Message boards : Number crunching : Work to be done!
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile MAGIC Quantum Mechanic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Oct 04
Posts: 1000
Credit: 45,918,615
RAC: 5,565
Message 13678 - Posted: 21 May 2006, 5:48:44 UTC
Last modified: 21 May 2006, 5:53:54 UTC


Server Status


Up, 85,529 workunits to crunch
45232 workunits in progress
42 concurrent connections




So many projects and plenty of work to be done.....just depends on what you prefer to do!



Just a test to see who really wants to be part of the particle physics project.


And we know there is a group of us that doesn't mind doing all of the work



........back to work.......

Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life
ID: 13678 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Professor Desty Nova
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 04
Posts: 34
Credit: 186,975
RAC: 92
Message 13697 - Posted: 22 May 2006, 17:23:16 UTC

And all gone now... ;_;


Professor Desty Nova
Researching Karma the Hard Way
ID: 13697 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Andreas

Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 05
Posts: 33
Credit: 1,966,898
RAC: 881
Message 13698 - Posted: 22 May 2006, 17:34:47 UTC - in response to Message 13697.  

And all gone now... ;_;


And I only got hold of one WU :-/ And it's still not finished...
ID: 13698 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Steve Cressman
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Sep 04
Posts: 47
Credit: 6,394
RAC: 0
Message 13699 - Posted: 22 May 2006, 17:45:18 UTC

There sure seems to be a lot of greedy people here using very large cache.
Saw this morning over 20,000 units and thought to myself , maybe I will get a few more. But then an hour later when my client decided to ask for more there are none to get. There is enough greed in the world, do we really need it here too???
98SE XP2500+ @ 2.1 GHz Boinc v5.8.8
ID: 13699 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Christian B.

Send message
Joined: 7 Aug 05
Posts: 18
Credit: 144,856
RAC: 0
Message 13701 - Posted: 22 May 2006, 19:33:03 UTC - in response to Message 13699.  

There sure seems to be a lot of greedy people here using very large cache


that's also a BOINC-problem. Why can't we just select cache size for every single project and every single computer? There's only a general setting. At least I have only found this one. I've set mine to 2 days, as I have some computers on some projects, that do not have a permanent connection to the net. But having set the cache to 2 days also means, that some other machines are downloading more than they need. Hopefully BOINC-developers are changing this one day.
ID: 13701 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Christian B.

Send message
Joined: 7 Aug 05
Posts: 18
Credit: 144,856
RAC: 0
Message 13702 - Posted: 22 May 2006, 19:35:53 UTC

and using the few zones (home, work, school) isn't really a solution to this.
ID: 13702 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile MAGIC Quantum Mechanic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Oct 04
Posts: 1000
Credit: 45,918,615
RAC: 5,565
Message 13706 - Posted: 23 May 2006, 6:33:14 UTC



I know many of you run most of the projects at the same time and I only run LHC and Einstein but this is what I do to get around that problem of loading them all with work at the same time.

I get on the "Project" page and pick the one I don't want to give more work and click on "No new work" and then go to my account page and click on "edit general preferences" and tell it to give me more work by updating the the total number of days of work.

Then I go back to the "Project" page and ask for an "Update" and load the work for the one I choose.

After that I just go back to the account page and again "edit general preferences" back to it's previous number.

Then go back and to the "Project" page and ask for another "Update" and it returns to the way it was (I do that twice just to make sure) and then go back to the one I gave "No new work" and return it to "Allow new work"


That way I can keep it balanced for my system.

Of course I do one pc at a time so they don't get mixed up and not do what I intended to do.........and right now I am on a dialup isp so it works easy.

So if you have them all online at once you know what you would have to do.






Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life
ID: 13706 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Honza

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 7
Credit: 30,712
RAC: 0
Message 13707 - Posted: 23 May 2006, 7:45:44 UTC - in response to Message 13701.  

that's also a BOINC-problem. Why can't we just select cache size for every single project and every single computer? There's only a general setting. At least I have only found this one. I've set mine to 2 days, as I have some computers on some projects, that do not have a permanent connection to the net. But having set the cache to 2 days also means, that some other machines are downloading more than they need. Hopefully BOINC-developers are changing this one day.

What you suggest would not work and would break consistency of deadline and work fetch policy.
For example: if you choose to have cache size for 5 days on one project, and only 1 day for another, the later would get no work when cache of first one would be filled for 1+ days. There are resource share, long term debts etc that plays the role.
Or what MAGIC says - keep it balanced.

ad. Boinc dev. They already did - Preferences override file
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/prefs_override.php

You can also use BoincStudio to manually ask for desired amount of work from any project.

>But having set the cache to 2 days also means, that some other machines are downloading more than they need.
I quite don't understand that. Each Wus has a time-to-complete estimation and BOINC prevents from downloading more Wus than cache or that can be completed prior deadline. Familiar with "computer overcommited"?
ID: 13707 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
NJMHoffmann

Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 05
Posts: 16
Credit: 14,707
RAC: 0
Message 13708 - Posted: 23 May 2006, 10:18:39 UTC - in response to Message 13707.  

>But having set the cache to 2 days also means, that some other machines are downloading more than they need.
I quite don't understand that. Each Wus has a time-to-complete estimation and BOINC prevents from downloading more Wus than cache or that can be completed prior deadline. Familiar with "computer overcommited"?

That would be nice. But reality is, that (if you have multiple projects) the client asks for the buffer size of work (2 days) and the server forgets that there are other projects (and sends 2 days of work for each project).
Norbert
ID: 13708 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Travis DJ

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 04
Posts: 196
Credit: 207,040
RAC: 0
Message 13716 - Posted: 23 May 2006, 20:23:41 UTC
Last modified: 23 May 2006, 20:24:59 UTC

One thing I wonder about the work cache size is just how many % of people use that method specifically to get as much work for a particular project as opposed to using it (as it was intended to) to give computers who aren't always online enough work between connects.

In regard to LHC it has always seemed to me the people who set their work cache high are simply into this to earn the most credit & the higher stats that come with it and nothing more - but my impression could be way off. In defense of my thoughts, LHC@Home hasn't ever been a seriously time-sensitive app and for that matter the average turnaround time staticstic has never worked (some of my hosts are 0 days, another 7.something days, another is 236278 days and utterly unrealistic :).

My honest opinion about the level of work (not) available at LHC has more to do with CERN really putting themselves behind the power of free distributed computing which BOINC offers than it does anything else such as reliability, security, or the somewhat unpredictable job completion time. Each of those criteria have solutions except the commitment by CERN to fully exploit this awesome resource they have with us.

That's my two cents.. didn't realize I had this much to say :)


ID: 13716 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
YeshuaAgapao

Send message
Joined: 29 Nov 05
Posts: 9
Credit: 1,266,935
RAC: 0
Message 13822 - Posted: 2 Jun 2006, 7:11:47 UTC
Last modified: 2 Jun 2006, 7:23:00 UTC

The cache size only is usefull once LHC is freshly out of work. You can set cache size for a specific project by create separate preferences for one of your home/school/work categories. As computers are assigned to these categories on a per-project basis, you can say set CacheSize to 1 for default, and to 10 for 'school', and then for LHC@Home, you can put all you computers as 'school', and 'work' or home' for all the other projects, so you can get a 10-day cache only for LHC@home, and 1 day for your other projects. LHC's short deadlines greatly decrease the usefulness of the large caches though. It won't get 10 days worth of work. 3-4 days at most (if none bomb-out early from beam destabilization).

Thats where the next trick comes in - suspend all pronects except LHC and crunch LHC exclusively while and only while LHC has work to serve. You will fetch and cache LHC work as if LHC was your only project. Plus you get maximum throughput while there is work to fetch. Once LHC runs out of work, turn back on all the other projects and BOINC will finish all the LHC units at its own leisure. Heavy multi-project people will be in NDF mode though, but you still get the large post-work exhaustion cache.

My... LinkSite | Blog | Pictures
ID: 13822 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Gaspode the UnDressed

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 506
Credit: 118,619
RAC: 0
Message 13824 - Posted: 2 Jun 2006, 7:38:45 UTC - in response to Message 13716.  


My honest opinion about the level of work (not) available at LHC has more to do with CERN really putting themselves behind the power of free distributed computing which BOINC offers than it does anything else such as reliability, security, or the somewhat unpredictable job completion time. Each of those criteria have solutions except the commitment by CERN to fully exploit this awesome resource they have with us.



It's not actually that simple. Many of the applications that the physicists use have been developed and refined over a long period of time, generally in an environment where a large monolithic computer was the only viable resource for running them.

Fast forward a couple of decades and BOINC arrives. BOINC can deliver enormous processing power, but it can't deliver the large computing environment needed by some of these applications. It's a breeze to run a model that requires 2Gb RAM, 4Gb RAM, 256Gb RAM, or more on a big mainframe. It just can't be done on a PC.

If the applications can be broken down into smaller modules such that data can be broken up and pipelined through different processes then maybe we have a DC application, but doing it will require a rewrite from the bottom up.

New applications don't have the legacy of development to contend with, so Einstein, Predictor, Rosetta, etc. can develop with DC in mind.



Gaspode the UnDressed
http://www.littlevale.co.uk
ID: 13824 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile MAGIC Quantum Mechanic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Oct 04
Posts: 1000
Credit: 45,918,615
RAC: 5,565
Message 13826 - Posted: 2 Jun 2006, 8:56:57 UTC


Server Status

Up, out of work
67,144 workunits in progress
43 concurrent connections


Well lets see how fast we can get this block of data processed!

We know there is always a group of members on any project that are watching and checking to see when the work units get below the 10k mark because it only takes about an hour for it all to be gone.


(yes I keep an eye on this one)







Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life
ID: 13826 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Dronak
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 May 06
Posts: 20
Credit: 297,111
RAC: 0
Message 13835 - Posted: 2 Jun 2006, 15:39:01 UTC - in response to Message 13826.  
Last modified: 2 Jun 2006, 15:39:27 UTC


Server Status

Up, out of work
67,144 workunits in progress
43 concurrent connections


Well lets see how fast we can get this block of data processed!


At the moment, I see "53856 workunits in progress" and apparently they're all sent out to other people, because I have no work in progress right now. It looks like I need to make some more adjustments to my settings in order to get some more work next time. I did get more this time than before, but still, a lot of work has yet to be done and my computer's dry.
ID: 13835 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Bronco

Send message
Joined: 31 Jul 05
Posts: 4
Credit: 6,933
RAC: 0
Message 13853 - Posted: 3 Jun 2006, 10:25:51 UTC - in response to Message 13701.  
Last modified: 3 Jun 2006, 10:27:29 UTC

that's also a BOINC-problem. Why can't we just select cache size for every single project and every single computer? There's only a general setting. At least I have only found this one. I've set mine to 2 days, as I have some computers on some projects, that do not have a permanent connection to the net. But having set the cache to 2 days also means, that some other machines are downloading more than they need. Hopefully BOINC-developers are changing this one day.

Up to me, the first thing to do on Boinc would be to manage correctly workload. It's now mostly right for a single project, but a total mess on multiple projects with different priority, and in this case planned end is of no use.

If this was correctly done, most of the issues would be solved.

Ans what are some crunching for ? reading some posts, I've got the feeling that some would prefer having work with no meaning rather that having no work lol. With more than 20 projects running, I'm sure you can find another usuefull projects
ID: 13853 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
NJMHoffmann

Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 05
Posts: 16
Credit: 14,707
RAC: 0
Message 13854 - Posted: 3 Jun 2006, 11:14:13 UTC - in response to Message 13853.  

Up to me, the first thing to do on Boinc would be to manage correctly workload.

Add me to the list :-)

Norbert
ID: 13854 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : Number crunching : Work to be done!


©2021 CERN