it be done.
	ID: 1279175 ·

Claggy Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 3515 Credit: 26,396,917 RAC: 18,246	Message 1279188 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 9:43:34 UTC - in response to Message 1279050. Last modified: 2 Sep 2012, 10:38:15 UTC
	Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James My Benches of x41 Cuda apps on different drivers has shown an increased runtime on the Cuda 5 preview drivers on legacy (pre-fermi) hardware, best to steer clear of 302.xx and later drivers for pre-fermi hardware. 9800GTX+ on 301.48 Drivers: WU : PG0444_v7.wu Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda23.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 87.883 secs, speedup: 81.98% ratio: 5.55x CPU 13.369 secs, speedup: 97.46% ratio: 39.44x Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda32.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 89.957 secs, speedup: 81.56% ratio: 5.42x CPU 14.758 secs, speedup: 97.20% ratio: 35.73x Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda41.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 99.328 secs, speedup: 79.64% ratio: 4.91x CPU 12.808 secs, speedup: 97.57% ratio: 41.17x Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda42.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 99.221 secs, speedup: 79.66% ratio: 4.92x CPU 12.184 secs, speedup: 97.69% ratio: 43.28x 9800GTX+ on 306.02 Drivers: WU : PG0444_v7.wu Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda23.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 95.015 secs, speedup: 80.52% ratio: 5.13x CPU 14.149 secs, speedup: 97.32% ratio: 37.27x Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda32.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 111.247 secs, speedup: 77.19% ratio: 4.38x CPU 15.101 secs, speedup: 97.14% ratio: 34.92x Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda41.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 118.127 secs, speedup: 75.78% ratio: 4.13x CPU 11.840 secs, speedup: 97.75% ratio: 44.53x Lunatics_x41z_win32_cuda42.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 118.140 secs, speedup: 75.78% ratio: 4.13x CPU 12.386 secs, speedup: 97.65% ratio: 42.57x Claggy
	ID: 1279188 ·

msattler Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 34720 Credit: 355,414,014 RAC: 375,403	Message 1279190 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 9:48:06 UTC - in response to Message 1279188.
	Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James My Benches of x41 Cuda apps on different drivers has shown an increased runtime on the Cuda 5 preview drivers on legacy (pre-fermi) hardware, best to steer clear of 302.xx and later drivers for pre-fermi hardware. Claggy Jason has made it clear that the latest and greatest app and drivers do not play very well with the older hardware. ____________ ****** "Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty." As it is kitten, so shall it be done.
	ID: 1279190 ·

Claggy Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 3515 Credit: 26,396,917 RAC: 18,246	Message 1279193 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 9:51:28 UTC - in response to Message 1279190.
	Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James My Benches of x41 Cuda apps on different drivers has shown an increased runtime on the Cuda 5 preview drivers on legacy (pre-fermi) hardware, best to steer clear of 302.xx and later drivers for pre-fermi hardware. Claggy Jason has made it clear that the latest and greatest app and drivers do not play very well with the older hardware. I know, I've done the Bench testing for him, Claggy
	ID: 1279193 ·

msattler Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 34720 Credit: 355,414,014 RAC: 375,403	Message 1279194 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 9:54:06 UTC - in response to Message 1279193. Last modified: 2 Sep 2012, 9:54:28 UTC
	Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James My Benches of x41 Cuda apps on different drivers has shown an increased runtime on the Cuda 5 preview drivers on legacy (pre-fermi) hardware, best to steer clear of 302.xx and later drivers for pre-fermi hardware. Claggy Jason has made it clear that the latest and greatest app and drivers do not play very well with the older hardware. I know, I've done the Bench testing for him, Claggy Right you are, Sir. And thank you for doing so. Meow. ____________ ****** "Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty." As it is kitten, so shall it be done.
	ID: 1279194 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7670 Credit: 40,284,612 RAC: 21,279	Message 1279247 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 13:30:21 UTC - in response to Message 1279188.
	Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James My Benches of x41 Cuda apps on different drivers has shown an increased runtime on the Cuda 5 preview drivers on legacy (pre-fermi) hardware, best to steer clear of 302.xx and later drivers for pre-fermi hardware. We're getting similar reports at Einstein: Fermi (unspecified) 5-6% improvement with 306.02 drivers (message 118966) Quadro FX1800 (similar to 9600 GS/GT) "compute-time with the new 305.93 driver is now 3 times as long as with the old 276.52 driver" (message 118918) [305.93 is a WHQL driver specifically for desktop Quadro cards]
	ID: 1279247 ·

msattler Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 34720 Credit: 355,414,014 RAC: 375,403	Message 1279254 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 13:40:34 UTC - in response to Message 1279247. Last modified: 2 Sep 2012, 13:41:08 UTC
	Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James My Benches of x41 Cuda apps on different drivers has shown an increased runtime on the Cuda 5 preview drivers on legacy (pre-fermi) hardware, best to steer clear of 302.xx and later drivers for pre-fermi hardware. We're getting similar reports at Einstein: Fermi (unspecified) 5-6% improvement with 306.02 drivers (message 118966) Quadro FX1800 (similar to 9600 GS/GT) "compute-time with the new 305.93 driver is now 3 times as long as with the old 276.52 driver" (message 118918) [305.93 is a WHQL driver specifically for desktop Quadro cards] Ouch. Now y'all know why the kitties tend to like the status quo rather than be blazing new trails with their tails. If it ain't busted.......... ____________ ****** "Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty." As it is kitten, so shall it be done.
	ID: 1279254 ·

Donald L. Johnson Send message Joined: 5 Aug 02 Posts: 4127 Credit: 379,102 RAC: 658	Message 1279279 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 15:15:25 UTC - in response to Message 1279222.
	The four CPU-based Seti@home tasks I had finished up and was uploaded and reported. Now I am back with 17 Seti@home CUDA tasks which I will not run now. Also I have two PrimeGrid tasks running. A Genefer World Record task (CUDA) also is suspended for now. This means that I still have room for 6 tasks in my CPU. Will I get any such tasks? As I recall from previous discussions, if you have ANY tasks Suspended or running in High Priority mode, BOINC will NOT request new work from ANY project. So no, you should NOT get any new S@H MB tasks for your CPU as long as you have taaks suspended. ____________ Donald Infernal Optimist / Submariner, retired
	ID: 1279279 ·

arkayn Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 14 May 99 Posts: 3149 Credit: 41,368,928 RAC: 31,161	Message 1279340 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 18:53:34 UTC - in response to Message 1279254.
	Well it certainly wont hurt to try for a couple of days. One thing that is throwing me though can upgrading your video drivers slow down processing? I had cause to install the Nvidia 306.02 drivers which are certified but not WHQL like the 302.42 drivers. And it seems like my astropulse computations have slowed down to 1/2 speed. James My Benches of x41 Cuda apps on different drivers has shown an increased runtime on the Cuda 5 preview drivers on legacy (pre-fermi) hardware, best to steer clear of 302.xx and later drivers for pre-fermi hardware. We're getting similar reports at Einstein: Fermi (unspecified) 5-6% improvement with 306.02 drivers (message 118966) Quadro FX1800 (similar to 9600 GS/GT) "compute-time with the new 305.93 driver is now 3 times as long as with the old 276.52 driver" (message 118918) [305.93 is a WHQL driver specifically for desktop Quadro cards] Ouch. Now y'all know why the kitties tend to like the status quo rather than be blazing new trails with their tails. If it ain't busted.......... That is what the alpha testers are for. I have installed every beta driver so far and only uninstalled the 295 and 296 drivers. ____________
	ID: 1279340 ·

rob smith Volunteer moderator Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 5572 Credit: 22,641,470 RAC: 39,132	Message 1279352 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 19:31:31 UTC
	As I recall from previous discussions, if you have ANY tasks Suspended or running in High Priority mode, BOINC will NOT request new work from ANY project. So no, you should NOT get any new S@H MB tasks for your CPU as long as you have taaks suspended. All I can say is - Its a shame not all projects obey the rules - LHC is running at high priority, and is downloading new WU, meanwhile S@H sits there waiting for a gap in LHC's stupid short deadlines and obeying the rules of don't download while running high priority. (Also being posted in LHC) ____________ Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
	ID: 1279352 ·

msattler Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 34720 Credit: 355,414,014 RAC: 375,403	Message 1279356 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 19:48:23 UTC - in response to Message 1279352.
	As I recall from previous discussions, if you have ANY tasks Suspended or running in High Priority mode, BOINC will NOT request new work from ANY project. So no, you should NOT get any new S@H MB tasks for your CPU as long as you have taaks suspended. All I can say is - Its a shame not all projects obey the rules - LHC is running at high priority, and is downloading new WU, meanwhile S@H sits there waiting for a gap in LHC's stupid short deadlines and obeying the rules of don't download while running high priority. (Also being posted in LHC) Uhh.....fix it by not running LHC? ____________ ****** "Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty." As it is kitten, so shall it be done.
	ID: 1279356 ·

Claggy Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 3515 Credit: 26,396,917 RAC: 18,246	Message 1279361 - Posted: 2 Sep 2012, 20:08:50 UTC - in response to Message 1279279.
	As I recall from previous discussions, if you have ANY tasks Suspended or running in High Priority mode, BOINC will NOT request new work from ANY project. That's not true, you can have tasks suspended from one project and still request work from another project, and Boinc can request work even if you have tasks running high priority too (in some circumstances) Claggy
	ID: 1279361 ·

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone else not getting work???