Message boards :
Number crunching :
I652-SANTI_baxbimSPW-0-62-RND0982_0
Message board moderation
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Send message Joined: 18 Oct 13 Posts: 53 Credit: 406,647,419 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I652-SANTI_baxbimSPW-0-62-RND0982_0 Packet =4948744 This file is now over 6 hrs crunching ready only 52% Display Resttime: 1:35 This could'nt be |
|
Send message Joined: 11 Jul 09 Posts: 1639 Credit: 10,159,968,649 RAC: 318 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes, I have a similar one from the 'short' queue - just approaching 95% after 16 hours on a GTX 470. Looks like it's making slow but steady progress and should complete within the hour - though outside 24 hours from when it was issued. Perhaps there was a muddle which queue these tasks should be loaded into? I60-SANTI_baxbimSPW-0-62-RND2323_0 |
|
Send message Joined: 14 Oct 11 Posts: 31 Credit: 81,420,504 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"Me too": http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=4948159 To abort or not to abort... that is the question. - Current time: 10h16m - Estimated remaining: 2h4m, but this number decreases by 1s every 9s clock time. - When this WU ran on another computer, it exited after 13s with "The simulation has become unstable. Terminating to avoid lock-up (1)" So my projection is more like "20h remaining" if BOINC's estimate doesn't decelerate further (which I suspect it will). Yup, I think I just answered my own question: abort. :-) |
|
Send message Joined: 15 Oct 11 Posts: 17 Credit: 81,085,378 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
%17.75 after twelve hours. Knocks the crap outa the system.High CPU useage. Computer basically unusable while crunching. If I suspend workunit, BOINC?? craps out and I get low ( %5 - %30) GPU usuage and very little progress.After reboot GPU usage between %85 - %90 but still very slow crunching. Wrong "queue" ?? http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7494659 http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7494640 |
|
Send message Joined: 5 Mar 13 Posts: 348 Credit: 0 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() |
Looking into it |
StoneagemanSend message Joined: 25 May 09 Posts: 224 Credit: 34,057,374,498 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
These 'short tasks' have all the hallmarks of long tasks except for the credit |
dskagcommunitySend message Joined: 28 Apr 11 Posts: 463 Credit: 958,266,958 RAC: 31 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why i reactiveded short queue -_- got the same.. DSKAG Austria Research Team: http://www.research.dskag.at
|
|
Send message Joined: 18 Oct 13 Posts: 53 Credit: 406,647,419 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Puh Starttime 10:00 o'clock yesterday in the morning now it's midnight 2:00 o'clock crunching time round about 16 Hrs ! This was never a short part.... My GPU is so hot I can fry eggs on it |
|
Send message Joined: 5 Mar 13 Posts: 348 Credit: 0 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() |
Yes you are right, we apologize a lot. There was a mistake in the sending of the WUs and they were indeed configured for the long queue. Santi has hopefully by now stopped all further WUs (but we won't cancel currently running ones so that people don't lose credit). I assume he will resend today with correct configuration. |
|
Send message Joined: 11 Jul 09 Posts: 1639 Credit: 10,159,968,649 RAC: 318 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes you are right, we apologize a lot. There was a mistake in the sending of the WUs and they were indeed configured for the long queue. Santi has hopefully by now stopped all further WUs (but we won't cancel currently running ones so that people don't lose credit). I assume he will resend today with correct configuration. That seems to have worked - I got new work from the short queue this morning, which looked identical from the outside (SANTI_baxbimSPW2-0-62- sequence, same estimated runtime) but completed in 4 hours instead of 16 hours... ... and was given exactly the same credit! All tasks for host 43404 |
dskagcommunitySend message Joined: 28 Apr 11 Posts: 463 Credit: 958,266,958 RAC: 31 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes you are right, we apologize a lot. There was a mistake in the sending of the WUs and they were indeed configured for the long queue. Santi has hopefully by now stopped all further WUs (but we won't cancel currently running ones so that people don't lose credit). I assume he will resend today with correct configuration. This time i would cancel them..we are talking about 17k credits only what some lose for one unit. Much time lost ok, but i already canceld my unit, because beginning from a fresh long unit give me much more credits then computing the wrong queued unit to the final. DSKAG Austria Research Team: http://www.research.dskag.at
|
|
Send message Joined: 5 Mar 13 Posts: 348 Credit: 0 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() |
Yes we debated it a bit. At this point it's up to the users to cancel them. But considering the complaints last time we accidentally "nuked" them (as we call that type of cancelling now) we thought it better to let it run its hopefully short course and continue with the good WUs. I don't know how many of the bad ones are still running. We will take a look at it. |
skgivenSend message Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The WU's are not bad, its just that the credit is poor/wrong. FAQ's HOW TO: - Opt out of Beta Tests - Ask for Help |
|
Send message Joined: 11 Jul 09 Posts: 1639 Credit: 10,159,968,649 RAC: 318 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Conversely, the new trypsin_lig_356x4-NOELIA_RC5-0-1- series seems to be running for the same time, but paying almost twice as much credit (same host link as last time). Swings and roundabouts... |
skgivenSend message Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I was thinking of the old Hot and Cold taps, where the red and blue colours use to ware off, and in some houses the taps were back to front, so you had to guess which was hot and which was cold. Maybe the short Trp WU's are being granting credit according to the Long credit system (50% bonus)? FAQ's HOW TO: - Opt out of Beta Tests - Ask for Help |
©2025 Universitat Pompeu Fabra