Validation Inconclusive, is it me or is this becoming more common? |
![]() |
| log in |
Message boards : Number crunching : Validation Inconclusive, is it me or is this becoming more common?
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Since they've broken that out for filtering on the results page I've notice that it's been growing as more and more of my GPU units are now waiting for a 2nd opinion. Now I agree that outright mismatches in number of pulses/spikes/triplets/Gaussians detected warrant another look but when both a CPU and GPU unit report the same, even all 0s, why would it be classified as inconclusive? It can't just be because of the flop count, there's no reason why two different apps, optimized for their specific platforms, have the same or reasonably close flop count. | |
| ID: 1324928 · | |
Since they've broken that out for filtering on the results page I've notice that it's been growing as more and more of my GPU units are now waiting for a 2nd opinion. Now I agree that outright mismatches in number of pulses/spikes/triplets/Gaussians detected warrant another look but when both a CPU and GPU unit report the same, even all 0s, why would it be classified as inconclusive? It can't just be because of the flop count, there's no reason why two different apps, optimized for their specific platforms, have the same or reasonably close flop count. I think this was always going on in the background, and it's only that they sorted it into a new stat just to keep us worried...LOL. ____________ ****** "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: 1324933 · | |
|
I'm not sure about being more common, it certainly "plagues" some crunchers far worse than others. | |
| ID: 1324942 · | |
I'm not sure about being more common, it certainly "plagues" some crunchers far worse than others. I watch the stats.......keep a window open with them and refresh it now and again. I have caught a rig going south now and again, but VI is NOT an indication of a problem, unless something goes really wild. ____________ ****** "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: 1324944 · | |
|
As I recall from previous discussions, the std.err.out report that we see is only a summary, not the whole story. There are significant differences between CPU and GPU apps in the way they process the WU data, so even if the pulse/spike/etc Counts are the same, they may not BE the same pulses, spikes, etc. I have seen this many times when my stock CPU apps are paired with GPU or Optimized apps. | |
| ID: 1324961 · | |
|
Definitely not your fault Keith. | |
| ID: 1324976 · | |
... 100% is required for an immediate "strongly similar" validation, any less goes inconclusive. Credit (and the accompanying "valid" status) is granted eventually for all which match at least 50% (weakly similar). Classic S@h kept track of the "best so far" signal of each type so there would be something to show on the graphics, and that of course carried over into seti_boinc. In addition those "best" signals are sent in the result uploaded to the BOINC servers unless there's an overflow, to give the Validator something to compare even if there are no reportable signals. So in addition to the counts of reportable signals, validation includes up to four additional signal comparisons. Joe | |
| ID: 1325031 · | |
|
I have noticed in the past few weeks being AP-only that I'm starting to see a lot of inconclusive results on the first go-around. Almost always, it is an open_cl GPU app that I get paired with..sometimes stock, sometimes optimized. At this moment, I have three of them, and they're all against stock. | |
| ID: 1325189 · | |
|
Dont forget difference in hardware. | |
| ID: 1325201 · | |
|
Here is a very good example. | |
| ID: 1325208 · | |
|
And that I can understand. However I've found another case were my system and my wing man's reported zero spikes, pulses, triplets, gaussians found and the it is still considered inconclusive. Did we somehow not find the same degree of nothingness? | |
| ID: 1325298 · | |
And that I can understand. However I've found another case were my system and my wing man's reported zero spikes, pulses, triplets, gaussians found and the it is still considered inconclusive. Did we somehow not find the same degree of nothingness? It didn't find nothing, it found Zero REPORTED signals, there were signals found, just they aren't good enough to be reported: Work Unit Info: Claggy | |
| ID: 1325324 · | |
Anyway like I stated before, the build up of inconclusive units is because the tie-breaker isn't being assigned for some reason over the last week or so. I imagine in the normal course of events (especially due to the 100 unit queue limits) the tie-breaker will return in a day or three and the work unit moved to validated, keeping the inconclusive list from growing longer while also keeping my RAC from slipping. As I mentioned earlier, resends go to the end of the queue, behind all current new WUs. They built up a batch of over 1 million new WUs to issuie ahead of the expected outage Friday, those had to be assigned before our resends could go out. I had one that erroreed on me on 2 Jan, the resend didn't go out until the 6th (today). As some of us used to say a lot more often than we do now, around here patience is not just a virtue, it is a requirement (8{) ____________ Donald Infernal Optimist / Submariner, retired | |
| ID: 1325328 · | |
Anyway like I stated before, the build up of inconclusive units is because the tie-breaker isn't being assigned for some reason over the last week or so. I imagine in the normal course of events (especially due to the 100 unit queue limits) the tie-breaker will return in a day or three and the work unit moved to validated, keeping the inconclusive list from growing longer while also keeping my RAC from slipping. I suspect it's even more drastic than that, and I don't think it was a deliberate attempt to stock up in advance of the outage. We had a server status page lockup at 02:50 UTC on 01 January, and at that moment the number of tasks shown 'ready to send' was below the high water mark that inhibits the splitters. I suspect they never stopped splitting until normal server status display was re-established some 36 hours later, by which time nearly five million tasks were available: We've been chewing them ever since, and I doubt a single new task has been split from tape in all that time. Some time fairly soon, we're going to reach the tail-end, comprised exclusively of replacement tasks for all the timeouts/errors/aborts/abandons/inconclusives for last week - probably half a million of them. That should cut down the pendings a bit. | |
| ID: 1325330 · | |
|
Looks like we dug down into the resend stratum about half an hour ago. | |
| ID: 1325365 · | |
|
And yes, as sure as Galoka didn't think that the Ulus were too ugly to save, my Validation Inconclusive stack has been steadily decreasing since last night now that all the tie-breaker units have been assigned to wingmen. That'll also mean my RAC will bounce back up to where it should historically be. | |
| ID: 1325563 · | |
It still bothers me that the optimized ATI/AMD code has a tendency to under detect pulses relative to the stock CPU code.. That iz odd, i was thinking my ATI card waz finding more than stock in my Validation Inconclusive stack, Ho hum, thats life :¬) | |
| ID: 1325662 · | |
Message boards : Number crunching : Validation Inconclusive, is it me or is this becoming more common?
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |