Message boards :
Number crunching :
Much slower processing with SETI@home ver 4.5
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Keith Kennedy Send message Joined: 28 May 99 Posts: 149 Credit: 244,165 RAC: 0 |
Has anybody else noticed -- my processing times per work unit have almost doubled since the upgrade to SETI@home ver 4.5. Can anybody explain why? |
. Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 410 Credit: 16,559 RAC: 0 |
I don't know exactly if the processing time has doubled, but I noticed that the new WU, I downloaded was 5.09 Mb big instead of usually about 600 kb. And it runs more equally (it this the right word??). Instead of finishing the first about 65 % in 3 minutes, it has finished about 30 % in about 30 minutes. |
Jord Send message Joined: 9 Jun 99 Posts: 15184 Credit: 4,362,181 RAC: 3 |
I doubt seriously that it was the WorkUnit you downloaded, more like the new Seti Cruncher. Why not give us a copy&paste of your GUI or your transfer window? As for doubling of processing times, I am still crunching on 4.03, maybe that the 4.05 version went back to Beta basics. In that case, welcome to Beta. :) ---------------------- Jordâ„¢ |
1202 Program Alarm Send message Joined: 16 Jun 99 Posts: 239 Credit: 19,164,944 RAC: 38 |
4.05 seems to have increased WU crunch time by a couple of hours on my Pentium 4 1.9GHz. SetiUK - The Offical UK Seti Site - Team Lookers The Space Directory Visit Seti.org.uk SETI News Mailing List [/url] |
. Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 410 Credit: 16,559 RAC: 0 |
> I doubt seriously that it was the WorkUnit you downloaded, more like the new > Seti Cruncher. Why not give us a copy&paste of your GUI or your transfer > window? > > Jordâ„¢ > I actally KNOW it was the WU as I was watching it download I have at the moment ONE WU size 6.25 Mb - |
1202 Program Alarm Send message Joined: 16 Jun 99 Posts: 239 Credit: 19,164,944 RAC: 38 |
The large files are usually pdb (?) files, the one I downloaded when I updated to 4.05 was just over 5mb. SetiUK - The Offical UK Seti Site - Team Lookers The Space Directory Visit Seti.org.uk SETI News Mailing List [/url] |
. Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 410 Credit: 16,559 RAC: 0 |
> The large files are usually pdb (?) files, the one I downloaded when I updated > to 4.05 was just over 5mb. > What is a pdb file?? I just upgraded to 4.05. |
mlcudd Send message Joined: 11 Apr 03 Posts: 782 Credit: 63,647 RAC: 0 |
Hi All, I don't believe your WU is processing slower, it is actually is running as it is supposed to. One of the fixes in the newer version was the movement of the progress bar in a more linear direction. I think we have been used to seeing the first part of the processing appear to zoom by, and then the program slow down. Now you should see equal prgression to time processed. Regards, Rocky |
Adrien Seldon Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 12 Credit: 656,515 RAC: 0 |
My processing time on a pentium 4 3.2 went from 3.5 hours on the 4.3 units to 5 hours on the first 4.5 unit I downloaded to 6 hours on the second 4.5 unit I just crunched. Granted my processor is hyperthreaded and I am doing two wu's at once but it slowed way down since the upgrade. Plus, the wu keeps going when it says 100.000% done. |
Bruno G. Olsen & ESEA @ greenholt Send message Joined: 15 May 99 Posts: 875 Credit: 4,386,984 RAC: 0 |
> > The large files are usually pdb (?) files, the one I downloaded when I > updated > > to 4.05 was just over 5mb. > > > What is a pdb file?? I just upgraded to 4.05. the pdb file is a debug file S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club © |
Benher Send message Joined: 25 Jul 99 Posts: 517 Credit: 465,152 RAC: 0 |
Hey all, The .pdb file is..correctly..a debug database file. It is only used if/when there is a seti worker crash. (not boinc the manager, seti the worker) It is then used by a special piece of code to backtrace and determine the function name where the crash happened. It then also traces backward to find what function called the crasher..and what called that...and so on. ---- I have only seen the 5 Meg .PDB myself. No WU has been larger than approx 360K. ---- WU times. Yea mine increased alot also. I note the 4.05 worker is 80K larger than the 4.03 worker.exe I checked the CVS (source code updater) for the worker and only found the status bar accuracy fix and the more elaborate graphix fix. So I'm guessing that work units beginning with 01mr04ab have more interesting results in them. I checked the graphics display for my long WU (when it was still calculating while over 100% on the bar) and it was "finding pulses / triplets"...whereas normal WUs at their end typically seem to alternate between "computing fast fourier transform" and "chirping". =Ben |
Heffed Send message Joined: 19 Mar 02 Posts: 1856 Credit: 40,736 RAC: 0 |
> I don't believe your WU is processing slower, it is actually is running as > it is supposed to. One of the fixes in the newer version was the movement of > the progress bar in a more linear direction. I think we have been used to > seeing the first part of the processing appear to zoom by, and then the > program slow down. Now you should see equal prgression to time processed. No, they are very definitely slower. Not looking at the progress meter, but the completion times. |
1202 Program Alarm Send message Joined: 16 Jun 99 Posts: 239 Credit: 19,164,944 RAC: 38 |
Same here, my completion times on the P4 1.9 have gone from around 5 hours 10 minutes to 7 hours 10 minutes. SetiUK - The Offical UK Seti Site - Team Lookers The Space Directory Visit Seti.org.uk SETI News Mailing List [/url] |
Woyteck - Boinc Busters Poland Send message Joined: 3 Jun 99 Posts: 49 Credit: 3,203,845 RAC: 0 |
Mine too, from 2 hours, 50 mins, to about 4 hours and 10 mins on Athlon XP thorton @ 2,2GHz -- Get up, stand up! Don't give up the fight! Credits will make everybody feel high! ;-) |
Bernard Boldt Send message Joined: 5 Aug 00 Posts: 5 Credit: 315,019 RAC: 0 |
I tend to agree the WU has doubled in completion time on my amd 3000 from 2.15 to almost 5 hours. on my amd 2500 it has completed 17% in just under 3 hours. I have shut them both off - I smell a bug somewhere. |
The Gas Giant Send message Joined: 22 Nov 01 Posts: 1904 Credit: 2,646,654 RAC: 0 |
|
Petit Soleil Send message Joined: 17 Feb 03 Posts: 1497 Credit: 70,934 RAC: 0 |
I would like to mention that it don't change anything as for credits. It does not matter if WU takes longer to process since the computer time count and not the amount of WU. |
mlcudd Send message Joined: 11 Apr 03 Posts: 782 Credit: 63,647 RAC: 0 |
Hello All, First off I WAS WRONG!, Result times are slower. I have added approx 1.8 to 2.28 hours longer times on all boxes. I wonder also if it is coencidence, but the benchmarks on 2 of my machines are lower than before 4.05.. Just curious Happy Crunching To all, and I will not be so quick to make assumptions in the future. Have A Great Day And A Better Tomorrow! Regards, Rocky |
Heffed Send message Joined: 19 Mar 02 Posts: 1856 Credit: 40,736 RAC: 0 |
|
©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.