1wgq-SDOERR_OPMcharmm6P2-0-1-RND0123 - Short runs

My PC with NV GT730 got a Short runs WU... - but it lasts ~ 3 days like a Long runs WU.

A NV GTX980 (wingman) meeded 8 hrs and 44 mins for this above WU.

Is there something wrong?

Thanks.
____________

It does seem like some of Stefan's tasks are being marked in the wrong category of short and long. Only his CASP22S_crystal_ss_contacts tasks seem to be in the correct areas because he knows how long they should last based on their complexity. Perhaps he does not know what category to put these others in until a few run and come back. I know his work specializes in finding new methods and tool development. So maybe these other tasks are using new methods or areas of the CPU/GPU/PC architecture that are just having unknown results until tested on a few different systems.

This is speculation, but I think it makes good sense based on his "function" in the research. The CASP22S_crystal_ss_contacts tasks had expected result times because they had set nanosecond variations. These others do not (maybe) and therefore could be having wildly different results than expected, thus in the wrong categories or even too long for any system to handle for some architectures or complexities of task to architecture usage.

Many of the tasks we get are from students who are using the 'tried and true' methods and tools the way they have been used in the past. Stefan's whole job is basically to see if there are different or better methods or tools that are going unused or could be better used. I expect that job to have results in the field that do not match what we are used to from other students and tasks. I would think that after some of these WUs come back to them as too long to run, aborted by users, application errors, too long for the long v short runs categories, etc, that they will be reassigned, shortened or cast away as proven bad methods or even that a new category might be created just for runs that are super long.
____________
1 Corinthians 9:16 "For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!"
Ephesians 6:18-20, please ;-)
http://tbc-pa.org

I've got 2 of them on a system with 3 980TIs in it. Let's see how these do. They are running 2 per card, so the system is running 6 WUs at this time and these 2 are on separate cards, but with 'ride along' units of other types.

http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=12185655
http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=12185598

My PC with NV GT730 got a Short runs WU... - but it lasts ~ 3 days like a Long runs WU.

A NV GTX980 (wingman) meeded 8 hrs and 44 mins for this above WU.

Is there something wrong?

Thanks.

It does seem like some of Stefan's tasks are being marked in the wrong category of short and long.

It does seem like some of Stefan's tasks are being marked in the wrong category of short and long.

Now have a Gerard that looks like it should have been in the long queue instead of short.
Wonder if the boys went out for a long lunch sometime this week. ;-)

I've got 2 of them on a system with 3 980TIs in it. Let's see how these do. They are running 2 per card, so the system is running 6 WUs at this time and these 2 are on separate cards, but with 'ride along' units of other types.

http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=12185655
http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=12185598

One of the 2 guys above ^^^ might call them unstable, especially the longer it goes and easily damageable. Would probably blame power loss as a culprit.
I did find that PC frozen up and it dropped 2 tasks on reboot while this was running, but the other one of these plus 3 more did finish with no error after the freeze as well and none of them 'started over' from zero %.

Have you set disk write caching to off as Zoltan has suggested? I've also found that if the running WU resets to 0% on reboot and starts over, it will always fail validation even though it appears to have completed successfully.

Hi Guys,

If a WU runs for N Hours over X normal hours of either a short or long run, will you be compensated for the extra time spent processing in terms of credits?

EG Would you get more credits than you would have on a 'normal' short or long WU in terms of credits. To be honest I not sure how WU credits are worked out on GPUGrid.

Thanks,

Chris

No, WU credits are fixed.

OK Thanks Bettingslip.

Unfortunately electricity bills are not.

I wonder if this is something the developers could think about..

Sending someone a 'short' WU which states that it is going to take an hour (on fastest GPU), when infact it takes maybe 20 hours, and then assigning the same amount of credit as a short WU, seems a bit mean..

Would you get more credits than you would have on a 'normal' short or long WU in terms of credits. To be honest I not sure how WU credits are worked out on GPUGrid.

Would you get more credits than you would have on a 'normal' short or long WU in terms of credits. To be honest I not sure how WU credits are worked out on GPUGrid.

Hi Chris, WU credits are fixed for each WU type. Unfortunately a WU assigned to the short queue only receives about 1/2 the credits of the same length WU assigned to the long queue. So for instance a 7 hour WU in the in the long queue may receive 100,000 credits while the same WU assigned to the short queue only receives 50,000. The reason for this was explained long, long ago as a compensation for the many bad WUs that were being generated, and also to motivate people to run the long WUs. This isn't so much the case anymore and I'd personally encourage the admins to give the same credits/hour for all WU types. It seems only fair (and non-elitist). ;-)

Thanks Beyond, I totally agree.. On both points!

Its strange about the WUs because for the last 8 months short WU's have been short, and long WU's have been long - at constant timelines.

--

In our opinion the whole credit system is a complete mess. You have Collatz that you can earn 100K per hour off a GTX970 doing non-life saving math WU's, and yet a project as important as GPUGrid assigns 200K credits-ish from a 9 hour WU.

And we won't talk about Bitcoin Utopia running off ASC devices which can earn Millions of credits an hour!

What I do not understand is why GPUGrid, World Community Grid, Rosetta, and ClimatePreditication etc eg the Really important projects, do not just match Collatz on credits. If they did they would get massive amounts of extra crunchers which would equate to massively more processing power, and its not like the credits cost anything to give out more.

In our opinion the whole credit system is a complete mess. You have Collatz that you can earn 100K per hour off a GTX970 doing non-life saving math WU's, and yet a project as important as GPUGrid assigns 200K credits-ish from a 9 hour WU.

And we won't talk about Bitcoin Utopia running off ASC devices which can earn Millions of credits an hour!

Speaking of WUs in the wrong queue, it looks like a bunch of GERARD_AGGRE WUs just got dumped into the short queue when they should be in the long queue.

Speaking of WUs in the wrong queue, it looks like a bunch of GERARD_AGGRE WUs just got dumped into the short queue when they should be in the long queue.

you are definitely right :-(
My GTX970 just crunched two of them, duration 12 hours each, and only 26.700 credits ea. (normally, for a "long runs" with 12 hours on the GTX970, credit is minimum 160.000 or more!)

... after having a bit too much vino at lunch. :-)