Message boards : Number crunching : Credits
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2

AuthorMessage
Uffe F

Send message
Joined: 9 Jan 08
Posts: 66
Credit: 727,923
RAC: 0
Message 24837 - Posted: 14 Sep 2012, 9:59:00 UTC - in response to Message 24836.  

I wish I had as high a credit as you Tom. ;-)
I get 0.84!


http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=3208867


But the task is only 108-141 seconds long. so that is like 1½-2½ minute long. You shouldn't get more credit than 0.84.

The credit only comes from CPU time, not run time. Run time is just the time it was running on your system. But if you play games, watch movies or stuff like that, then your CPU time will be a lot less than your run time, since the CPU is only running at a few percentages of what it can do.

Here is a normal workunit of mine that gave 139 credit for 5 hours of work. And it gave even mor credit per hour for my wingman as he completed it faster.

http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=3149580
ID: 24837 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Uffe F

Send message
Joined: 9 Jan 08
Posts: 66
Credit: 727,923
RAC: 0
Message 24838 - Posted: 14 Sep 2012, 9:59:00 UTC - in response to Message 24836.  

I wish I had as high a credit as you Tom. ;-)
I get 0.84!


http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=3208867


But the task is only 108-141 seconds long. so that is like 1½-2½ minute long. You shouldn't get more credit than 0.84.

The credit only comes from CPU time, not run time. Run time is just the time it was running on your system. But if you play games, watch movies or stuff like that, then your CPU time will be a lot less than your run time, since the CPU is only running at a few percentages of what it can do.

Here is a normal workunit of mine that gave 139 credit for 5 hours of work. And it gave even mor credit per hour for my wingman as he completed it faster.

http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=3149580
ID: 24838 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Sunny129
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Dec 05
Posts: 31
Credit: 9,709,398
RAC: 0
Message 24839 - Posted: 14 Sep 2012, 12:05:45 UTC - in response to Message 24835.  

1) Those are 'wlxscan' tasks - normal length for this project, not the long 'wlxu2' variety.

while generally true, a minority of "wlxu2" tasks have "normal" run times, and likewise a minority of "wlxscan" and "wlxt48" tasks have long run times.
ID: 24839 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Tom95134

Send message
Joined: 4 May 07
Posts: 250
Credit: 826,541
RAC: 0
Message 24840 - Posted: 15 Sep 2012, 17:53:59 UTC - in response to Message 24835.  

1) Those are 'wlxscan' tasks - normal length for this project, not the long 'wlxu2' variety.

2) You should be comparing runtime (total elapsed working time), not CPU time.

3) Especially, since the SETI task you linked was computed on your GTS 450 Fermi GPU - the CPU will have contributed practically nothing.

Hi Richard,

Thanks for the info. You are correct. I've been "forcing" running of LHC Tasks so I would get some long Tasks and for some reason I thought those were the long ones. They were not as you pointed out.

I found one that was already validated
http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=3121381
and credit on this looks about normal.

Also, a couple still pending
http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=3122463
http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=3119041

Thanks again.
ID: 24840 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Number crunching : Credits


©2020 CERN