Panic Mode On (90) Server Problems?

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (90) Server Problems?
Message board moderation

Previous · 1 . . . 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 . . . 24 · Next

AuthorMessage
Lionel

Joined: 25 Mar 00
Posts: 680
Credit: 563,640,304
RAC: 597
Message 1584958 - Posted: 10 Oct 2014, 21:55:35 UTC - in response to Message 1584583.

If the blanked tasks take less time than using v6 (as they will), then you would expect less credit per task, but more tasks per day, resulting in the same RAC.

If the credit system worked as documented, that is. ;)

Richard, you are wrong about daily RAC.

AP v6: average run time circa 3800 seconds, credit circa 650.

AP v7: average run time circa 3000 seconds, using credit circa 200 (actually seeing any where between 120 and 160 credits per v7 AP WU as the norm).

The equivalence point based on the circa data above is 513 credits for v7. The implication is a 61% reduction in AP credits per unit time.

I appreciate that run times can be less, but if you factor that in with the credits being actually granted/seen, there is still a significant gap.

Daily RAC will not be the same.

cheers
ID: 1584958 ·
Claggy
Volunteer tester

Joined: 5 Jul 99
Posts: 4654
Credit: 47,537,079
RAC: 4
Message 1584965 - Posted: 10 Oct 2014, 22:05:24 UTC - in response to Message 1584958.

If the blanked tasks take less time than using v6 (as they will), then you would expect less credit per task, but more tasks per day, resulting in the same RAC.

If the credit system worked as documented, that is. ;)

Richard, you are wrong about daily RAC.

AP v6: average run time circa 3800 seconds, credit circa 650.

AP v7: average run time circa 3000 seconds, using credit circa 200 (actually seeing any where between 120 and 160 credits per v7 AP WU as the norm).

The equivalence point based on the circa data above is 513 credits for v7. The implication is a 61% reduction in AP credits per unit time.

I appreciate that run times can be less, but if you factor that in with the credits being actually granted/seen, there is still a significant gap.

Daily RAC will not be the same.

cheers

It's now only just onto day two, only (as far as I can tell) Windows Nvidia OpenCL and AMD OpenCL app versions have reached their 100 validations, there are another 22 app versions that have to reach their 100 validations,
then each host needs to reach their 11 validations for each app version, Have more patience.

Claggy
ID: 1584965 ·
HAL9000
Volunteer tester

Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6533
Credit: 196,805,888
RAC: 57
Message 1584967 - Posted: 10 Oct 2014, 22:07:33 UTC - in response to Message 1584958.

If the blanked tasks take less time than using v6 (as they will), then you would expect less credit per task, but more tasks per day, resulting in the same RAC.

If the credit system worked as documented, that is. ;)

Richard, you are wrong about daily RAC.

AP v6: average run time circa 3800 seconds, credit circa 650.

AP v7: average run time circa 3000 seconds, using credit circa 200 (actually seeing any where between 120 and 160 credits per v7 AP WU as the norm).

The equivalence point based on the circa data above is 513 credits for v7. The implication is a 61% reduction in AP credits per unit time.

I appreciate that run times can be less, but if you factor that in with the credits being actually granted/seen, there is still a significant gap.

Daily RAC will not be the same.

cheers

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!
ID: 1584967 ·
Richard Haselgrove
Volunteer tester

Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 14571
Credit: 200,643,578
RAC: 874
Message 1584985 - Posted: 10 Oct 2014, 22:25:15 UTC - in response to Message 1584958.

If the blanked tasks take less time than using v6 (as they will), then you would expect less credit per task, but more tasks per day, resulting in the same RAC.

If the credit system worked as documented, that is. ;)

Richard, you are wrong about daily RAC.

Anyone who knows me will attest that the "If the credit system worked as documented" conveys a huge margin of scepticism.
ID: 1584985 ·
Lionel

Joined: 25 Mar 00
Posts: 680
Credit: 563,640,304
RAC: 597
Message 1584997 - Posted: 10 Oct 2014, 22:51:50 UTC - in response to Message 1584965.

If the blanked tasks take less time than using v6 (as they will), then you would expect less credit per task, but more tasks per day, resulting in the same RAC.

If the credit system worked as documented, that is. ;)

Richard, you are wrong about daily RAC.

AP v6: average run time circa 3800 seconds, credit circa 650.

AP v7: average run time circa 3000 seconds, using credit circa 200 (actually seeing any where between 120 and 160 credits per v7 AP WU as the norm).

The equivalence point based on the circa data above is 513 credits for v7. The implication is a 61% reduction in AP credits per unit time.

I appreciate that run times can be less, but if you factor that in with the credits being actually granted/seen, there is still a significant gap.

Daily RAC will not be the same.

cheers

It's now only just onto day two, only (as far as I can tell) Windows Nvidia OpenCL and AMD OpenCL app versions have reached their 100 validations, there are another 22 app versions that have to reach their 100 validations,
then each host needs to reach their 11 validations for each app version, Have more patience.

Claggy

Claggy, I'm not impatient and am quite happy to sit back and see what happens however, the early indication is that daily RAC will be lower on v7 than on v6, not like as Richard asserted.

cheers
ID: 1584997 ·
ivan
Volunteer tester

Joined: 5 Mar 01
Posts: 783
Credit: 348,560,338
RAC: 223
Message 1585052 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 0:12:16 UTC - in response to Message 1584817.

4851...

Patience, Julie. I'm just now starting to see an uptick in my home machine and overall RAC. Perhaps the APv7 results are starting to have an effect. Or maybe it's just a statistical blip...
ID: 1585052 ·
TBar
Volunteer tester

Joined: 22 May 99
Posts: 5204
Credit: 840,779,836
RAC: 2,768
Message 1585074 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 0:46:35 UTC - in response to Message 1584985.

If the blanked tasks take less time than using v6 (as they will), then you would expect less credit per task, but more tasks per day, resulting in the same RAC.

If the credit system worked as documented, that is. ;)

Richard, you are wrong about daily RAC.

Anyone who knows me will attest that the "If the credit system worked as documented" conveys a huge margin of scepticism.

I think part of the problem on main is the absurdly High Time Estimates. On my machine the stock estimate is 14 hours for an ATI task. Actual Time is 33 minutes, which it is now estimating since achieving 11 completions. From experience with 2 dissimilar GPUs, the GPU finishing under the estimate receives a Lower 'score'. 33 minutes is Much Lower than 14 hours, hence a Lower 'score'. Unfortunately it took around 50 validations to receive 11 'Completions' so now all the Bad history must be overcome. Unlike SETIv7, APv7 is producing a Higher APR than APv6 and SHOULD produce HIGHER Scores than APv6. That assumes CreditFew actually follows basic math principles. It would have been Nice if it wouldn't have recorded 50 valid tasks at an Estimate of 14 Hours...
ID: 1585074 ·
betreger

Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 11225
Credit: 29,581,041
RAC: 66
Message 1585088 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 1:06:14 UTC - in response to Message 1585074.

If true that's very short term damage.
ID: 1585088 ·
Zalster
Volunteer tester

Joined: 27 May 99
Posts: 5516
Credit: 528,817,460
RAC: 242
Message 1585093 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 1:26:35 UTC - in response to Message 1585074.

Got 28 validations on 2 different machines, but credit scores are still low. Hope you are right about it getting better. Lowest credit I've had is 42. Highest 200. Will see what happens as they get closer to 100 validations(I don't know if that number has any relevance but it's what I'm going to use to see how the credits adjust as they get done.) That is probably going to take most of the weekend.
ID: 1585093 ·
TBar
Volunteer tester

Joined: 22 May 99
Posts: 5204
Credit: 840,779,836
RAC: 2,768
Message 1585108 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 1:47:08 UTC - in response to Message 1585093.

Got 28 validations on 2 different machines, but credit scores are still low. Hope you are right about it getting better. Lowest credit I've had is 42. Highest 200. Will see what happens as they get closer to 100 validations(I don't know if that number has any relevance but it's what I'm going to use to see how the credits adjust as they get done.) That is probably going to take most of the weekend.

The number that counts is;
Average processing rate 906.20 GFLOPS

Once it reaches 11 completed, the time estimate is based on APR. Of course, you probably need your WingPersons to also reach 11 completions before the Credit changes much.

Looks like we just had a large number of APv6 results validate;

ID: 1585108 ·
HAL9000
Volunteer tester

Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6533
Credit: 196,805,888
RAC: 57
Message 1585114 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 2:02:51 UTC - in response to Message 1585108.

Got 28 validations on 2 different machines, but credit scores are still low. Hope you are right about it getting better. Lowest credit I've had is 42. Highest 200. Will see what happens as they get closer to 100 validations(I don't know if that number has any relevance but it's what I'm going to use to see how the credits adjust as they get done.) That is probably going to take most of the weekend.

The number that counts is;
Average processing rate 906.20 GFLOPS

Once it reaches 11 completed, the time estimate is based on APR. Of course, you probably need your WingPersons to also reach 11 completions before the Credit changes much.

Looks like we just had a large number of APv6 results validate;

[im g]http://setistats.haveland.com/munin-cgi/munin-cgi-graph/setiathome/setiathome/ap_workunits-day.png[/img] [img ]http://setistats.haveland.com/munin-cgi/munin-cgi-graph/setiathome/setiathome/ap_workunits-week.png[/img]

It is still going as well. I was at 580 Valid AP v6 & then 673 after only a few seconds. I think someone must be running a script to force the WUs to be checked for validation.
Looks like tomorrow will be our epic stat day.
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!
ID: 1585114 ·
TBar
Volunteer tester

Joined: 22 May 99
Posts: 5204
Credit: 840,779,836
RAC: 2,768
Message 1585129 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 3:02:30 UTC - in response to Message 1585114.

`   Wormhole Effect`

This thing's going to fly apart...
ID: 1585129 ·
woohoo
Volunteer tester

Joined: 30 Oct 13
Posts: 972
Credit: 165,671,404
RAC: 5
Message 1585130 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 3:05:39 UTC

does anyone ever complain about too much RAC?
ID: 1585130 ·
Grant (SSSF)
Volunteer tester

Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 13476
Credit: 208,696,464
RAC: 304
Message 1585140 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 4:31:19 UTC - in response to Message 1585130.

does anyone ever complain about too much RAC?

Given that when MBv7 came out it used code that had been used in the optimised versions which resulted in a 50% drop in RAC for those that had been using optimised versions, I'd expect similar results for the move to APv7 if it's making use of optimised code.
Grant
Darwin NT
ID: 1585140 ·
Grant (SSSF)
Volunteer tester

Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 13476
Credit: 208,696,464
RAC: 304
Message 1585141 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 4:33:48 UTC - in response to Message 1585108.

Looks like we just had a large number of APv6 results validate;

Just another 200,000 or so to go.
Should give AP crunchers a RAC spike to rule all spikes.

Grant
Darwin NT
ID: 1585141 ·
HAL9000
Volunteer tester

Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6533
Credit: 196,805,888
RAC: 57
Message 1585150 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 5:10:11 UTC

30mr09ac seems to have most of its channels finishing in error. Anyone get MB work from that data set yet?
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!
ID: 1585150 ·
TBar
Volunteer tester

Joined: 22 May 99
Posts: 5204
Credit: 840,779,836
RAC: 2,768
Message 1585151 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 5:14:31 UTC - in response to Message 1585140.

does anyone ever complain about too much RAC?

Given that when MBv7 came out it used code that had been used in the optimised versions which resulted in a 50% drop in RAC for those that had been using optimised versions, I'd expect similar results for the move to APv7 if it's making use of optimised code.

Gee, the way I remember it SETIv7 was Much Slower than SETIv6, causing Much Longer Run-Times for the Same Credit resulting in Lower RAC. Yes, I'm Positive about it. SETIv7 was Slower than SETIv6 as seen in the APRs;
SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, NVIDIA GPU): Average processing rate 126.50 GFLOPS
SETI@home v7 (anonymous platform, NVIDIA GPU): Average processing rate 91.06 GFLOPS

The situation with AstroPulse v7 is the Opposite, APv7 is Faster than APv6 as seen in the previously posted APRs.
ID: 1585151 ·

Joined: 6 Aug 99
Posts: 204
Credit: 12,463,705
RAC: 0
Message 1585153 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 5:31:44 UTC

A bunch of mine went through it seems, a 20k jump in RAC, daaaang.....
ID: 1585153 ·
Grant (SSSF)
Volunteer tester

Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 13476
Credit: 208,696,464
RAC: 304
Message 1585181 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 7:41:37 UTC - in response to Message 1585151.

Gee, the way I remember it SETIv7 was Much Slower than SETIv6, causing Much Longer Run-Times for the Same Credit resulting in Lower RAC. Yes, I'm Positive about it.

The part that slowed things down were the auto correlations, which shouldn't have resulted in a 50% reduction in RAC as the processing time didn't double.
Grant
Darwin NT
ID: 1585181 ·
TBar
Volunteer tester

Joined: 22 May 99
Posts: 5204
Credit: 840,779,836
RAC: 2,768
Message 1585189 - Posted: 11 Oct 2014, 8:09:21 UTC - in response to Message 1585181.

Gee, the way I remember it SETIv7 was Much Slower than SETIv6, causing Much Longer Run-Times for the Same Credit resulting in Lower RAC. Yes, I'm Positive about it.

The part that slowed things down were the auto correlations, which shouldn't have resulted in a 50% reduction in RAC as the processing time didn't double.

You might want to check on that. There is proof the old nvidia cards, such as mine, ran a v6 shorty in 4 minutes and produced around 40 credits. I still have one of those cards running. Check out how long it takes to produce 40 credits today; http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=6796475&offset=20&show_names=0&state=4&appid=11
Granted...it's a little slower in Win 8, but, 1000secs is much slower than 240secs in most everyone's book.
ID: 1585189 ·
Previous · 1 . . . 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 . . . 24 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (90) Server Problems?