Message boards : Number crunching : Up and Running Again
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2

AuthorMessage
Profile Magic Quantum Mechanic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Oct 04
Posts: 1114
Credit: 49,503,310
RAC: 3,828
Message 12712 - Posted: 11 Feb 2006, 11:49:53 UTC
Last modified: 11 Feb 2006, 12:05:05 UTC



Server Status


Up, 122,798 workunits to crunch
63434 workunits in progress
39 concurrent connections


I had the power out here from a wind storm.
last weekend until monday night
and I was wondering what I would find left here.
was surprised to see lots of work still here
then every time I check the number goes up instead of down
so maybe I didn't lose too much time here.


Back to work.............





Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life
ID: 12712 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Magic Quantum Mechanic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Oct 04
Posts: 1114
Credit: 49,503,310
RAC: 3,828
Message 12743 - Posted: 15 Feb 2006, 11:53:22 UTC
Last modified: 15 Feb 2006, 12:12:05 UTC



Server Status


Up, 9,222 workunits to crunch (8,645 ten minutes later)
65510 workunits in progress
42 concurrent connections




Running low........and I am loaded and ready




Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life
ID: 12743 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Tribaal

Send message
Joined: 13 Nov 05
Posts: 1
Credit: 3,388
RAC: 0
Message 12751 - Posted: 16 Feb 2006, 8:39:22 UTC

Hum one of my hosts with about 10 WU buffered suffered a HDD failure... it will probably not got online again (it was pretty old). Is there any way for me to force WU reassignation?

Sorry if this post doesn't belong here.

Cheers
ID: 12751 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
River~~

Send message
Joined: 13 Jul 05
Posts: 456
Credit: 75,142
RAC: 0
Message 12752 - Posted: 16 Feb 2006, 10:46:02 UTC - in response to Message 12751.  
Last modified: 16 Feb 2006, 10:49:12 UTC

Hum one of my hosts with about 10 WU buffered suffered a HDD failure... it will probably not got online again (it was pretty old). Is there any way for me to force WU reassignation?


No practicable way.

This project is designed on the assumption that things like this will happen:
5 copies of each of those wu will have been sent out, and as soon as 3 come back that agree it won't matter about your results not being returned. If it happens that the project can't get 3 results to agree from the other 4, a sixth copy of that WU will be sent out soon after the deadline expires.

It is a matter of boinc policy that there is no web-based method for cancelling results once issued; if I understand this correctly it is felt that such a feature would generate user errors and tempt some people to abuse the deadline system and that these issues would outweigh the advantages.

Thanks for the thought, but you can sit back and let the system catch up with the problem in its own time.

Please note, this is very different from people abusing the deadline system - delays such as yours are inevitable and in a big project like this can be predicted on a statistical basis. These anticipated delays are built into the timings and the project team can respond to the stats by adjusting the number of results sent out for each wu.

You may have seen posts objecting to people who deliberately take more than they can crunch. That is different because it adds an unpredictable unnecessary and additional delay to the process. Critics of the practice say also that it is greedy precisely because it is deliberate.


Sorry if this post doesn't belong here.

Personally I'd have started a new thread for your question, (on this same Number Crunching board), as I like to limit 'topical drift'. It is not clear-cut: conversations do naturally drift, it is hard to know when to break the flow.

River~~
ID: 12752 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Magic Quantum Mechanic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Oct 04
Posts: 1114
Credit: 49,503,310
RAC: 3,828
Message 12759 - Posted: 16 Feb 2006, 20:51:07 UTC



That's ok River......somebody must read these and get a tip now and then


Last year I tried to get my old PIII 500 to run a few LHC's and soon after it had a motherboard problem so it was unable to ever finish and send them in.

I put the HD in another machine and dumped them back right away and retired that pc for good.

(the pc I put that HD in to do that was even slower and never would have finished any in the PII)

And I only load my faster pc's up with what they can handle (the server helps with that too as you know)


One of mine finished already and the other 2 are close to being finished so they will be ready for more soon and just running Einsteins if we still have to wait for more LHC's........and I don't run any of the other projects myself.


Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life
ID: 12759 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
R/B
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Jan 06
Posts: 10
Credit: 1,947
RAC: 0
Message 12811 - Posted: 21 Feb 2006, 16:40:33 UTC

I wonder if in order to avoid these outages while they are generating new work if it would be within their goals to prepare 2 simultaneous experimental paths (for lack of a better term) so that the 2nd LHC 'batch' is ready to load while they compile and redirect the first batch. LHC goal '2' doing something useful so that the computing power available out here in hostland is not neglected. Just a thought.
Founder of BOINC group Objectivists: Rational people crunching data for science.

ID: 12811 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Keck_Komputers

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 275
Credit: 2,652,452
RAC: 0
Message 12819 - Posted: 21 Feb 2006, 23:49:57 UTC - in response to Message 12811.  

I wonder if in order to avoid these outages while they are generating new work if it would be within their goals to prepare 2 simultaneous experimental paths (for lack of a better term) so that the 2nd LHC 'batch' is ready to load while they compile and redirect the first batch. LHC goal '2' doing something useful so that the computing power available out here in hostland is not neglected. Just a thought.

I believe this is already happening. The reason I think this is there has been at least one time when new work appeared before we actually ran out and also there have been very short periods of no work. I would think if there was only one path of studies the period of no work would be more consistant and there would never be new work without a period of no work.
BOINC WIKI

BOINCing since 2002/12/8
ID: 12819 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Number crunching : Up and Running Again


©2024 CERN