Discussion of Invalid Host Messaging

I thought the server was supposed to throttle a client with too many errors, is that not true?

It is true, but effective only when nothing but errors are returned for an extended time. There are delays caused by pending tasks from before the problem, and each error only reduces quota by one. For "SETI@home Enhanced 6.10 windows_intelx86 (cuda_fermi)", Thndr's host is down to "Max tasks per day 2" but for GPUs that is multiplied by a project setting which is probably still 8 here. So for that application version it's down to 16 per day, and that's enough less than the limit of 100 in progress to minimize the damage.

Joe

Its still seems odd that there are users with a thousand inconclusives.

As an example, I've got an inconclusive with this user, who has no tasks in progress, but the application details show he can take 100 WU? http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=6726942

I don't mean to imply any ill will towards anyone working on sorting out their gpu problem. Maybe the project should throttle the GPUs faster and automatically notify you if you get a lot of errors.

11/14/2012 5:28:45 PM | | suspend work if non-BOINC CPU load exceeds 25 %.

This setting can produce errors, it stops and starts the app..
Better to set it to 0 (zero) and use the (CPU) and GPU setting: run when computer is idle, IMHO

The same applies to the default settings of the AstroPulse stock app.

DATA_CHUNK_UNROLL at default:2 DATA_CHUNK_UNROLL at default:2

Depending of the GPU used, these values should be adjusted accordingly.
F.i. start with UNROLL=8, UNROLL=16 is usually the limit.

Info: BOINC provided device ID used Used GPU device parameters are: Number of compute units: 4 Single buffer allocation size: 256MB max WG size: 1024 FERMI path used: yes

UNROLL=4 should work better, IMHO.
(If it's still possible to change these values?!).

So, not a single AstroPulse "Computation error" since updating to BOINC 7.0.38. Interesting. I had been receiving around one, sometimes two, a day with 7.0.28. I see the AstroPulse error was vaporized, but, I did receive 4 others with the nVidia card before adding the FLOP entry. You can see when I updated to 7.0.38 here, Task 2780311703 It's become somewhat of a cliffhanger now, will it pass or throw the Error? The suspense is growing with every passing hour, All AstroPulse v6 tasks for computer 6797524
I suppose I could just change the Unroll to 2 and see what happens, but, that would remove the drama...

This could save a large amount of Computer Time if updating BOINC solved the problem :-)

*** I suppose I could just change the Unroll to 2 and see what happens ***

*** I suppose I could just change the Unroll to 2 and see what happens ***

I've completed 6 APs in a row with the Unroll setting at 2. If I would have done that back here ^Something isn't right^ around 5 of those 6 would have ended in a "Computation error".
Here are the first 3 of the 6;
Task 2784334429
Task 2784338147
Task 2784338745

I'm ready to declare Victory.

You could adjust the Fetch and Thread_Block, see that you use 1:3 and
Fetch_Block 2048 and Thread_Block 6144, have you tried other values, f.i. Tread_Block 10240 and Fetch_Block 5120 or 8192 and 4096: (1:2).

Running on device number: 0 DATA_CHUNK_UNROLL at default:2 DATA_CHUNK_UNROLL set to:2 FFA thread block override value:6144 FFA thread fetchblock override value:2048

With UNROLL=2, Tread and Fetch_Block can be bigger!
Which one is the most effective also depends which GPU you're using.
See that you use an 9800GT and a BARTS GPU. Quite different architecture and
thus Regsize.

GPU usage has nothing to do with the Boinc version.
Blankings are reponsible for GPU usage because its calculation is done by the CPU.

A while back, I went to using a CPU setting of 60% for Multiprocessors. That gave me about the same as I had using a different setting, 2 CPUs for 603 Tasks and 2 CPUs for the GPUs. I've never had a problem with having 2 CPUs free for the 2 GPUs even with running Multiple Instances on 1 GPU. I'm running the wonderful System Information Viewer continuously, and it has a CPU Process graph for each Process. When the Hang occurs, the CPU process for one AP maxes out in the Red. My guess is BOINC 7.0.38 wants me to sacrifice another CPU for the GPUs. Again, I did't have that problem in 7.0.28 or 7.0.36. I'm really not interested in running 2 APs at the same time, I was just testing to see if I got the (0xc0000005) error. I didn't receive the (0xc0000005) error, I got something else. I'm happy with running 1 AP at a time, at around 90% GPU usage. If you look back at my results when using 7.0.28, you will notice I was getting some fast times. Those times were with the GPU running around 90% with most tasks. Since updating to 7.0.38, the most I've seen is around 80% usage on the fastest APs I've run so far. I should have run across quite a few at 90%, I haven't....So Far.

BTW, I still haven't received the dreaded "Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x0040A1FA read attempt to address 0x00399F64" Error on my MacPro since updating to 7.0.38. Later tonight I will be updating the machine with the ATI 4670 to 7.0.38. I'm not sure what's going on with that machine, it's had a terrible week. It usually doesn't give any problems. Now it's given the "Unhandled Exception Detected...
- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x0040A1FA read attempt to address 0x00399F64" Error, Followed by an Invalid, and then more questionable results. We'll see what happens after the update.

When it rains....
Check this out. I just looked at my last completed AP and look at what my Wingman got;
Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x0040A1FA read attempt to address 0x0052901C
You can't make this stuff up....

After 9 days, another Error. Well, it's better than it use to be.

Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x0040A1FA read attempt to address 0x003AA2DC

When the other results are in, I'll bet they validate the results that are currently labeled "Invalid". Something is causing that Error after the results are written...

Maybe someone could send a PM to Cody Sharp and explain to him how to add the command line entry to his ap_cmdline_6.04_windows_intelx86__opencl_ati.txt file. He just showed up at the top of one of my Workgroups again. I guess his file might have a different name since he's running Win 7 64bit. If he just added one of these lines to that file he could probably avoid most of those Errors. I keep thinking about it every time I see one of his Errors, but, there are so many of those affected Hosts...

Maybe SETI could make a post on the News page about the problem and explain how to add one of the lines;
Command Line Parameters,
High end cards (more than 12 compute units)
-unroll 12 -ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 4096 -hp

Mid range cards (less than 12 compute units)
-unroll 10 -ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536 -hp

Entry level GPU (less than 6 compute units)
-unroll 4 -ffa_block 2048 -ffa_block_fetch 1024 -hp

It might save some bandwidth...and give people sending PMs a link to reference.

It also causes something else, related to the Error. What happens if you set the settings too high in XP? *Out of Memory* It causes the App to use more memory. But, You should know that though...

It sure helped me back here, Then try adding -unroll 10 -ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536 to your ap_cmdline_6.04_windows_intelx86__opencl_ati.txt file. Send someone having a lot of these Errors a message, see if it helps them.

Oh, I'm about out of APs again...