41) Message boards : Number crunching : Time to Completion (Message 7974)
Posted 5 Jun 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
It seems as I watch this phenomena on different runs as they have a formula for 100k runs and 1 for 1m runs that is calculated with your hosts benchmarks give you a consistent time to completion no matter what the parameters of a particular test ie: the time to completion calculated by boinc and lhc always come up about the same time on all my hosts but the REAL time changes dramatically mostly less but on occasion more and a few runs were almost spot on. Just an observation
42) Message boards : Number crunching : no work from project (Message 7955)
Posted 4 Jun 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
I'm guessing the reason the front page isn't updating is it has not been linked to the new scheduler program and I believe we are in the 1st 30k 1m turns Marrku talked about. Boinc 4.44 is starting to work as advertised (cough cough) and is reloading new work as required and server is still giving. I wonder if there will be any breaks in the total 1m run
43) Message boards : Number crunching : shorter deadline please! (Message 7931)
Posted 3 Jun 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
@Ziran Boinc has now made it personal and must I say challeging! My best option now is to Suspend! Suspend! Suspend! with a little bit of resource tweaking.So much for those who give thier calculations and formulas dt I have observed my 3.6gigHT down to 1 CPDN work unit with 2 other projects AVAILABLE! and still would dl no work til I suspended CPDN.... me thinks many quirks abound and they have gone from 1 extreme to another!!! Would just be nice to be able to do what I want w/o constantly tending to the farm dt Boinc issues :( It seems there are Demons in the Daemon!
44) Message boards : Number crunching : shorter deadline please! (Message 7924)
Posted 2 Jun 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Grenadier & littlebouncer you are both right. But that is no reason to change a deadline littlebouncer because YOU are having a problem-Grenadier is right too much work but you are right lb not a good way to get LHC work... so what do we do? I say you need to tweak your resource settings lb when LHC has work:)Thats what I do and if anyone has problems with thier scheduler not asking for work when you have none is to suspend all other projects/workunits and that project will give you work.
45) Message boards : Number crunching : Projects Computing Power (Message 7775)
Posted 20 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Yes Chrulle it answered my question as best as possible as it was a somewhat generalzed question (went fishing).It is something I have been curious about and am glad to know just how much this research is helping Cern. Thank-you for your reply
46) Message boards : Number crunching : Cannot find workunit (Message 7765)
Posted 20 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
It Appears all finished workunits going to pending, getting same answer when I access db on all workunits now...also had 3 results on a workunit a few hours ago nothing granted... seems like this sort of thing happens as they load database for next run... we shall see
47) Message boards : Number crunching : Projects Computing Power (Message 7763)
Posted 20 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Nice article Skip Da Shu -thanks.... now let me see Dr Anderson says 500k hosts (must be including classic) outperform fastest supercomputer by about 30%. LHCs resources are about 1% of that... howevever obviously sixtrack would not have been using that computer... so I guess I have to defer to Markku's comment that we outperform any platform they could use and it has to suffice for now for an answer hmmm my math tells me that our output is approx 1 terraflop sound right? What do university's have available to them?
48) Message boards : Number crunching : Projects Computing Power (Message 7758)
Posted 19 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Thank you for your answer Markku :) If details ever become available to you on this it would be nice to know how our presently small community stacks up to say a supercomputer you might use.
49) Message boards : Number crunching : Projects Computing Power (Message 7744)
Posted 18 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Hey Markku,
May I ask how LHC's computing power compares to what you had originally planned in house for the sixtrack program?I know we have a only a bit over 5000 users and 15000+ hosts at any given time at present. Estimates of a million work unit run with 5 million results are that it would last us about a month or so as posted on these boards seem generally accurate. May main question is how does that compare timwise crunching compared to supercomputers you might have used or clustering with same amount of workunits?
50) Message boards : Number crunching : Will this test stop next?-No, ... ? (Message 7672)
Posted 13 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
> And this raises another interesting question: Is the lifetime of this project
> finite?
>
>
>My understanding from past posts is that after we are done on this "prework" , we will also being analyzing results after they are completed. And since our computing power has so caught the eye of the physicists I believe they are planning other projects for us as well. The intention once everything is debugged and worked out is to go mainstream and stay that way and never be finished.
51) Message boards : Number crunching : Old Pending Credit Issue (Message 7640)
Posted 12 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
oops so sorry Marrku and all missed that post reply- thx TravisDJ-
52) Message boards : Number crunching : uuh...? (Message 7627)
Posted 12 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Poorboy I'm using 148 meg on my top host ,just looked , but what does that mean, depending on many factors ie: preference settings, cpu type/speed,ram... etc, other than he may be doing less slower than ours. whats his rac haven't looked sorry
53) Message boards : Number crunching : Old Pending Credit Issue (Message 7625)
Posted 12 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Hello Markku (and readership)
I have seen numerous threads by users about the same old type of credits not granted(from beginning of new server), I have not seen any response by admin about these ( or an adequate response). I know ya'll really busy but can you say something like in the meantime we will address this issue maybe quarterly? when we have time for it? never? LOL . Some kind of response would be appreciated as your resposiveness level has been quite high for us posters Thank-you in advance :)
54) Message boards : Number crunching : uuh...? (Message 7558)
Posted 9 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
I have had something similar happen to me on a host. I had less memory left on my hard drive than what I was telling Boinc in my general preferences to keep free. Hope it is just that simple for you.
55) Message boards : Number crunching : ADMIN! - Project Down Errors & Message Board Errors (Message 7557)
Posted 9 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Thats all I would like to say is this was Ian's 1st post(glad my 1st post did not have so much controversy as I would probably never post again and it has happenned b4 over at CPDN) and would like to see these boards more active that might lead to more productivity and am also pleased at Markku's response on this thread about the subject.
56) Message boards : Number crunching : We got the million (Message 7555)
Posted 9 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Congrats Swiss Team but after all you are in the host country of the LHC and should be very proud of that as well.Next would be the 1st million mark user from the Swiss team? hehe and if they create a black hole ya'll will be the 1st to get sucked in
57) Message boards : Number crunching : Is the validator doing it's job? (Message 7509)
Posted 7 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Poorboy my guess is as they are trying to clean up database and had to recover from as Markku put it the 1st database crash the new server has had.... that the validator is probably shut down as the same as you happenning to me ie everthing shooting into pending.... the validator also seemed shut down earlier this am. but recovered , validated everything validateable ,and then was shut down or went down again.
58) Message boards : Number crunching : Daily quota exceeded (Message 7505)
Posted 7 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
>
> Investigations continue...
>
> ADD: From the logs I see that there were many database errors while the
> results were assigned to you. The database actually crashed today for some
> unknown reason (first time in LHC@home history) but fortunately a recovery was
> successful. While database was sick many database updates failed and this can
> be now seen as abnormal behaviour.
>
> I set nresults_today for host #22642 to 40. Happy crunching.
>
>
>Thank-you Markku it is much appreciated as well as your responsiveness
59) Message boards : Number crunching : Daily quota exceeded (Message 7499)
Posted 7 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
Host # 22642 has received 40 units today and is being told it has exceeded daily quota. It appears the increase has had no effect. This host averages 85-100 results a day and will probably run out of work tommorrow for LHC unless it truly starts getting 100 a day as it only has 60 left in cache. It appears the bug is still present at the server side.
60) Message boards : Number crunching : Daily quota exceeded (Message 7459)
Posted 5 May 2005 by Jayargh
Post:
After the latest database overload occurred my daily limit went to 25 from 50( which as has been stated doesn't keep HT machines happy. 2 of my HT machines were trying to collect its daily quota when this occurred. Does everyone have thier quota reset at same time? Is this what is causing the overload? The 1st few days of this 200k+ my machines were crunching,uploading,and downloading 2 at a time in an orderly fashion and I saw no database overloads occurring . Then when the nasty (hehe) quotas came along we have overload. Could the LHC project be victim of its own policies?


Previous 20 · Next 20


©2022 CERN