Look at this host:

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=379675

This host downloaded 150(!) WUs since Nov 29.According to his average completion time it will finish 6-7 WUs/day. Far too less to meet the two weeks deadline. WUs must be resent and crunched again. What a waste of time, CPU cycles and bandwith.

Shouldn't this be limited by the boinc client?

scsimodo

Sigh, and the person has 21 active Computers showing in his Account also. So 150 WU's is nothing to be downloading for that many Computers.

---

> Sigh, and the person has 21 active Computers showing in his Account also. So
> 150 WU's is nothing to be downloading for that many Computers.

It's 150 WUs for *one* host, not for 21!!

---

Hmmmmmmmmm, your right, my mistake, sorry...Yes that is to many to be downloading for just one computer, theres no way he is going to finish that many in 14 days ...

---

Here is another one. Downloading 50 workunits per day (max allowed) and only processing a few a day. Periodically dumps workunits in queue to download more. The computer doesn't seem to be having any problems. Maybe there should be a percent limit of workunits downloaded against workunits returned. If the limit is reached then limit downloads to that computer to one a day or one unit downloaded for each result returned.

Here is the host:

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=363935

May be the queues where flushed for some reason. For the first one there is a break about half thru the list of 150 WUs; this could be an indication of a queue flush.

In another thread I read, sonme one made the surgestion that the workstation be able to inform the the project that it has flushed all work units and is requesting more. This would then allow the the project to send out the work units right away, instead of waiting for the 2 weeks for non-existant, flushed, work units.

---

You need a second life? Seconlife.com

This is what I do not like about having an acct that all can look at, if you look a little closer, you will find he is crunching about 10 WUWUs a day and has about 150 on hand so he will get most of them crunched before deadline, if nothing goes wrong..... We do not need witch hunts here, so look closer and see if you agree,,,,,,,,

---

Semper Eadem
So long Paul, it has been a hell of a ride.

Park your ego's, fire up the computers, Science YES, Credits No.

> This is what I do not like about having an acct that all can look at, if you
> look a little closer, you will find he is crunching about 10 WUWUs a day and
> has about 150 on hand so he will get most of them crunched before deadline, if
> nothing goes wrong..... We do not need witch hunts here, so look closer and
> see if you agree,,,,,,,,
>
It looks to me more like 3 - 4 per day on the host this thread addressed

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=379675

Four per day would take 37.5 days to complete all 150.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

> > This is what I do not like about having an acct that all can look at, if
> you
> > look a little closer, you will find he is crunching about 10 WUWUs a day
> and
> > has about 150 on hand so he will get most of them crunched before
> deadline, if
> > nothing goes wrong..... We do not need witch hunts here, so look closer
> and
> > see if you agree,,,,,,,,
> >
> It looks to me more like 3 - 4 per day on the host this thread addressed
>
> http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=379675
>
> Four per day would take 37.5 days to complete all 150.
>
You need to look again, I count 10 results for Dec 1. But with his history I have no faith that all WUWUs will be completed on time......

---

Semper Eadem
So long Paul, it has been a hell of a ride.

Park your ego's, fire up the computers, Science YES, Credits No.

I wasn't on a witch hunt. I have several of his workunits that are pending because of him and I have to wait for a couple more weeks before they will get sent out again. Doesn't matter if his computers are hidden or not. I would still have seen that host. Just not his name. There are many more people like him. Downloading the max number of workunits a day and periodically flushing them. There is no computer that can process 50 workunits a day right now. That is why I suggested some kind of limit based on percentage downloaded/uploaded.

> I wasn't on a witch hunt. I have several of his workunits that are pending
> because of him and I have to wait for a couple more weeks before they will >get sent out again.


Hear Hear!

Timmy

---

> > > This is what I do not like about having an acct that all can look
> at, if
> > you
> > > look a little closer, you will find he is crunching about 10 WUWUs a
> day
> > and
> > > has about 150 on hand so he will get most of them crunched before
> > deadline, if
> > > nothing goes wrong..... We do not need witch hunts here, so look
> closer
> > and
> > > see if you agree,,,,,,,,
> > >
> > It looks to me more like 3 - 4 per day on the host this thread addressed
> >
> > http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=379675
> >
> > Four per day would take 37.5 days to complete all 150.
He has finished 6 WU's since the first one downloaded on 29 Nov 2004 6:14:03 UTC and the last one downloaded on 30 Nov 2004 8:49:47 UTC. So in 2 days he has done 6 Wu's that's 3 per day amd he has 144 more WU's to complete in 12 more days for the WU's downloaded on the 29th and 13 more days for the WU's downloaded on the 30th. At the rate he has done so far he can get 36 WU's done before the ones due to expire on the 12th there are 94 Wu's that need to be done by this date. That would make 58 WU's that will not be done by the due date. This will leave the 50 more Wu's that need to be done by the 13th not done as well. That leaves 108 Wu's out of 150 not compleated on time.

---

I know this makes it look like I have too much time on my hands but I did some counting.

As of 1 DEC 04 he has:

Downloaded 769
Not flushed 136
Returned 193

There were also 49 with client error, download.

There was a period in there where the project was deleting out verified results but still, this is not a very good downloaded/returned ratio.

The root of the matter is that the system still allows too many WU's to be downloaded by any one computer to be efficient for the overall project. Ideally, it would be nice if there were a case by case limit based on each computer's benchmarks or returned results history. That's a feature that will have to sit out on the wish list for quite a while, I'm sure.

---

>
> Shouldn't this be limited by the boinc client?
>

It could be limited by the BOINC server, since that is where "number of days between connections" is set.

The server should limit everyone to some reasonable number of days, like maybe 5, between connections. That'd limit people to about 10 days worth.

---

> You need to look again, I count 10 results for Dec 1. But with his history I
> have no faith that all WUWUs will be completed on time......
>
Well, I looked again and he's averaging around 13400 seconds per WU. So 13400/3600 = 3.72222 That's why I said 3 to 4 per day.

Remember, it's not how many WU's one uploads per day, it's how long each one takes. If one crunches 10 WU's in three days and uploads them on the third day, they are not crunching 10 per day.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

I've worked with the source code for some of these items...so believe me when I tell you that...

A At 13,502.84 seconds average per WU on a machine (AMD Duron) means it will complete maximum of 6.4 WUs per day. (86400 secs/day)

B This is a duron, therefore no manufacturer has ever made one into a multi -CPU machine, only with Athlon (Duron's big brother).

C There are machines that can do 50 WU per day...with optimized code a Pentium IV 2.8Gig HT machine does approx 1 WU per hour (23-24 per day). On a dual CPU server machine this would achieve 46-48. With more CPUs...more. There are user's systems out there with 8 Pentium or Xeon processors.

D JAF is correct. With proper settings, dozens of WUs could be completed and sitting on a user's machine and all uploaded on a single day.

E I have suspicions, but have never tested myself, that multiple identical machines (CPU, O/S, RAM, HDD) could be "merged" into one machine. (Seti servers could be told it was single) However theoretically the 50 WU download limit still should prevent more than 50/day for said stat fiend.

---

> I've worked with the source code for some of these items...so believe me when
> I tell you that...
>
> A At 13,502.84 seconds average per WU on a machine (AMD Duron) means it
> will complete maximum of 6.4 WUs per day. (86400 secs/day)
>
> B This is a duron, therefore no manufacturer has ever made one into a
> multi -CPU machine, only with Athlon (Duron's big brother).
>
> C There are machines that can do 50 WU per day...with optimized code a
> Pentium IV 2.8Gig HT machine does approx 1 WU per hour (23-24 per day). On a
> dual CPU server machine this would achieve 46-48. With more CPUs...more.
> There are user's systems out there with 8 Pentium or Xeon processors.
>
> D JAF is correct. With proper settings, dozens of WUs could be
> completed and sitting on a user's machine and all uploaded on a single day.
>
> E I have suspicions, but have never tested myself, that multiple
> identical machines (CPU, O/S, RAM, HDD) could be "merged" into one machine.
> (Seti servers could be told it was single) However theoretically the 50 WU
> download limit still should prevent more than 50/day for said stat fiend.
>
>
Benher: Thanks for not calling me stupid, but I was. I'm so used to using the numer 3600 to figure how many hours my WU's took to complete, I mistakingly used it incorrectly (twice). Of course I should have divided 24 by 3.72 to get the correct 6.45 WU's per day.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

> > You need to look again, I count 10 results for Dec 1. But with his
> history I
> > have no faith that all WUWUs will be completed on time......
> >
> Well, I looked again and he's averaging around 13400 seconds per WU. So
> 13400/3600 = 3.72222 That's why I said 3 to 4 per day.
>
> Remember, it's not how many WU's one uploads per day, it's how long each one
> takes. If one crunches 10 WU's in three days and uploads them on the third
> day, they are not crunching 10 per day.
>
>
>You got me JAF, I am using ver4.56 and it uploads when the WUWUs are completed, so all my WUWUs are showing the date they were crunched......I just got confused and apologize.....

---

Semper Eadem
So long Paul, it has been a hell of a ride.

Park your ego's, fire up the computers, Science YES, Credits No.

There is a simple method to solve the problem of lost WUs(as result of a reset). The Client should send a list witch the current WUnames in Cache to the Server. The Server now compares the userlist with the serverlist and erases all lost wus from that Client.

This action could take place before a reset or if not possible once a week so any overload is reduced.

---

BOINC Doc | Team-Site | BOINC-Podcast