Hi all,

I just crunched a GIANNI WU which was marked short run, but it took more or less the same time than the NATHAN long runs but giving only half the credit.

that is normal ?

I'm running a HD7950 under Win7 64

Here is the link to the WU http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=4452168

thanks for comments

BR
Markus

here is another one, that took even longer...

http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=4452297

BR
Markus

GIANNI_VIL1 WU's are fairly short (5h23min on a GTX660Ti is short).
Conversely, the issue could be perceived that Nathan's WU's are just as short, and shouldn't really be in the Long queue!

The Long queue is for WU's that take "(8-12 hours on fastest card)"
The Short queue is for WU's that take "(2-3 hours on fastest card)"

On the fastest GPUs (GTX680) both WU's take <4h, which is a lot closer to the Short queue than the Long queue.

While I have suggested that there should be a Medium Sized WU queue, saying as there is a 5h gap between the short and long queue and several different WU's at present, I don't have to maintain the server or the queues.

It would make more sense that these GIANNI_VIL1 WU's granted the same credit as Nate's WU's, one way or the other.

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Thanks for the answer...

I don't know excatly how it works for GPU grid but shouldn't the credits be given by the amount of calculations done (or similar) and not by the queue the WU comes from ? Obviously this is not the case here ?!?

Markus

The problem is probably because these tasks run at relatively low GPU utilization.
See here: http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3365&nowrap=true#29992

I watched the GPU utilization of the second one because it was my first idea....

I saw a general level of about 80-95% with some drops to about 60% for seconds. Overall stable on a high level.

Earlier reported low utilization WU's had a much lower overall level than these.

Can anybody watch on their GPU's, I'm out of GIANNI right now ;-)

I just saw that I mentioned the wrong GPU in my first post ...

I'm using a GTX 660 Ti and for sure not the ATI card for GPUGrid

Markus

There are two main reasons why more credit is awarded on the long queue:
1) Greater risk for the cruncher to crunch (typically) much longer WUs. If a simulation crashes after 18 hours, that's a much bigger loss than a crash after 2 or 6 hours. This is especially true for older/slower cards.
2) To encourage/reward users who dedicate their computers to the long hours crunching that long WUs require. With he short queue, you can run a WU while you sleep or run errands, for example, and by the time you wake up or come home it's finished, and you can use your computer for other things. Dedicating a gpu/cpu/computer to run on long queue means you basically can't use it for other things, such as work, entertainment, etc., and so higher credits reward them for that.

Gianni's WUs may be slightly long for the short queue, but my recent tasks were definitely short for the long queue. The reason was that, at the time, my WUs were the only work for anyone to crunch, so I didn't want to make them too long in case people who typically crunch on short tasks wanted WUs to do, but couldn't sacrifice the time. Basically, it was due to the circumstances at that time. We have had a few weeks recently where I was the only one who had work for you guys, which was never a common situation for us. However, we keep adding more users, and it is becoming harder to come up with ideas fast enough (which is a good problem to have!). We are also trying to bring in new scientists!

Also seeing the same issue for the GIANNIs - 19446.58 seconds for the most recent. This is more time than the NATHAN WUs.

I saw the GIANNI WUs using 70 - 75% of my GTX680 on average. The NATHANs and NOELIAs tend to run around 85% on average. (I've never had a problem with NOELIA units.)

There are two main reasons why more credit is awarded on the long queue:
1) Greater risk for the cruncher to crunch (typically) much longer WUs. If a simulation crashes after 18 hours, that's a much bigger loss than a crash after 2 or 6 hours. This is especially true for older/slower cards.
2) To encourage/reward users who dedicate their computers to the long hours crunching that long WUs require. With he short queue, you can run a WU while you sleep or run errands, for example, and by the time you wake up or come home it's finished, and you can use your computer for other things. Dedicating a gpu/cpu/computer to run on long queue means you basically can't use it for other things, such as work, entertainment, etc., and so higher credits reward them for that.

Number 1 has some validity especially in the light of the recent rash of server aborted WUs. But 2x the credit differential seems excessive. Number 2: I'm not so sure about the logic at all. It certainly doesn't factor into my decision making in the least. In fact, the large credit differential causes some of us to move to different projects rather than do the short WUs and basically feel like 2nd class citizens. Four of my GPUs that happily ran long run Nathans and Tonis are unfortunately once again at other projects.

Hi, Nate:

I particularly like the last two sentences in your post:

However, we keep adding more users, and it is becoming harder to come up with ideas fast enough (which is a good problem to have!). We are also trying to bring in new scientists!

Regards,

John

I'm really disappointed : GIANNI tasks are considered as short tasks when lasting about 3 times more than other "small" tasks, but their deadline is the same. They don't terminate in time if I'm sharing resources on my computer.
As long as the deadline remains the same, I'll have to manually abort all GIANNI tasks.

---

I'm glad to read this thread! Today I started again with crunching since 2 months ago. So I started with short runs GIANNI. But he's already crunching since 16:00 pm and is almost (00:50 am). So a run took more than 31.500 seconds to complete @ my GTX570!!! I thought I had a hard- or software error... I'm glad it isn't only me.

A screenshot over here (Dutch Boinc): http://prntscr.com/16117w
I've taked that screenshot 15 minutes ago. 8 hours and 15 minutes at that moment! :S :S

One of the workunits: http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=4468529

Finally it's done... eh, only 1 WU. The other one caused a lockup of my computer in the last 2 minutes. Arghhh -> computation error -> #$%^&* -_-'

I've only had 4 Gianni tasks since returning to GPUGrid. One ended in with an exit status 255 (0xff) Unknown error number.

The other 3 completed successfully in about 5 hours each. 660 TI, Linux Mint.

Will real short tasks come back?
I mean I thought those were really abnormally long, but it's worst than that.
In my tasks list, long tasks (I have 2) are all below 68200s of working time, while the recent "short" ones (I have 3) are over 68200s (2 are over 70000s).

I know I don't have what you call a "fastest card", but 19 hours of work for a 2~3 hours task, the gap is a bit overkill.

I know I don't have what you call a "fastest card", but 19 hours of work for a 2~3 hours task, the gap is a bit overkill.

Lol, indeed... :/

Hi: Actually these tasks should not be considered SHORT. In my GTX 590 are at about >25,000 sec.

That is by no means a short task, based on the parameters it has set GPUGRID.

As in the past that have also been discussed, the evaluation criteria for this project are very random and little respect for their own guidelines. Greetings.

On the fastest GPU (now a GTX680) Gianni WU's take <4h. That is less than an hour outside the Short queue's approximation of 2-3 hours, and a very long way from typical Long queue WU's, on the GTX680 (8 to 12h).

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

On the fastest GPU (now a GTX680) Gianni WU's take <4h. That is less than an hour outside the Short queue's approximation of 2-3 hours, and a very long way from typical Long queue WU's, on the GTX680 (8 to 12h).

Hello: ¿ By that criterion within little time calculation base is the GTX TITAN ...?.

Sorry but I think it would have weighed an average / high among the series GTX5xx GTX6xx and not everyone has the GTX680 or TITAN, GTX780 or soon. Greetings.

I completed a GIANNI (I0R56-GIANNI_VIL1-2-3-RND5973_1) in ~9 hours, receiving ~26K. This means a day of these WUs would get me ~70K. A single Long SDOERR got me 135K in 18 hours. In average, just doing SDOERR Longs will get me ~180K per day.

Sorry, no contest, I'm disabling Short WUs. At least these GIANNIs are seriously wrong-rated as Short and their gain is seriously low. They need to be re-evaluated.

Edit: I have a GTX 650Ti