Does v5.8.16 now swap projects on checkpoints?

Author	Message
Martin Johnson Send message Joined: 9 Jun 01 Posts: 201 Credit: 224,995 RAC: 0	Message 542150 - Posted: 7 Apr 2007, 6:17:33 UTC I have noticed that the new version of Boinc no longer obeys the preferences choice "Switch between applications every ...". ID: 542150 ·

Keck_Komputers Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 1575 Credit: 4,152,111 RAC: 1	Message 542188 - Posted: 7 Apr 2007, 9:13:14 UTC Correct, it now waits for a checkpoint when possible. It does still use the switch every preference but not as exactly as previous versions. BOINC WIKI BOINCing since 2002/12/8 ID: 542188 ·

Keith T. Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 23 Aug 99 Posts: 962 Credit: 537,293 RAC: 9	Message 542192 - Posted: 7 Apr 2007, 10:09:05 UTC - in response to Message 542150. Last modified: 7 Apr 2007, 10:40:35 UTC I have noticed that the new version of Boinc no longer obeys the preferences choice "Switch between applications every ...". As you run Rosetta (I do too), you will probably know that Rosetta only checkpoints at the end of a model. BOINC is now designed to wait for checkpoints before switching projects, to save wasted crunching time. On the Rosetta message boards there has been some discussion of more frequent checkpoints, it should be comming soon (may already be in RALPH). Ver 5.59 of Rosetta updates the % complete regularly. See http://ralph.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=298&nowrap=true#2968 for more information about future Rosetta releases with improved checkpointing. Sir Arthur C Clarke 1917-2008 ID: 542192 ·

Martin Johnson Send message Joined: 9 Jun 01 Posts: 201 Credit: 224,995 RAC: 0	Message 542493 - Posted: 8 Apr 2007, 1:29:17 UTC There is no wasted crunching time if the units are left in memory, as I do. Perhaps they should see if the "Leave in memory" switch is set, and if so, not wait for checkpoints. ID: 542493 ·

1mp0Â£173 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8423 Credit: 356,897 RAC: 0	Message 542505 - Posted: 8 Apr 2007, 1:55:22 UTC - in response to Message 542493. There is no wasted crunching time if the units are left in memory, as I do. Perhaps they should see if the "Leave in memory" switch is set, and if so, not wait for checkpoints. If I'm not mistaken, BOINC will still switch if the science app. does not checkpoint regularly, but it will wait longer. It's best if BOINC switches on a checkpoint. ID: 542505 ·

Martin Johnson Send message Joined: 9 Jun 01 Posts: 201 Credit: 224,995 RAC: 0	Message 542533 - Posted: 8 Apr 2007, 4:29:02 UTC Er, why? ID: 542533 ·

1mp0Â£173 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8423 Credit: 356,897 RAC: 0	Message 542540 - Posted: 8 Apr 2007, 4:50:33 UTC - in response to Message 542533. Er, why? Because the science application is effectively saying to BOINC "this is a good time to do something -- I've saved my current state and can be safely interrupted for any reason." If Rosetta never checkpoints, then the app. must stay in RAM. If something happens to lose the contents of RAM (like a reboot) then all work in progress is gone. Checkpoints are your friend. ID: 542540 ·

Keck_Komputers Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 1575 Credit: 4,152,111 RAC: 1	Message 542583 - Posted: 8 Apr 2007, 9:48:26 UTC - in response to Message 542533. Er, why? There can be substantial CPU time wasted by not switching at checkpoints. My RAC rose about 20% when the first test version came out, from ~800 to ~1000. Your project mix and settings may give you a different improvement. BOINC WIKI BOINCing since 2002/12/8 ID: 542583 ·

©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.