1435

Message boards : Comments and discussion : 1435
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile DoctorNow
Project donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 05
Posts: 403
Credit: 2,189,214
RAC: 7
Message 11272 - Posted: 7 Apr 2012, 5:09:03 UTC
Last modified: 7 Apr 2012, 5:10:47 UTC

I think this session should be marked as slow. I have a WU that is at ca. 61%, already runs for over 11 hours and none of my wingmen finished it yet although they have more cores as me. Progress of 0,001 per second and 100% core usage shows at least that it's not a stuck WU. ;-)

Edit:
As 1436 is the other side I guess it's the same there.

Edit 2:
Somehow I created two threads for this now. That wasn't intended, sorry... ;-)
Life is Science, and Science rules. To the universe and beyond
Proud member of BOINC@Heidelberg
My BOINC-Stats
ID: 11272 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile DoctorNow
Project donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 05
Posts: 403
Credit: 2,189,214
RAC: 7
Message 11273 - Posted: 7 Apr 2012, 15:11:04 UTC

Interesting, finished the WU first with almost 18 hours...
Life is Science, and Science rules. To the universe and beyond
Proud member of BOINC@Heidelberg
My BOINC-Stats
ID: 11273 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Janus
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 04
Posts: 4574
Credit: 2,100,463
RAC: 8
Message 11274 - Posted: 8 Apr 2012, 16:33:05 UTC - in response to Message 11273.  

It does indeed seem to be a little slow. Not as slow as the other slow ones, but still slower than the fast ones. I've pushed it down the priority queue a bit.
ID: 11274 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
tuankiet65

Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 12
Posts: 4
Credit: 76,612
RAC: 0
Message 11502 - Posted: 30 Oct 2012, 5:11:51 UTC
Last modified: 30 Oct 2012, 5:12:19 UTC

ID: 11502 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
noderaser
Project donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Mar 06
Posts: 516
Credit: 1,567,702
RAC: 0
Message 11673 - Posted: 25 Mar 2013, 22:55:56 UTC

This one certainly seems to be having a rough time... Lots of app crashes, aborted, over deadline, etc.
Click here to see My Detailed BOINC Stats
ID: 11673 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Speedy

Send message
Joined: 25 May 06
Posts: 208
Credit: 676,104
RAC: 0
Message 11691 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 20:17:04 UTC
Last modified: 31 Mar 2013, 20:21:35 UTC

When I checked on Task 7321710 to see whether or not it been validated I saw that two copies of it had been but mine being marked as in valid because of this no credit has been granted. Validate state = invalid I have had a look at the task output and I cannot see anything that tells me why this task has marked as invalid. Is there any particular reason why this has been marked as invalid and will I get credit granted for my 6.19 hours of run time?Thanks in advance for explaining this situation
Have a crunching good day
ID: 11691 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Speedy

Send message
Joined: 25 May 06
Posts: 208
Credit: 676,104
RAC: 0
Message 11729 - Posted: 6 Apr 2013, 9:48:03 UTC - in response to Message 11691.  

This session has passed the record of sorts. We have processed 86% of it in a year.
Have a crunching good day
ID: 11729 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
zombie67 [MM]
Project donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Dec 06
Posts: 93
Credit: 2,492,267
RAC: 649
Message 11785 - Posted: 19 Apr 2013, 2:04:10 UTC
Last modified: 19 Apr 2013, 2:06:02 UTC

79% complete, 26 wall clock hours elapsed for a task, and many of those hours have used almost no CPU at all. 7 threads are allocated to this MT task, all sitting idle. My wingman did it in 146k CPU seconds. So my 7 thread machine should have been able to do that in about 6 hours. Should I abort?

Also odd, the task status on my host page:

17 Apr 2013 | 15:50:41 UTC 18 Apr 2013 | 9:50:41 UTC Timed out - no response

Less than a day deadline? That can't be right.

http://burp.renderfarming.net/workunit.php?wuid=1802444
Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

ID: 11785 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
zombie67 [MM]
Project donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Dec 06
Posts: 93
Credit: 2,492,267
RAC: 649
Message 11786 - Posted: 19 Apr 2013, 4:09:08 UTC

It turns out that BOINC will not let me suspend this one task, and request more tasks while waiting for a response. "Not requesting tasks: some task is suspended via Manager" Brilliant.
Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

ID: 11786 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile DoctorNow
Project donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 05
Posts: 403
Credit: 2,189,214
RAC: 7
Message 11787 - Posted: 19 Apr 2013, 8:11:39 UTC - in response to Message 11785.  

79% complete, 26 wall clock hours elapsed for a task, and many of those hours have used almost no CPU at all. 7 threads are allocated to this MT task, all sitting idle. My wingman did it in 146k CPU seconds. So my 7 thread machine should have been able to do that in about 6 hours. Should I abort?

Also odd, the task status on my host page:

17 Apr 2013 | 15:50:41 UTC 18 Apr 2013 | 9:50:41 UTC Timed out - no response

Less than a day deadline? That can't be right.

http://burp.renderfarming.net/workunit.php?wuid=1802444

Judging that your wingman xPOD has finished this WU in about 6 hours you should have finished this WU in about 10-12 hours with your machine.
If it runs for over 26 hours now with this behaviour you can abort this task, because you probably hit the "never ending running task"-bug here, which happens from time to time to the Sunflower-WUs. Had this two or three times myself.
Life is Science, and Science rules. To the universe and beyond
Proud member of BOINC@Heidelberg
My BOINC-Stats
ID: 11787 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : Comments and discussion : 1435