New application L2.04 / W2.02 - Feedback


Advanced search

Message boards : SZTAKI Desktop Grid : New application L2.04 / W2.02 - Feedback

AuthorMessage
larry1186
Send message
Joined: Sep 25 06
Posts: 37
Credit: 18,502
RAC: 0
Message 4628 - Posted 9 Nov 2006 17:44:11 UTC

    Last modified: 9 Nov 2006 17:45:45 UTC

    I just noticed that the BOINC manager says it\'s using \"search 2.02\" and it was downloaded about 15 minutes ago. The first WU to complete took about 5 minutes, 50 lines. Is this version any different from the 2.02 we downloaded and renamed to 2.01?

    [edit]for WinXP[/edit]
    ____________
    Don't get distracted by shiny objects.

    Stick
    Send message
    Joined: Jun 12 06
    Posts: 193
    Credit: 66,271
    RAC: 0
    Message 4629 - Posted 9 Nov 2006 18:02:36 UTC - in response to Message 4628.

      I just noticed that the BOINC manager says it\'s using \"search 2.02\" and it was downloaded about 15 minutes ago. The first WU to complete took about 5 minutes, 50 lines. Is this version any different from the 2.02 we downloaded and renamed to 2.01?

      [edit]for WinXP[/edit]


      This message from Adam appears to be related.

      ____________

      Profile Nightbird
      Forum moderator
      Avatar
      Send message
      Joined: Jul 12 05
      Posts: 920
      Credit: 114,924
      RAC: 0
      Message 4634 - Posted 10 Nov 2006 7:39:24 UTC

        Last modified: 10 Nov 2006 7:39:57 UTC

        Feedback, please
        ____________

        Profile Nightbird
        Forum moderator
        Avatar
        Send message
        Joined: Jul 12 05
        Posts: 920
        Credit: 114,924
        RAC: 0
        Message 4635 - Posted 10 Nov 2006 7:54:28 UTC

          It doesn\'t crash on my Barton 3200+.
          ____________

          larry1186
          Send message
          Joined: Sep 25 06
          Posts: 37
          Credit: 18,502
          RAC: 0
          Message 4637 - Posted 10 Nov 2006 15:17:17 UTC - in response to Message 4634.

            Feedback, please


            Using W2.02:
            Four WUs (11155, 7478, 11259, 22526) completed on Intel P4, 3.06 GHz, Win XP Pro, SP2.

            Doesn\'t crash here.
            ____________
            Don't get distracted by shiny objects.

            Niquet
            Send message
            Joined: Feb 16 06
            Posts: 10
            Credit: 141,856
            RAC: 0
            Message 4639 - Posted 10 Nov 2006 19:13:54 UTC

              With 2.02, WU 22565 is working so far (76% completed) on my Athlon XP 2200+.
              ____________

              Profile Nightbird
              Forum moderator
              Avatar
              Send message
              Joined: Jul 12 05
              Posts: 920
              Credit: 114,924
              RAC: 0
              Message 4640 - Posted 10 Nov 2006 22:47:20 UTC

                Last modified: 10 Nov 2006 22:47:53 UTC

                The 2.02 needs the speed of the 2.01 but it\'s better than the 2.00.
                ____________

                Profile Klaus Rupprecht
                Send message
                Joined: Jan 30 06
                Posts: 1
                Credit: 11,564
                RAC: 0
                Message 4642 - Posted 11 Nov 2006 4:57:37 UTC

                  Using 2.02, there is no crash on my AMD Athlon XP 2800+.

                  ____________

                  STOLTZ
                  Send message
                  Joined: Mar 5 06
                  Posts: 1
                  Credit: 52,106
                  RAC: 0
                  Message 4643 - Posted 11 Nov 2006 6:03:43 UTC

                    2.02 doesn\'t crash on my AMD Sempron 2600+.
                    However if I let SZDG run for about an hour then switch to another project and back the percent complete will advance. The Exit Status is still 0 but it seams the results might be flawed if I can terminate the processing of a line on demand.
                    ____________

                    Profile idahofisherman
                    Avatar
                    Send message
                    Joined: Sep 17 06
                    Posts: 6
                    Credit: 32,124
                    RAC: 1
                    Message 4652 - Posted 13 Nov 2006 1:29:19 UTC

                      The new SEARCH 2.02 has been running about 8 hours of CPU time on one WU, but the completion time (00:56:57) and progress time (00.000) have not changed one iota. Is this a problem? Do I need to cancel these WUs?
                      ____________

                      Profile idahofisherman
                      Avatar
                      Send message
                      Joined: Sep 17 06
                      Posts: 6
                      Credit: 32,124
                      RAC: 1
                      Message 4653 - Posted 13 Nov 2006 1:37:35 UTC - in response to Message 4652.

                        The new SEARCH 2.02 has been running about 8 hours of CPU time on one WU, but the completion time (00:56:57) and progress time (00.000) have not changed one iota. Is this a problem? Do I need to cancel these WUs?


                        In looking at my results. It shows that the last WUs I received are scheduled to complete before the date they were sent. How is this possible? And is this the reason for the above problems?
                        ____________

                        Odysseus
                        Avatar
                        Send message
                        Joined: Feb 27 06
                        Posts: 212
                        Credit: 221,397
                        RAC: 0
                        Message 4655 - Posted 13 Nov 2006 6:30:18 UTC - in response to Message 4653.

                          Last modified: 13 Nov 2006 6:31:14 UTC

                          In looking at my results. It shows that the last WUs I received are scheduled to complete before the date they were sent. How is this possible? And is this the reason for the above problems?

                          Where are you seeing that? If it’s a time shown in the “To completion” column in the Tasks tab of BOINC Manager, that’s BOINC’s estimate of how long the WU will take, not the clock-time when it will be done. Such estimates are practically meaningless for this project, as the crunching times vary enormously—it’s best for your blood pressure to ignore them. (That said, after you’ve crunched a number of WUs the estimates should improve. You can see how BOINC is adjusting them at the bottom of your Computer Summary page: the “Result duration correction factor” is multiplied by the project’s estimate for each task, so that once the BOINC client has some experience with a project it knows how much work to ask for. This value grows more easily than it shrinks, to prevent a run of short WUs from making the client over-confident.)
                          ____________

                          ifg@work
                          Send message
                          Joined: Jul 12 05
                          Posts: 13
                          Credit: 103,819
                          RAC: 0
                          Message 4657 - Posted 13 Nov 2006 12:37:06 UTC

                            There are two 2.02 versions existing. One is distributed automatically (size: 436 k)and the other, an inofficial one, sized 196 k. The latter one is crunching much, much faster BUT has a big disadvantage: even with the same file name it is rejected by the project and all downloaded WUs are marked to be erroneous even before they are crunched.

                            So, what is the difference of these two versions and why is the faster one rejected by the project ?

                            Profile Nightbird
                            Forum moderator
                            Avatar
                            Send message
                            Joined: Jul 12 05
                            Posts: 920
                            Credit: 114,924
                            RAC: 0
                            Message 4660 - Posted 14 Nov 2006 0:55:50 UTC - in response to Message 4657.

                              Last modified: 14 Nov 2006 1:11:55 UTC

                              There are two 2.02 versions existing. One is distributed automatically (size: 436 k)and the other, an inofficial one, sized 196 k. The latter one is crunching much, much faster BUT has a big disadvantage: even with the same file name it is rejected by the project and all downloaded WUs are marked to be erroneous even before they are crunched.

                              So, what is the difference of these two versions and why is the faster one rejected by the project ?

                              I will think about because i\'ve got the same problem on my A64 X2 4400+.
                              Need to check.

                              ____________

                              Stick
                              Send message
                              Joined: Jun 12 06
                              Posts: 193
                              Credit: 66,271
                              RAC: 0
                              Message 4661 - Posted 14 Nov 2006 2:11:20 UTC - in response to Message 4660.

                                Last modified: 14 Nov 2006 2:57:03 UTC

                                There are two 2.02 versions existing. One is distributed automatically (size: 436 k)and the other, an inofficial one, sized 196 k. The latter one is crunching much, much faster BUT has a big disadvantage: even with the same file name it is rejected by the project and all downloaded WUs are marked to be erroneous even before they are crunched.

                                So, what is the difference of these two versions and why is the faster one rejected by the project ?

                                I will think about because i\'ve got the same problem on my A64 X2 4400+.
                                Need to check.


                                As Adam said in this message, the newer (larger) 2.02 is not optimized. The older (smaller) 2.02 was his first attempt at fixing the problem (and it didn\'t fix anything). No telling whether there are differences in the code or just in the compilation. For the record, the older/smaller 2.02 works OK on my Intel P4 and M computers.

                                EDIT: I just rechecked and although I thought I was running the older/smaller 2.02, it appears that the server is re-downloading the newer/larger version and installing it over the older version.
                                ____________

                                Profile [B^S] Doug Worrall
                                Avatar
                                Send message
                                Joined: Sep 9 05
                                Posts: 15
                                Credit: 1,454
                                RAC: 0
                                Message 4662 - Posted 14 Nov 2006 3:30:09 UTC

                                  Last modified: 14 Nov 2006 3:44:34 UTC

                                  Hope it is alright to ask a quick question in this thread Nightbird,
                                  Just rehooked to Sztaki, after a 6 Month Hietus. Many changes. Am running a Linux
                                  Box. Downloaded 2 w/u named \"search 2.04\"
                                  What is the \"Mean\" size , or average time, of this paticular w/u ?
                                  Presently am 2 hours and 22 Minutes, at, 59.999%, for the last Hour.Completion
                                  time is 1.18.46.

                                  I apologise for possibly using the wrong thread, have only one P.C., so, Posting
                                  and reading takes too much crunching time away, even running BOINC 24-7.

                                  \"Edited\":Post Mon Nov 13 22:49:17 2006|SZTAKI Desktop Grid|Resuming task 1a9d6387-6dd8-4e3d-a31c-ae75a2daaf6d_aefb01e8-e188-45c4-908f-eb113ffeda33_2379_3 using search version 204


                                  I ended the sesion, the w/u then jumed too 80% complete.I always remebered
                                  Sztaki, too have very stable units.

                                  Thanks Nightbird
                                  Doug
                                  ____________


                                  Profile Nightbird
                                  Forum moderator
                                  Avatar
                                  Send message
                                  Joined: Jul 12 05
                                  Posts: 920
                                  Credit: 114,924
                                  RAC: 0
                                  Message 4663 - Posted 14 Nov 2006 7:38:22 UTC - in response to Message 4662.

                                    Last modified: 15 Nov 2006 21:10:25 UTC

                                    Hope it is alright to ask a quick question in this thread Nightbird,
                                    Just rehooked to Sztaki, after a 6 Month Hietus. Many changes. Am running a Linux Box. Downloaded 2 w/u named \"search 2.04\"
                                    What is the \"Mean\" size , or average time, of this paticular w/u ?
                                    Presently am 2 hours and 22 Minutes, at, 59.999%, for the last Hour.Completion
                                    time is 1.18.46.

                                    I apologise for possibly using the wrong thread, have only one P.C., so, Posting
                                    and reading takes too much crunching time away, even running BOINC 24-7.

                                    \"Edited\":Post Mon Nov 13 22:49:17 2006|SZTAKI Desktop Grid|Resuming task 1a9d6387-6dd8-4e3d-a31c-ae75a2daaf6d_aefb01e8-e188-45c4-908f-eb113ffeda33_2379_3 using search version 204


                                    I ended the sesion, the w/u then jumed too 80% complete.I always remebered
                                    Sztaki, too have very stable units.

                                    Thanks Nightbird
                                    Doug

                                    Yes, Doug many changes.
                                    Time ? well, dont\'t trust what you see in the Boinc manager, at least at the beginning ; after some wus, thanks to the duration correction factor, time will be more accurate.
                                    Anyway time crunching can really vary (minutes, hours, days).
                                    In short, nowadays the project is not easy to run, specially for Windows or Mac users.
                                    (the last 2.02 for Windows is a temporary version)
                                    But since you\'re running a Linux box, things will be perhaps or probably easier.
                                    We would be happy to read some feedback about the last 2.04 for Linux and how the project is running on a Linux box.
                                    Thanks to you.
                                    ____________

                                    Profile Nightbird
                                    Forum moderator
                                    Avatar
                                    Send message
                                    Joined: Jul 12 05
                                    Posts: 920
                                    Credit: 114,924
                                    RAC: 0
                                    Message 4697 - Posted 19 Nov 2006 20:32:16 UTC - in response to Message 4661.

                                      Last modified: 19 Nov 2006 20:33:16 UTC

                                      There are two 2.02 versions existing. One is distributed automatically (size: 436 k)and the other, an inofficial one, sized 196 k. The latter one is crunching much, much faster BUT has a big disadvantage: even with the same file name it is rejected by the project and all downloaded WUs are marked to be erroneous even before they are crunched.

                                      So, what is the difference of these two versions and why is the faster one rejected by the project ?

                                      I will think about because i\'ve got the same problem on my A64 X2 4400+.
                                      Need to check.


                                      As Adam said in this message, the newer (larger) 2.02 is not optimized. The older (smaller) 2.02 was his first attempt at fixing the problem (and it didn\'t fix anything). No telling whether there are differences in the code or just in the compilation. For the record, the older/smaller 2.02 works OK on my Intel P4 and M computers.

                                      EDIT: I just rechecked and although I thought I was running the older/smaller 2.02, it appears that the server is re-downloading the newer/larger version and installing it over the older version.

                                      The test version 2.03 renamed 2.02 will do perhaps the trick.
                                      (i\'m trying it on my A64 X2 4600+ [but unluckily it (only) will work with the cpus supporting the SSE2 instructions] and i need to wait for the validation)

                                      ____________

                                      Stick
                                      Send message
                                      Joined: Jun 12 06
                                      Posts: 193
                                      Credit: 66,271
                                      RAC: 0
                                      Message 4701 - Posted 19 Nov 2006 21:38:03 UTC - in response to Message 4697.

                                        Last modified: 19 Nov 2006 21:40:27 UTC

                                        The test version 2.03 renamed 2.02 will do perhaps the trick.
                                        (i\'m trying it on my A64 X2 4600+ [but unluckily it (only) will work with the cpus supporting the SSE2 instructions] and i need to wait for the validation)


                                        This message from Adam introduces test version 2.03. Note that Adam says it has \"no optimization\" (and that it is also 436KB). Therefore, I would guess that it is very similar the new \"official\" W2.02.
                                        ____________

                                        Profile Nightbird
                                        Forum moderator
                                        Avatar
                                        Send message
                                        Joined: Jul 12 05
                                        Posts: 920
                                        Credit: 114,924
                                        RAC: 0
                                        Message 4702 - Posted 19 Nov 2006 21:43:37 UTC - in response to Message 4701.

                                          Last modified: 20 Nov 2006 0:00:14 UTC

                                          The test version 2.03 renamed 2.02 will do perhaps the trick.
                                          (i\'m trying it on my A64 X2 4600+ [but unluckily it (only) will work with the cpus supporting the SSE2 instructions] and i need to wait for the validation)


                                          This message from Adam introduces test version 2.03. Note that Adam says it has \"no optimization\" (and that it is also 436KB). Therefore, I would guess that it is very similar the new \"official\" W2.02.

                                          I hope that it will be faster than the new 2.02.
                                          (i have presently a wu 247cb2c2 using the 2.03, at 70 % for a completion time 1h54min)

                                          edit :
                                          wu finished : 6,199.23 sec or ~ 1h 43 min

                                          ____________

                                          Profile jamin
                                          Avatar
                                          Send message
                                          Joined: Nov 20 06
                                          Posts: 324
                                          Credit: 100,110
                                          RAC: 0
                                          Message 4724 - Posted 21 Nov 2006 18:33:29 UTC

                                            I\'m possibly writing nothing new ;) but got a WU stuck at 0.00 - restarted BOINC after 8hrs - finished immediately :)
                                            I know, I know - only one (the remaining 4 are pretty ok) - and I\'m not crunching for a long time - just began yesterday :)

                                            Out of plain curiosity - are there any steps taken to overcome this problem? :D
                                            ____________
                                            Bang! Zoom! Right in the kisser!

                                            larry1186
                                            Send message
                                            Joined: Sep 25 06
                                            Posts: 37
                                            Credit: 18,502
                                            RAC: 0
                                            Message 4725 - Posted 21 Nov 2006 19:46:40 UTC - in response to Message 4724.

                                              I\'m possibly writing nothing new ;) but got a WU stuck at 0.00 - restarted BOINC after 8hrs - finished immediately :)
                                              I know, I know - only one (the remaining 4 are pretty ok) - and I\'m not crunching for a long time - just began yesterday :)

                                              Out of plain curiosity - are there any steps taken to overcome this problem? :D

                                              The WU wasn\'t really \"stuck,\" it was one of those 1-line WUs that will only move from 0% complete when it finishes that one line and jumps to 100% complete. If you look at the result the output is empty. That WU also has 4 results sent back, no errors but empty results, and yet no consensus for the minimum quorum of 3.

                                              I have yet to find a result that is \"empty\" and has credit granted. If anyone has an empty result that is granted credit, please speak up.

                                              \"Interrupting\" the WU (by closing BOINC and restarting) sometimes causes the % complete to jump and an empty result. Sometimes it will pick up from the last checkpoint like it should. Personally, I try not to shut down BOINC while I have a SZTAKI WU crunching if at all possible. Just my thoughts, feel free to disagree.
                                              ____________
                                              Don't get distracted by shiny objects.

                                              Profile jamin
                                              Avatar
                                              Send message
                                              Joined: Nov 20 06
                                              Posts: 324
                                              Credit: 100,110
                                              RAC: 0
                                              Message 4727 - Posted 21 Nov 2006 20:02:08 UTC

                                                Last modified: 21 Nov 2006 20:14:07 UTC

                                                I\'m not that eager to disagree :) - nice to know that (is that somehow embedded (or could be in future) in the WU name?) I know you can get number of lines from \"in\" file but not everyone has time to observe the result and open the file just for the fun of it :)

                                                I\'ve noticed earlier that everybody got empty result [edit] when it comes to this WU [/edit] and thought that maybe something\'s wrong with it :/

                                                Thanks Larry for the answer :D

                                                Post to thread

                                                Message boards : SZTAKI Desktop Grid : New application L2.04 / W2.02 - Feedback


                                                Home | My Account | Message Boards


                                                Copyright © 2017 SZTAKI Desktop Grid