1) Message boards : Number crunching : Did I miss something? (Message 17890)
Posted 14 Sep 2007 by Neil
Post:
Now you see 'em... now you don't. Y'all must have sneezed or something and missed out. :)


Wow. I just checked and my slower computer had managed to grab 40 results. (None on the other). That's the most I've managed to get hold of in ages.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Quorate but unvalidated (Message 16547)
Posted 12 Mar 2007 by Neil
Post:
Pending results aren't checked by seeing which have 0 granted.


All the ones I'm talking about have "Validation state: Initial" as if they have never been through the validator. The same is true for the results of all the people who have contributed to those WU's.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Fairer distribuiton of work(Flame Fest 2007) (Message 16509)
Posted 10 Mar 2007 by Neil
Post:
The "problem" is self-limiting. The project is way over-resourced for the amount of work it does at the moment. It must be or everyone would get work regularly. The people doing the work are either content with that or they aren't. The people with the lowest threshold leave. If that goes on for long enough, there will be enough work (or few enough workers) to keep everyone busy. Until that point the project isn't getting its limited work done significantly more slowly than they were with lots of workers, most of whom were idle most of the time. There are more than enough workers who are content just to do whatever work comes their way, to more than meet the current requirements of the project.

The only possible motivation for risking anything to keep the project over-populated would be if you knew the workload was going to increase enormously sometime soon. But it's my guess that the "silent majority" of contented workers will still be enough even when Garfield shows up.

I know how I would change the work distribution arrangements if I was the project administration: not at all, because it isn't broken.

Neil
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Quorate but unvalidated (Message 16498)
Posted 9 Mar 2007 by Neil
Post:
if everyone only got a couple wu's per box theyd be done by now and we could move on!


What are you going on about? The point of the thread is that all the results have been returned in every case, they just haven't been validated.

There's already enough threads about sharing out work; use one of those. (Then at least I don't have to start ignoring this one as well).

Neil

[I just had a look and this machine has picked up 141 WU this morning. I'm sure that won't meet with your approval, but I'm equally sure they'll all be done either today or tomorrow. Is that ok for you?]
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Quorate but unvalidated (Message 16477)
Posted 7 Mar 2007 by Neil
Post:
Anyone else got a load of results completed that aren't being validated?

I got five more results today; I'll wait to see if they validate when I send them back.


My new results seem to be validating. The old ones that aren't validating probably only amount to a couple of milli-credits each, so I'll not loose any sleep over them for that reason. I still don't understand why they haven't gone through though.
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Quorate but unvalidated (Message 16469)
Posted 7 Mar 2007 by Neil
Post:
Anyone else got a load of results completed that aren't being validated? Only three out of 43 results I returned from two hosts since 28/2 have been validated (and those were marked invalid). I think all of them have had the result returned from all the members of the initial replication.

There might be a reason for the invalids, as I was having some heat problems on one of the hosts at the time, but I don't know why the others haven't been through the validator.

I got five more results today; I'll wait to see if they validate when I send them back.

Neil
7) Message boards : Number crunching : That was fast (Message 16245)
Posted 6 Feb 2007 by Neil
Post:
The sixty I got were entirely down to the BOINC application. I did nothing to provoke it. So yes, I did manage to finish all 60. As it happened it took about seven or eight hours of CPU. Though it took around nine hours for them all to be reported and acknowledged. I guess it would have downloaded more, if there had been more at the time, given how short each one was.


And my other machine just picked up forty this morning using the same method.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : That was fast (Message 16232)
Posted 6 Feb 2007 by Neil
Post:
Yeah, lucky. Will you end all 60 workunits in a sensible amount of time?


The sixty I got were entirely down to the BOINC application. I did nothing to provoke it. So yes, I did manage to finish all 60. As it happened it took about seven or eight hours of CPU. Though it took around nine hours for them all to be reported and acknowledged. I guess it would have downloaded more, if there had been more at the time, given how short each one was.
9) Message boards : Number crunching : That was fast (Message 16217)
Posted 5 Feb 2007 by Neil
Post:
I was getting "no work from project" up until 01:59:46. Then I managed to grab 60 work units on one machine and by 02:02:51 it was all sold out and back to "no work from project" again.

Lucky me.



©2024 CERN