Posts by Mike


log in
1) Message boards : Cafe SETI : Word Link #72 (Message 1591827)
Posted 2 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
performing
2) Message boards : Cafe SETI : TLPTPW #223 My, it was the fashion (Message 1591825)
Posted 2 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Good morning win.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : The site ahead contains malware Attackers currently on bit.ly might attempt to install dangerous programs on your computer that steal or delete your information (for example, photos, passwords, messages, and credit cards). (Message 1591815)
Posted 2 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Maybe one of the cookies contains malware.

Download malwarebytes free and check your computer.
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591595)
Posted 11 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Just curiosity Mike your son´s computer uses AMD or Intel CPU?

A long long not logical & totaly insane shoot, all the hosts i see with the issue are powered by low end Intels CPUs, Mike´s uses AMD CPU (at least the one listed by Boinc), could be possible a diference in the way the host deals with the memory be the source of the problem? Ok i know it´s wierd but i belive in witches.


Yes, AMD CPU.
A very slow 5000+

So it´s another AMD without the issue.

Could you try to run the WU on an Intel slow (old) CPU like ours? That could explain why you don´t have the issue and we all have.

Or maybe Raistmer who have AMD CPU could try the opositive?

I know have almost no sense what i sugest.


In some way it makes sense.
AMD is using a different memory controller.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591588)
Posted 12 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Just curiosity Mike your son´s computer uses AMD or Intel CPU?

A long long not logical & totaly insane shoot, all the hosts i see with the issue are powered by low end Intels CPUs, Mike´s uses AMD CPU (at least the one listed by Boinc), could be possible a diference in the way the host deals with the memory be the source of the problem? Ok i know it´s wierd but i belive in witches.


Yes, AMD CPU.
A very slow 5000+
6) Message boards : Cafe SETI : Off to bed now...night night everyone #3 - and may all our moderators have sweet dreams :) (Message 1591579)
Posted 12 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Good night Julie.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591578)
Posted 12 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
My logical way of thinking doesn`t allow to agree on this.
Considiering this technique is not new and many volunteers are running AP`s for more than a year with high ffa_fetch values and we already had quite a few periods with lots overflow tasks and nobody got a issue til now ?
Some are running 3 or more instances at a time and never complaint ?
Coincidence ?

I honestly dont think so.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591561)
Posted 12 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Hm... Looks like no matter if I write in English or in Russian... nobody cares to read anyway :/

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=75863&postid=1590653

No need to invent new entities w/o need.


I understand what you say.

Now if you could explain why it doesn`t happen neither on my nor on my sons host would be great.

Well, it's more hard question :)

But my own host sees this issue so I can proceed with more detail exploration.
Corresponding picture posted here:
http://lunatics.kwsn.net/12-gpu-crunching/opencl-ap-v7-memory-consumption.msg57227.html;topicseen#msg57227


Dont get me wrong but what i`ve learned in the univercity 30 years ago is if you can`t reproduce same behaviour in different places under same conditions nothing is confirmed.


signal storage imlemented via STL's vector storage template so maybe some differencies in STL implementation DLLs installed on your host that avoid memory leak... maybe another reason. Will see. Currently running test case task with exactly same cmd line (but with ATi app on HD6950 card) with workset size logging into file each second.
Will post resulting picture later.


You forgot my sons PC it is not that optimized like mine.
I have build it thats the only similarity.
No memory leak too tho.
9) Message boards : Cafe SETI : The NEW youtube thread.... (Message 1591553)
Posted 13 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
For Mike.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G_5IGWXkhc


Thanks.

Love this song.
10) Message boards : Cafe SETI : Beer Drinkers thread part 20 (Message 1591549)
Posted 13 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Morning Wiggo, taking it easy here in Belgium:) Cheers!


I would like to do that too but........

Maybe some beer helps.
Good morning Wiggo.

Cheers :-)
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591545)
Posted 13 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Hm... Looks like no matter if I write in English or in Russian... nobody cares to read anyway :/

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=75863&postid=1590653

No need to invent new entities w/o need.


I understand what you say.

Now if you could explain why it doesn`t happen neither on my nor on my sons host would be great.

Well, it's more hard question :)

But my own host sees this issue so I can proceed with more detail exploration.
Corresponding picture posted here:
http://lunatics.kwsn.net/12-gpu-crunching/opencl-ap-v7-memory-consumption.msg57227.html;topicseen#msg57227


Dont get me wrong but what i`ve learned in the univercity 30 years ago is if you can`t reproduce same behaviour in different places under same conditions nothing is confirmed.
12) Message boards : Cafe SETI : TLPTPW #223 My, it was the fashion (Message 1591541)
Posted 13 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Winning
13) Message boards : Cafe SETI : Word Link #72 (Message 1591538)
Posted 13 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
finding
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591537)
Posted 13 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
-oclFFT_plan is case sensitive.

Uh, oh. I actually just cut and pasted the recommendations exactly the way you had provided them over in The GTX750(Ti) Thread for my two boxes, one being
-use_sleep -unroll 12 -oclfft_plan 256 16 256 -ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 4096 -tune 1 64 4 1 -tune 2 64 4 1

and the other being
-use_sleep -unroll 10 -oclfft_plan 256 16 256 -ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 4096 -tune 1 64 4 1 -tune 2 64 4 1


Could that be why I've been seeing about a 15%-40% increase in my AP run times on those boxes? (Huge decrease in CPU times, though.)


The -use_sleep command will cause the time to increase, but will allow you to use the CPU that is normally dedicated to the app for something else.


The oclFFT_plan will more than compensate it.
It speeds up at least by 10% if set correctly.
Try this for your multi GPU host.

-use_sleep -unroll 10 -oclFFT_plan 256 16 256 -ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 4096 -tune 1 64 4 1 -tune 2 64 4 1
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591452)
Posted 17 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Hm... Looks like no matter if I write in English or in Russian... nobody cares to read anyway :/

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=75863&postid=1590653

No need to invent new entities w/o need.


I understand what you say.

Now if you could explain why it doesn`t happen neither on my nor on my sons host would be great.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591451)
Posted 17 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
I think this is host dependend.

I belive is not, why? it´s happening on a totaly diferent OS & GPU, the same happening on a 2x690 who runs Win Server. The only thing they have in common is they use the same old I5 CPU.

After few test i made here remotely, i could confirm the problem is aparently related to the size of the -ffa_block, a 4096 block makes some WU ussing 150MB, larger sizes huge increase the memory usage, a 8192 makes the WU uses about 250MB and so on, the 1GB apears when you use a 16k block size.

For some reason who i cant understand until now, my hosts simply apears to ignore the -oclfft_plan 256 16 256 switch.


-oclFFT_plan is case sensitive.
Make sure FFT is upper case or just snip it from the read me.
-use_sleep -unroll 16 -oclFFT_plan 256 16 256 -ffa_fetch 8192 -ffa_fetch_block 4096-tune 1 64 4 1 -tune 2 64 4 1


You don't follow your own advice ;)
You often make the typo "ffa_fetch"/"ffa_fetch_block" instead of ffa_block/ffa_block_fetch

But if app ignores -oclfft_plan it will probably safely ignore also ffa_fetch/ffa_fetch_block

?


Yes, it seems i was a bit to tired for those long conversations.
I`m very sorry.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591383)
Posted 19 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Interesting, Sten-Arne uses ATI, not NV like me, so aparently the problem is in the code itself and sure not host related.


It is since i dont get this high memory usage even with biggest unroll and ffa_fetch values.
Same on my sons 7850.

Did you try a large ffa_block? On my tests, unroll, ffa_fetch does not produce the problem, only large ffa_block on the range of 16K, smaller number produces only small memory usage.


I did run your units with the settings you did.
No problem on 2 different hosts.
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591379)
Posted 19 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Interesting, Sten-Arne uses ATI, not NV like me, so aparently the problem is in the code itself and sure not host related.


It is since i dont get this high memory usage even with biggest unroll and ffa_fetch values.
Same on my sons 7850.


Could this be memory related? This old computer only have slow DDR2 memory, single channel.


Yes, possible.
19) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591376)
Posted 19 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Try to use a smaller -ffa_block and you will see, the memory hogging WU will use a lot less memory (i like the name)


I'll drop back to my original (since v6) ffa_block and -ffa_block_fetch, as well as my unroll.


Unroll will be bigger then.
Watch out.


Hmm, is unroll 12 bigger than 16? Am I missing something here? Is it backwards?


I meant if you remove unroll in comand line.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.43 Release Notes (Message 1591373)
Posted 19 hours ago by Profile MikeProject donor
Interesting, Sten-Arne uses ATI, not NV like me, so aparently the problem is in the code itself and sure not host related.


It is since i dont get this high memory usage even with biggest unroll and ffa_fetch values.
Same on my sons 7850.


Next 20

Copyright © 2014 University of California