Message boards :
Number crunching :
90 Hours to crunch 1 task? Help!
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Blanchjoe Send message Joined: 27 Nov 02 Posts: 12 Credit: 7,148,533 RAC: 5 |
Hello Everyone, I just recently moved to Bionic 515 and I just noticed that my last three WU took 70 and 90 hours to run? Am I reading the Bionic Manager correctly? Have the WU gotten significantly larger? Can someone let me know if this is normal. My system ran slow in the past (I was using an optimized Bionic 411) but it took no more than 16 hours to run a WU. I have Number of CPU's is 1 at 275 float point MIPS on Win98 with a 333mhz processor. Thanks! Blanchjoe |
Pooh Bear 27 Send message Joined: 14 Jul 03 Posts: 3224 Credit: 4,603,826 RAC: 0 |
The units are the same size, the application does a deeper scan, so yes with your P2, you will see this. There are varied hours, so some will be faster, some slower. My movie https://vimeo.com/manage/videos/502242 |
Blanchjoe Send message Joined: 27 Nov 02 Posts: 12 Credit: 7,148,533 RAC: 5 |
Thanks Pooh, Egoicly I knew I could never keep up with the mighty crunchers, but at least I felt that I could push a WU out of my poor 333 P2 in 18 hours, but now to see that it takes 70 or 90 hours is deflating needless to say. Ah me, well thanks for your insight. Blanchjoe |
Alinator Send message Joined: 19 Apr 05 Posts: 4178 Credit: 4,647,982 RAC: 0 |
LOL, don't worry about those long run times and keep that "old timer" going! :-) Acutually IMHO it does pretty good for itself, I had one that took more than 800 Ksecs, and that was on a NT4 box so the CPU time was correct. ;-) Alinator |
The MariahNet Network Send message Joined: 14 Jul 99 Posts: 173 Credit: 2,469,357 RAC: 0 |
The longer times, I can pretty much see, are basically the adjustment for CPU processing power advancement over the years. So for all the older CPUs, they can still run SETI@home stuff, but slower than before relative to the kind of CPU work of the here and now compared to the past. I do believe long, long ago, I was able to run on a 486 without too much trouble. It then became a joke to run SETI@home on it. (I think it was SETI stuff, or it could have been something else. But I'm pretty sure it was SETI.) Time changes, CPU processing power advances, software advances accordingly (or should), and all older things become proportionally slower and then, later on, completely obsolete. It's sad to hear, relative to what we have, at some point in time, but time moves on and technology advances. :-/ But if something still works, use it when and where it is still practical. E |
Blanchjoe Send message Joined: 27 Nov 02 Posts: 12 Credit: 7,148,533 RAC: 5 |
The longer times, I can pretty much see, are basically the adjustment for CPU processing power advancement over the years. So for all the older CPUs, they can still run SETI@home stuff, but slower than before relative to the kind of CPU work of the here and now compared to the past. |
Blanchjoe Send message Joined: 27 Nov 02 Posts: 12 Credit: 7,148,533 RAC: 5 |
The longer times, I can pretty much see, are basically the adjustment for CPU processing power advancement over the years. So for all the older CPUs, they can still run SETI@home stuff, but slower than before relative to the kind of CPU work of the here and now compared to the past. Hello E, Thanks for the insight, and yes I understand your commentary all too well. I am old enought to remember a time when a machine stayed current for the better part of its functional life, however with the advent of computers a machine is viable only for a very limited perieod of time. While my 333mhz P2 is a dinasoar compared to most, it is in real terms only about ten years old, but in computer development is ancient. I use a Gateway Destination system which is acting as my television, home computer, movie player and SETI number cruncher all at once 24-7-365 on Win98 1st Version. Needless to say it has taken some bubble gum and bailing wire to keep it going over the years on a wireless DSL network, and frustrating as you can imagine, but the cost of replacing what this system does for me for something current is prohibitive at the moment. Take care and thanks! Blanchjoe |
RePhLeX Send message Joined: 3 Dec 05 Posts: 76 Credit: 128,962 RAC: 0 |
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=2351752 180,000 secs to crunch a wu, and 30 credits..Nice. |
Saenger Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 2452 Credit: 33,281 RAC: 0 |
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=2351752 So what? It's a GenuineIntel Pentium(r) II Processor, benchmarked with Measured floating point speed 263.98 million ops/sec Measured integer speed 455.65 million ops/sec What do you expect from such an old machine? Gruesse vom Saenger For questions about Boinc look in the BOINC-Wiki |
1mp0£173 Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8423 Credit: 356,897 RAC: 0 |
While my 333mhz P2 is a dinasoar compared to most, it is in real terms only about ten years old, but in computer development is ancient. Ten years is a bit over three standard eternities in this business. (one standard eternity is equal to three years). I haven't built it out yet, but I have a new Athlon 64 3000+ that cost me $99, including the motherboard. |
Zero_Crew Send message Joined: 7 Jun 06 Posts: 2 Credit: 13 RAC: 0 |
90 Hours!?! I am on one right now that has been crunching for 60 hours and still has 111 hours to go! 75% of all statistics are lies |
Marck Send message Joined: 18 May 03 Posts: 33 Credit: 1,390,532 RAC: 0 |
90 Hours!?! I am on one right now that has been crunching for 60 hours and still has 111 hours to go! That's peanuts! My internet router box crunches a WU for SETI enhanced in the range of 14 *days*. ;-) |
RePhLeX Send message Joined: 3 Dec 05 Posts: 76 Credit: 128,962 RAC: 0 |
|
[AF>france>pas-de-calais]symaski62 Send message Joined: 12 Aug 05 Posts: 258 Credit: 100,548 RAC: 0 |
i thought 10k secs was bad, but 1M secs..thats just mental!... http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=78987918 Owner Marck Created 11 Feb 2006 20:55:19 UTC Total Credit 399.10 Recent average credit 4.25 CPU type CyrixInstead 6x86 2x Core/Bus Clock Number of CPUs 1 Operating System Linux 2.4.27-3-586tsc Memory 92.69 MB Cache 976.56 KB Measured floating point speed 39.06 million ops/sec Measured integer speed 66.7 million ops/sec Average upload rate 4.67 KB/sec Average download rate 9.65 KB/sec Average turnaround time 8.73 days Maximum daily WU quota per CPU 100/day Results 2 SETI@Home Informational message -9 result_overflow with a general handicap of 80% and it makes much d' efforts for the community and s' expimer, thank you d' to be understanding. |
KWSN - Chicken of Angnor Send message Joined: 9 Jul 99 Posts: 1199 Credit: 6,615,780 RAC: 0 |
Megasecond Madness! :o) There really should be a stats category for the longest time taken to crunch a valid WU. Crunch on! 90 hours are 324000 seconds, so about 1/4 of those 1.2 million...patience is a virtue. i thought 10k secs was bad, but 1M secs..thats just mental!... Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal! Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information |
Ingleside Send message Joined: 4 Feb 03 Posts: 1546 Credit: 15,832,022 RAC: 13 |
Megasecond Madness! :o) Well, the longest deadline is 55.12 days, this equals 4762476 seconds... Oh, and the shortest deadline is 4.34 days, this equals 375k seconds... |
EricVonDaniken Send message Joined: 17 Apr 04 Posts: 177 Credit: 67,881 RAC: 0 |
i thought 10k secs was bad, but 1M secs..thats just mental!... That was a 1M sec task for their computer. For yours it would be ~10K sec task. ...and if we had SSE 1/2/3 support in the standard app for CPU's like yours that supported it, it would only be a ~2K sec task for your computer. since yours is not the highest benching host participating, there is a good chance that w/ SSE 1/2/3 support available some hosts could crunch that task in <= 200 secs. We =really= need a= SSE 1/2/3 support, 64b support, the option to have a client that is "stripped" of all the graphics overhead, etc etc. IOW, we need optimized apps. b= a more intelligent task allocation scheme. When expected crunching time can vary by ~4-5 orders of magnitude depending on difficulty of task combined with power of host, IMHO the variability is too high. |
KWSN - Chicken of Angnor Send message Joined: 9 Jul 99 Posts: 1199 Credit: 6,615,780 RAC: 0 |
We =really= need Not to sound like a know-it-all, but did you know that the source code is freely available? Both for Windows and Linux. You are welcome to compile your own client that has no graphics (it's a configure switch on Linux, similar on Windows) and/or that's optimized for your hardware platform. You keep telling us what we need - why don't you put your expertise to work instead? Grab a copy of the sources and hack away. GPL means you can have your cake and eat it, too. Regards, Simon. Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal! Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information |
EricVonDaniken Send message Joined: 17 Apr 04 Posts: 177 Credit: 67,881 RAC: 0 |
Being able to see the solution to a problem and being able to implement it are two different skill sets. In addition, I have =no= desire to be put through the sh*t Crunch3r went through. Life is too short, I have other responsibilities, and most important... ...I'd be =way= too tempted to reach through my screen and the network to smack some manners and sense into Certain Parties if/when they had the gall to publicly question my skills and/or ethics when they have no frigging idea how to do the work they are criticising and could not come close to paying for it if they had to rather than it being donated. In short, I am not as nice or conflict adverse as Crunch3r. I'm not Stallman, but I would become =most= unpleasant under such circumstances. So I'm going to avoid them and help out in other ways that do not risk such a confrontation or consequence. :) |
KWSN - Chicken of Angnor Send message Joined: 9 Jul 99 Posts: 1199 Credit: 6,615,780 RAC: 0 |
For someone who wants to smack sense and manners into someone else, you do come over strong. Might work on your tone. :o) You seem to be able to do it, you just don't want to because of possible conflict. That's your choice, but I didn't see anyone questioning your ethics or skills (as opposed to the other way around). Right now it's doing, not talking, that's required. The how is clear, the work involved is not trivial. Regards, Simon. Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal! Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information |
©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.