Work buffer and Preferences

Author	Message
Lord Tedric Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Jun 99 Posts: 204 Credit: 1,063,736 RAC: 0	Message 573619 - Posted: 22 May 2007, 9:54:18 UTC Last modified: 22 May 2007, 9:54:44 UTC Since the outage, one of my boxes will not download more than one workunit at a time, even though my preferences are set to 2 days worth of work. I have two machines running on the same account and the second machine has a healthy work buffer (using BoincView). I have already detached and reatached the project, is there a simple tweak to sort this out i.e. edit .xml file, or would a complete reinstall be the preffered solution? ID: 573619 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14653 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874	Message 573620 - Posted: 22 May 2007, 10:03:06 UTC - in response to Message 573619. Last modified: 22 May 2007, 10:08:09 UTC Since the outage, one of my boxes will not download more than one workunit at a time, even though my preferences are set to 2 days worth of work. I have two machines running on the same account and the second machine has a healthy work buffer (using BoincView). I have already detached and reatached the project, is there a simple tweak to sort this out i.e. edit .xml file, or would a complete reinstall be the preffered solution? It could be the Duration Correction factor. You can see this using BOINCView (at least, you can with BV 1.4.2, which is what I'm using). Projects tab, right-click on the column title row, check 'Duration correction' at the bottom. Tell us what you see for the SETI project on the box that's giving problems. You would expect about 1.0 normally, down to 0.3 or below if you use optimised applications. Anything seriously above 1 will give the symptoms you describe. If it's high, post back and we can move on to the next step. Edit - complete reinstall is *never* the preferred solution! ID: 573620 ·

Lord Tedric Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Jun 99 Posts: 204 Credit: 1,063,736 RAC: 0	Message 574367 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 12:39:28 UTC - in response to Message 573620. It could be the Duration Correction factor. You can see this using BOINCView (at least, you can with BV 1.4.2, which is what I'm using). Projects tab, right-click on the column title row, check 'Duration correction' at the bottom. complete reinstall is *never* the preferred solution! I couldn't get 1.4.2 to work (probably something simple missing), so I cannot check 'Duration correction', any other solution? ID: 574367 ·

Henk Haneveld Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 154 Credit: 1,577,293 RAC: 1	Message 574368 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 12:48:44 UTC - in response to Message 574367. Last modified: 23 May 2007, 12:50:05 UTC It could be the Duration Correction factor. You can see this using BOINCView (at least, you can with BV 1.4.2, which is what I'm using). Projects tab, right-click on the column title row, check 'Duration correction' at the bottom. complete reinstall is *never* the preferred solution! I couldn't get 1.4.2 to work (probably something simple missing), so I cannot check 'Duration correction', any other solution? Look up your computer info on the "Your account" page. It is on the bottom of the listing for the computer. ID: 574368 ·

Philadelphia Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 12 Feb 07 Posts: 1590 Credit: 399,688 RAC: 0	Message 574378 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 13:25:09 UTC - in response to Message 574368. It could be the Duration Correction factor. You can see this using BOINCView (at least, you can with BV 1.4.2, which is what I'm using). Projects tab, right-click on the column title row, check 'Duration correction' at the bottom. complete reinstall is *never* the preferred solution! I couldn't get 1.4.2 to work (probably something simple missing), so I cannot check 'Duration correction', any other solution? Look up your computer info on the "Your account" page. It is on the bottom of the listing for the computer. I'm not familiar with BOINCView, can anyone help? If you're refering to the 'your account' page from SETI, I didn't notice anything about 'duration correction', I may be looking at the wrong page &/or spot. Thanks. ID: 574378 ·

Henk Haneveld Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 154 Credit: 1,577,293 RAC: 1	Message 574390 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 13:45:10 UTC - in response to Message 574378. If you're refering to the 'your account' page from SETI, I didn't notice anything about 'duration correction', I may be looking at the wrong page &/or spot. On the "your account" page is a link to your computers. Use that link and it wil show your computer id's as links. Chose the link of the computer you want to see and on the bottom of that page is the info. ID: 574390 ·

Philadelphia Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 12 Feb 07 Posts: 1590 Credit: 399,688 RAC: 0	Message 574412 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 14:38:25 UTC - in response to Message 574390. If you're refering to the 'your account' page from SETI, I didn't notice anything about 'duration correction', I may be looking at the wrong page &/or spot. On the "your account" page is a link to your computers. Use that link and it wil show your computer id's as links. Chose the link of the computer you want to see and on the bottom of that page is the info. OK, thanks, found it. I have .22 on one and .5 on the other, both running chicken soup, so I guess those are acceptable numbers. I never really knew what they refered to. ID: 574412 ·

Lord Tedric Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Jun 99 Posts: 204 Credit: 1,063,736 RAC: 0	Message 574470 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 17:23:19 UTC - in response to Message 574412. Last modified: 23 May 2007, 17:24:12 UTC Found it also. Mine is currently set to 0.73and 0.8 respectively! Is that good or bad? ID: 574470 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14653 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874	Message 574490 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 18:07:45 UTC - in response to Message 574470. Found it also. Mine is currently set to 0.73and 0.8 respectively! Is that good or bad? Well within normal range, and so not the cause of your original problem/question. We'll have to look elsewhere for that - anyone got another starting point? ID: 574490 ·

jason_gee Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0	Message 574497 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 18:20:50 UTC - in response to Message 574470. Perhaps, Receiving 1 or 2 at a time you say?, that is odd since you appear to have many listed as 'In Progress', on both machines. 'Ghosts?' which is really odd because you are running a stock app, Richard? "Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions. ID: 574497 ·

jason_gee Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0	Message 574498 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 18:26:36 UTC - in response to Message 574497. Oh Yes, Hangon, Since your detach/ reattach has a new benchmark Run? That and the DCF work together to decide the amount to fetch. Running the benchmarks and making sure nothing is interfering might adjust how much work Boinc asks for back to normal levels. "Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions. ID: 574498 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14653 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874	Message 574499 - Posted: 23 May 2007, 18:31:35 UTC Another thing to check are the CPU efficiency, and two run time %ages - the three numbers above the RDCF on the computer summary page. Lord Tedric, we have to ask you to look these things up and post them for us to see - they are visible to you as the computer owner, but the rest of us only see a summary of the computer information which doesn't include those figures. ID: 574499 ·

Lord Tedric Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Jun 99 Posts: 204 Credit: 1,063,736 RAC: 0	Message 574818 - Posted: 24 May 2007, 7:00:29 UTC - in response to Message 574499. Strange thing happened - Patch Tuesday. Did my updates yesterday (Wednesday), and after a reboot everthing seems to be ok. Boinc is listing all my w/u's my ul/dl appears normal. One of the updates stated 'reliability' could this be what was wrong? Has me at a loss, but everything now appears back to normal. Anyway :- Av CPU Efficiency = 0.992843 Running = 99.1707 Allowed = 99.985 Lord T ID: 574818 ·

jason_gee Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0	Message 574820 - Posted: 24 May 2007, 7:23:29 UTC - in response to Message 574818. Last modified: 24 May 2007, 7:24:36 UTC Strange thing happened - Patch Tuesday. Did my updates yesterday (Wednesday), and after a reboot everything seems to be ok. Boinc is listing all my w/u's my ul/dl appears normal. One of the updates stated 'reliability' could this be what was wrong? Has me at a loss, but everything now appears back to normal. Anyway :- Av CPU Efficiency = 0.992843 Running = 99.1707 Allowed = 99.985 Lord T The Microsoft Patch Yesterday? It is the long awaited patch for windows update service problems that caused systems to be ridiculously bogged down for about half an hour after boot-up, and windows updates to take forever ( msi-installer, especially the svchost.exe stuck taking 100% CPU, with Memory Leaks ). This was a frustrating error that interfered with everything, possibly including the boinc benchmarks. "Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions. ID: 574820 ·

©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.