1) Message boards : Number crunching : Boinc memory estimate and LHC Settings (Message 35159)
Posted 3 May 2018 by metalius
Post:
I just found - I have TWO BOINC_Data folders.
I was not accurate, when I upgraded BOINC several days ago.
Thank You very much for Your patience!
And GOOD LUCK!
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Boinc memory estimate and LHC Settings (Message 35157)
Posted 3 May 2018 by metalius
Post:
...is NOT a novice.

All of these years my hosts processed SixTrack only - hope, this explains all. ;-)
Hint1: examine your client_state.xml

Currently no idea, which statement is missing or incorrect there (between <project> </project>).
Hint2: Only a novice may save client_state.xml while the client is running.

Excellent hint. :oD
It doesn't work?

Not yet, unfortunately.
Did you examine your BOINC client log?

??? cc_config.xml not found - using defaults ???
This file is really missing.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Boinc memory estimate and LHC Settings (Message 35154)
Posted 3 May 2018 by metalius
Post:
computezrmle
Thank You very much again!
Yes, of course - XML always is a solution.
<demagogy>
But for advanced users only - at least ONE incorrect symbol in XML code is resulting from "this is just not working" to "this ruined all". Some time ago I had many hours of pain until I finally activated optimized apps for SETI and Einstein...
Also which percent of volunteers may be named as "advanced"?
</demagogy>
In THIS situation:
1. YOUR code is not working.
2. MY code is not working too:
<app_config>
    <app>
      <name>Theory Simulation</name>
      <max_concurrent>3</max_concurrent>
    </app>
    <app>
      <name>LHCb Simulation</name>
      <max_concurrent>1</max_concurrent>
    </app>
	<report_results_immediately/>
	</app_config>

Maybe, <name> is still incorrect?
Any ideas?
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Boinc memory estimate and LHC Settings (Message 35152)
Posted 3 May 2018 by metalius
Post:
computezrmle!
Thank You very much for so fast reply!

2. Max # of CPUs for this project - this means a limit for maximum of running tasks at the same time?

No.
It limits the number of CPU cores used by a multicore app.


Dear Project team!

As You can see, current definition may provoke misunderstandings.
Can You correct it (for example, Max # or CPUs for multicore applications)?
Or just add some explanation, what this statement means?

Also, some of LHC vbox applications are a significant abuse for "typical / standard" volunteer's PC used at home or at work.
Is it possible to add one more statement, which would allow to limit maximum of LHC tasks running at the same time?
Of course, this is not necessary at all for SixTrack...
But it necessary already for LHCb, which eats 2 GB of RAM pro task...
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Boinc memory estimate and LHC Settings (Message 35149)
Posted 3 May 2018 by metalius
Post:
Dear colleagues!
Explain, please, some statements in LHC@home preferences.
1. Max # of jobs for this project - this means a limit for maximum of downloaded tasks at all (running + waiting to run + ready to start)?
2. Max # of CPUs for this project - this means a limit for maximum of running tasks at the same time?
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Migration (Message 29032)
Posted 3 Mar 2017 by metalius
Post:
Hi,
Thanks for this wonderful job of merging projects. That's a very good idea and an impressive work.

Just say the truth, are You trolling here?
Everyone (thousands of BOINC volunteers worldwide), who at least touched LHC@home, have now disturbed and damaged statistic...
This is not wonderful job, this is true pornography!
Sorry for brutal tone (I hope, nobody will be insulted personally)...
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Migration (Message 29021)
Posted 2 Mar 2017 by metalius
Post:
After this credit migration I got a new project (parasite project in reality) in my project list. The name of parasite-project is vLHCathome, of course, the credits are identical to LHC@home credits.
Something needs to be fixed on servers - I (and absolute majority of all users, IMHO) refuse such "gift".
8) Message boards : News : VM applications broken by the Windows 10 update KB3206632 (Message 28432)
Posted 11 Jan 2017 by metalius
Post:
I downloaded, upgraded... got ZERO...
9) Message boards : LHCb Application : Memory usage of LHCb tasks (Message 28387)
Posted 8 Jan 2017 by metalius
Post:
Very good comment, Harri! Thank You!
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Got to much tasks, runing 5 times longer as predict. (Message 27682)
Posted 30 Jan 2016 by metalius
Post:
Yes, this is Ok.
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Available work? (Message 27289)
Posted 5 Apr 2015 by metalius
Post:
Just an example...
Einstein@home uses minimum quorum 2, maximum tasks - 20...
Believe or not, by this extremely high reserve, rarely but sometimes several WUs are getting status "to many errors"... ;-)
12) Message boards : Number crunching : New bizarre Work Units (Message 27288)
Posted 5 Apr 2015 by metalius
Post:
Dublis... :-)
13) Message boards : Number crunching : New bizarre Work Units (Message 27287)
Posted 5 Apr 2015 by metalius
Post:
please see http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/forum_thread.php?id=3921&postid=27279

Thank You, I know this problem.
And I have NOTHING against raised quorum - the project knows here better than all of us, which level of confidence is mandatory at the moment.
I just reported an another problem.
Eric, Thank You for fast reply. Happy Holiday!
14) Message boards : Number crunching : New bizarre Work Units (Message 27281)
Posted 5 Apr 2015 by metalius
Post:
Dear project Team!
You started new batch of WUs with:
1. minimum quorum - 3;
2. initial replication - 3;
3. max # of error/total/success tasks - also 3, 3, 3!!! or ZERO possible attempts, if at least 1 task in WU will end with computation error, download error, user abort etc.
So, just take a look to first results of this new "strategy"...
I observed my nearest host only:
- from 32 tasks 6 got status "Cancelled by server" or "Completed, can't validate";
- 20% WUs are lost;
- approx. 170 hours of CPU time is wasted (in 6 lost WUs)...
Is this simple mistake by changing server's configuration (still hope for this)?
Or is this Your new strategy? If so, I do not understand You...
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Windows XP hosts do not receive work! (Message 26639)
Posted 9 Jul 2014 by metalius
Post:
Reset the project?
But what to do with remote hosts, not attached or missed contact with account manager?
Why XP only computers are hit by this problem?
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Windows XP hosts do not receive work! (Message 26638)
Posted 9 Jul 2014 by metalius
Post:
Hello!
The majority of my XP hosts are blocked and for a long time already!
The error messages are:
Scheduler request failed: HTTP internal server error
Any ideas?
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Upload Errors (Message 25580)
Posted 14 May 2013 by metalius
Post:
A new upload error:
14/05/2013 19:58:59 | LHC@home 1.0 | [error] Error reported by file upload server: Server is out of disk space
18) Message boards : News : First tests 2013 (Message 25075)
Posted 11 Jan 2013 by metalius
Post:
Good luck!
19) Message boards : Number crunching : New MEGA! crunchers (Message 24969)
Posted 27 Nov 2012 by metalius
Post:
1 more. Outscale, RAC ~500K/day!!!
20) Message boards : Number crunching : New MEGA! crunchers (Message 24869)
Posted 28 Sep 2012 by metalius
Post:
Agile Boincers from Switzerland... It looks like - entire computer cluster is involved. It does more job pro 1 day as my 40 hosts did in 6 years. That is really hard...


Next 20


©2020 CERN