Message boards :
Number crunching :
Local control of which subprojects run`2
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 22 Oct 07 Posts: 27 Credit: 808,821 RAC: 0 |
I'm starting a new thread because the existing one is has become pretty muddled. I want a way to locally control which LHC subprojects will be run. I cna't use the account control because I'm computing through gridcoin and have to run under the gridcoin poll account. This is not a request for gridcoind support. I wanted to eliminate LHCb tasks, since a the moment they just sit there occupying resources without doing much useful. So added the following to my LHC app_config file <app> <name>LHCb</name> <max_concurrent>0</max_concurrent> </app> This isn't working, I'm still getting LHCb tasks.. I know that the app_config is being read and that other items in the app_config are taking effect. Did I miss something I need here? Thanks, ++PLS |
Send message Joined: 9 Jan 15 Posts: 151 Credit: 431,596,822 RAC: 0 |
max_concurrent need to be 1 or higher. To use 0 would not work. |
Send message Joined: 22 Oct 07 Posts: 27 Credit: 808,821 RAC: 0 |
And so it didn't. Is there a way with app_config to have LHCb not run at all? |
Send message Joined: 21 Jun 10 Posts: 40 Credit: 10,760,482 RAC: 5,243 |
pls, The app_config.xml file does not control which tasks get downloaded. All the app_config.xml file does is control the manner in which the downloaded tasks run (number concurrent, memory size, etc.). The only way to control which tasks get downloaded is by using the project preferences. A complete description of options for the app_config.xml file can be found at the bottom of https://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/client_configuration Hope that helps. |
Send message Joined: 22 Oct 07 Posts: 27 Credit: 808,821 RAC: 0 |
Yeah, I have that. But while that page gives the format of the options, it doesn't really explain what they DO. Really, I have this problem because the control that LHC provides over which subproject are run is at the wrong level. It should be at the individual computer level. Not that it can't also be at the account level, serving as the default for individual computers. But needs to be at the computer level, too. Thanks for the information. |
Send message Joined: 22 Oct 07 Posts: 27 Credit: 808,821 RAC: 0 |
I seem to accidently have solved my problem. I set <max_concurrent>1</max_concurrent> and <avg_ncpus>1.0</avg_ncpus> I figured that if I have to run LHCb, they can only have 1 cpu. And I haven't seen an LHCb job since. Is LHCb not handing out 1 cpu jobs any more? |
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 08 Posts: 2413 Credit: 226,448,531 RAC: 132,312 |
... And I haven't seen an LHCb job since. This links/comments will tell you what's going on: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/server_status.php https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/lhcb_job.php https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/forum_thread.php?id=4871&postid=37283 |
Send message Joined: 5 Nov 15 Posts: 144 Credit: 6,301,268 RAC: 0 |
I went through the same discussion a year orso back. Not in the pool but can empathize with your dilemma. It's untested but if you set <avg_ncpus></avg_ncpus> to more cores than your BOINC client has available (or greater than 16 cores), LHC@home server should stop sending WU's which have impossible requirements to fulfill. |
©2024 CERN