Panic Mode On (82) Server Problems?

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (82) Server Problems?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 . . . 24 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile cov_route
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 13 Sep 12
Posts: 342
Credit: 10,270,618
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1344955 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 15:16:20 UTC - in response to Message 1344924.  

Tanks to the one who discovered/share that with us.

cdemers figured it out.
ID: 1344955 · Report as offensive
juan BFP Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 07
Posts: 9786
Credit: 572,710,851
RAC: 3,799
Panama
Message 1345013 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 17:24:10 UTC - in response to Message 1344955.  
Last modified: 10 Mar 2013, 17:24:36 UTC

Tanks to the one who discovered/share that with us.

cdemers figured it out.

Not so shure about that, but he have his big contribution in testing and sharing the results with us.
ID: 1345013 · Report as offensive
Profile ivan
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Mar 01
Posts: 783
Credit: 348,560,338
RAC: 223
United Kingdom
Message 1345140 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 23:21:38 UTC

So, what are the theories as to why the cricket graph incoming (blue line) has started to creep upward? Something to do with the current lack of AP workunits to send?

ID: 1345140 · Report as offensive
kittyman Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 51468
Credit: 1,018,363,574
RAC: 1,004
United States
Message 1345141 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 23:26:22 UTC - in response to Message 1345140.  
Last modified: 10 Mar 2013, 23:26:43 UTC

So, what are the theories as to why the cricket graph incoming (blue line) has started to creep upward? Something to do with the current lack of AP workunits to send?

With AP work not clogging up the pipes, more MB work is probably going out and being returned.
There have also been a significant number of 'shorty' MB WUs, which get crunched and returned much faster.
"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

ID: 1345141 · Report as offensive
Lionel

Send message
Joined: 25 Mar 00
Posts: 680
Credit: 563,640,304
RAC: 597
Australia
Message 1345153 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 0:05:10 UTC - in response to Message 1345141.  

Mark, there is a shortie shower going on at the moment...
ID: 1345153 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 14650
Credit: 200,643,578
RAC: 874
United Kingdom
Message 1345156 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 0:11:17 UTC - in response to Message 1345153.  

Mark, there is a shortie shower going on at the moment...

And, with both shorties and limits, big hosts contact the servers much more often.

Their sched_request files count towards the bits on the blue line. At least, with limits in place, the request files aren't as big as the ones we've discussed in the past.
ID: 1345156 · Report as offensive
Profile Wiggo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 34744
Credit: 261,360,520
RAC: 489
Australia
Message 1345157 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 0:16:16 UTC - in response to Message 1345140.  

So, what are the theories as to why the cricket graph incoming (blue line) has started to creep upward? Something to do with the current lack of AP workunits to send?

That always happens as the downloads stop to saturate the pipeline allowing the uploads to have more bandwidth (it just hasn't been seen in a long time).

Cheers.
ID: 1345157 · Report as offensive
Grant (SSSF)
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 13736
Credit: 208,696,464
RAC: 304
Australia
Message 1345212 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 6:21:13 UTC - in response to Message 1345153.  

Mark, there is a shortie shower going on at the moment...

But there are no more shorties going through than there wre a couple of days ago and there was no effect on inbound traffic then, although i notice this time the turnaround time has dropped drastically.
Grant
Darwin NT
ID: 1345212 · Report as offensive
Profile Gatekeeper
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Jul 04
Posts: 887
Credit: 176,479,616
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1345214 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 6:25:29 UTC - in response to Message 1345212.  

Mark, there is a shortie shower going on at the moment...

But there are no more shorties going through than there wre a couple of days ago and there was no effect on inbound traffic then, although i notice this time the turnaround time has dropped drastically.


And how!

My primary rig is turning over 100 GPU shorties every ~30 minutes. @ 200/hour for close to 12 hours, plus the CPU work, that's 2500 WU's, and the rig is only #14 rankings-wise. Good news is, efficient downloading has kept up very nicely.
ID: 1345214 · Report as offensive
Profile Michael W.F. Miles
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Mar 07
Posts: 268
Credit: 34,410,870
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1345406 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 17:21:15 UTC

Everything was going smooth for downloads until yesterday.Now the only way I can get these shorties to come through is to suspend net activity and resume about three times / task. This is downright frustrating. Anyone else seeing a huge problem with downloading today

Michael Miles

ID: 1345406 · Report as offensive
Profile Cliff Harding
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Aug 99
Posts: 1432
Credit: 110,967,840
RAC: 67
United States
Message 1345408 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 17:27:59 UTC - in response to Message 1345406.  

Everything was going smooth for downloads until yesterday.Now the only way I can get these shorties to come through is to suspend net activity and resume about three times / task. This is downright frustrating. Anyone else seeing a huge problem with downloading today

Michael Miles



No problems here on either of my machines, did you by chance install the TCP fix?


I don't buy computers, I build them!!
ID: 1345408 · Report as offensive
Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 9954
Credit: 103,452,613
RAC: 328
United Kingdom
Message 1345439 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 18:12:51 UTC - in response to Message 1345406.  

Everything was going smooth for downloads until yesterday.Now the only way I can get these shorties to come through is to suspend net activity and resume about three times / task. This is downright frustrating. Anyone else seeing a huge problem with downloading today

Michael Miles


Nope all machines downloading same as last 4 days. (with TCP fix)
ID: 1345439 · Report as offensive
Wedge009
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 451
Credit: 431,396,357
RAC: 553
Australia
Message 1345510 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 19:57:12 UTC

With all the short MB WUs being delivered, I did have one host that struggled to download an AP WU (all Windows hosts have had the RFC1323 option applied). Main issue for me now is that the short MB WUs are being processed in only a little more time than it takes to download them (on the fastest hosts) - download rates have dropped to about half of what they were when AP WUs and longer MB WUs were still being sent.

...but that's probably my geographical location that's contributing, as well as the increased download demand.
Soli Deo Gloria
ID: 1345510 · Report as offensive
Horacio

Send message
Joined: 14 Jan 00
Posts: 536
Credit: 75,967,266
RAC: 0
Argentina
Message 1345518 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 20:15:40 UTC - in response to Message 1345510.  

The TCP fix is still working in my hosts but it's not as effective as it was the first day Ive applied the changes...
Still effective enough to not need the retry script, even when Im getting some delayed transfers and some project wide backoffs sometimes...
May be is a combined effect between the shorties the lack of APs and the fact that with the optimizations a lot of computers are actively transfering files instead of beeing delayed due to the backoffs (and my highly unreliable internet conections, of course)
ID: 1345518 · Report as offensive
Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 9954
Credit: 103,452,613
RAC: 328
United Kingdom
Message 1345535 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 20:54:47 UTC

Well I have just watched several downloads on my 3 active machines.

Absolutely no difference, no back offs, speed between 2-10kps about 50sec per wu, so still working here.
ID: 1345535 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 14650
Credit: 200,643,578
RAC: 874
United Kingdom
Message 1345540 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 21:00:52 UTC - in response to Message 1345518.  

The TCP fix is still working in my hosts but it's not as effective as it was the first day Ive applied the changes...
Still effective enough to not need the retry script, even when Im getting some delayed transfers and some project wide backoffs sometimes...
May be is a combined effect between the shorties the lack of APs and the fact that with the optimizations a lot of computers are actively transfering files instead of beeing delayed due to the backoffs (and my highly unreliable internet conections, of course)

I suppose in the old days, before TCP, we used to download a little bit, and then leave a gap - while BOINC decided whether to go for a full-scale timeout and backoff to the next one. And in our gap, somebody else could get a little downloading done.

Apply TCP, and - no more gaps!
ID: 1345540 · Report as offensive
Profile Michael W.F. Miles
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Mar 07
Posts: 268
Credit: 34,410,870
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1345590 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 22:24:01 UTC - in response to Message 1345408.  

I am sure I missed this tcp fix. Is it a tcp optimizer?
Can you point this out

Michael
ID: 1345590 · Report as offensive
Oddbjornik Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 220
Credit: 349,610,548
RAC: 1,728
Norway
Message 1345594 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 22:32:09 UTC - in response to Message 1345590.  

I am sure I missed this tcp fix. Is it a tcp optimizer?
Can you point this out

Michael


It is a long and winding discussion in this thread, but all you have to do is set or add the following DWORD to the registry:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\Tcpip\Parameters]
"Tcp1323Opts"=dword:00000003

ID: 1345594 · Report as offensive
Profile Wiggo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 34744
Credit: 261,360,520
RAC: 489
Australia
Message 1345595 - Posted: 11 Mar 2013, 22:33:07 UTC - in response to Message 1345590.  

I am sure I missed this tcp fix. Is it a tcp optimizer?
Can you point this out

Michael

I don't know you could've missed this thread and all you require is in the 1st post, Windows TCP Settings - Follow up - Help with server communication.

Cheers.
ID: 1345595 · Report as offensive
Profile Michael W.F. Miles
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Mar 07
Posts: 268
Credit: 34,410,870
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1345686 - Posted: 12 Mar 2013, 3:50:48 UTC

It is a long and winding discussion in this thread, but all you have to do is set or add the following DWORD to the registry:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\Tcpip\Parameters]
"Tcp1323Opts"=dword:00000003


Thank you
smoothed right out

Michael Miles
ID: 1345686 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 . . . 24 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (82) Server Problems?


 
©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.