Posts by old_user2467

61) Message boards : Number crunching : Again sec/TS is abnormal rising... (Message 10868) Posted 14 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Well... I made some additional calculations about history: <pre> Phase Timestep CPU Time innertrickle speed 2 151228 1464633 4,155156453 2 140426 1419749 4,960099981 2 129624 1366170 5,861692279 2 118822 1302852 5,478707647 2 108020 1243671 5,259026106 2 97218 1186863 4,968154046 2 86416 1133197 3,721347899 2 75614 1092999 4,060451768 2 64812 1049138 3,193390113 2 54010 1014643 3,121088687 2 43208 980929 3,772079245 2 32406 940183 3,959081652 2 21604 897417 3,119144603 2 10802 863724 1,301610813 1 259248 849664 4,362988335 1 248446 802535 3,674041844 1 237644 762848 3,658489169 1 226842 723329 3,579707462 1 216040 684661 3,504813923 1 205238 646802 3,586835771 1 194436 608057 3,511571931 1 183634 570125 3,147380115 1 172832 536127 3,155989632 1 162030 502036 3,121088687 1 151228 468322 3,200240696 1 140426 433753 3,081466395 1 129624 400467 3,048879837 1 118822 367533 3,182095908 1 108020 333160 3,134419552 1 97218 299302 3,065358267 1 86416 266190 3,055545269 1 75614 233184 3,165154601 1 64812 198994 3,084151083 1 54010 165679 3,050546195 1 43208 132727 3,071005369 1 32406 99554 3,173949269 1 21604 65269 2,987317163 1 10802 33000 3,054989817 </pre> As one can see the processing speed of every 10802 TS at phase 1 is very stable. Only at phase 2 the model is claiming more and more CPU time with an additional need of 50% at average and 85% at the highest compared to the whole average. Can't this be explained with normal model behavior? Ciao, Tom
62) Message boards : Number crunching : Again sec/TS is abnormal rising... (Message 10842) Posted 14 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Thx for your answers! @Stratcat: I didn't know of this thermal issue. I thougt the thermal management only reduces CPU frequency. Ok. I donwloaded ThrottleWatch as you mentioned and run it on my p4 notebook. The graphs are showing that cpu frequency is normal at 2400Mhz but TM1 Throttling throws about 0 to 50%. But I don't know whether this happened also several days ago as there the sec/TS where still normal. How can I see thermal throttling with the normal win taskman? @Honza I run defragmentation but without seeing any heavy fragmentation. Additionally I excluded the Boinc folder from virusdetection, but this was'nt the case as processing speed where still normal. Maybe its now running a little bit faster. @all Look again at the <a href="http://climateapps2.oucs.ox.ac.uk/cpdnboinc/trickle.php?resultid=391890">Trickle History</a> of this host. It reported one trickle yesterday evening with an innertrickle processing speed of 4.98 sec/TS. The innertrickle speed one trickle before was 5.86 much higher. Maybe due to thermal throttling. But maybe due to something else? Thx, Tom
63) Message boards : Number crunching : Again sec/TS is abnormal rising... (Message 10806) Posted 13 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: > - Memory leaks System provides 448MB Ram (cause of sharing with video) and hdasm3um is currently using about 55MB. The paging file seems to be normal with about 244MB. > - other CPU-Intensive background tasks No other tasks with permanently significant CPU loads. Hadsm3um gets about 97 to 99 perc. > - Screensaver Gui is installed cause of getting more flexibility. No screensaver is running. Display is mostly shutdown. No hadsm visualization is used. > - LogOn/LogOff policies System is always logged in. For more informations about the host <a href="http://microtoxic.ath.cx/cpuz.htm"> look at detailed output of cpuz</a> Thx & Ciao, Tom
64) Message boards : Number crunching : Again sec/TS is abnormal rising... (Message 10795) Posted 13 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: I checked the Core Speed after running CPDN on this Notebook for about 4 hours and it runs with 2.4GHz as it should. A point to mention some trickles ago the model chrashed without reporting error to sheduler and it begann calculating the current trickle from the beginning. But this happend some trickles ago. Now it is working fine despite the increasing calculation time. I think its not normal that processing speed rises across model from 3.17 to 5.86. Theres something wrong.
65) Message boards : Number crunching : Again sec/TS is abnormal rising... (Message 10777) Posted 12 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Hi, look at this <a href="http://climateapps2.oucs.ox.ac.uk/cpdnboinc/trickle.php?resultid=391890">host and it' trickles</a>... At the beginning of model this machine needed about 3.17 sec/TS. But the consumed CPU time was rising along model progress. Actually it needed 5.86 sec/TS to complete the 10802TS for the last trickle. One trickle before this it was 5.48sec/TS. What causes sec/TS to rise so abnormaly? The setup of may machine has'nt changed scince model start. Thx & Ciao, Tom
66) Message boards : Number crunching : Lost work. (Message 10532) Posted 7 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: > Is there any way of getting the last trickle or WU,...or whatever; > from CPDN to continue the proccessing? If you don't have saved it yourself, the answer is no. Ciao, Tom
67) Message boards : Number crunching : Bad for CPU to run 100%, 24/7 @ 62 degrees? (Message 10422) Posted 5 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: > Many of the people who really care tend to assemble their own machines > anyway. That's the point. Buyers of assembly-lined pc's normally are'nt the users that care about tweaking their pcs. The problem of this machines are simply the mostly insufficient possibilities of overclocking or upgrading. So PC manufactures are assembling most likely low budget components or quality parts with reduced tweaking possibilities. > Years of experience suggest to me that PC cases are an underappreciated > aspect of computing. But I think only to useres that don't care about it. But you have the possibilities of choosing a case that suits modern aspects of high performance pc's. But one may not make the mistake to believe this cases are cheap. Cheaper cases are'nt in the quality of highperformance needs. So you've the possibility to get well designed components, you only have to realize and assign them. Ciao, Tom
68) Message boards : Number crunching : .7 sec/TS difference in computation of phase 1 or 2 (Message 10380) Posted 4 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Processing has normalized. The second trickle of phase 2 has needed the normal 26000 seconds. Now the globe looks also normal. How it looked during the abnormal trickle phase I don't know. So now all seems to be normal but the fast trickle remains mystery. Ciao, Tom
69) Message boards : Number crunching : backup and restore WU (models) (Message 10361) Posted 4 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Thanks Andrew for your explanations! Ciao, Tom
70) Message boards : Number crunching : .7 sec/TS difference in computation of phase 1 or 2 (Message 10356) Posted 4 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Taking a closer look at the first trickle of phase 2 one can see that this host only needed 6908 sec of CPU Time. Normaly it needs about 26000 seconds. The resulting speed of the first trickle with its 6908 sec for its 10802 TS lies about<b> 0,64 sec / TS</b>. There seems to be something wrong! I don't know what but it looks like. Ciao, Tom
71) Message boards : Number crunching : .7 sec/TS difference in computation of phase 1 or 2 (Message 10348) Posted 4 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Hi, this morning at utc I completed with <a href="http://climateapps2.oucs.ox.ac.uk/cpdnboinc/show_host_detail.php?hostid=86867">this machine</a> pase 1 of current model. It just took 2.42xx sec per timestep to compute. Now this host is running phase 2 of this model with current speed of 2.35xx sec/TS. There were no changes to hardware or software setup of this host. I could'nt saw this at any other host of my farm yet. Any minds? Ciao, Tom
72) Message boards : Number crunching : backup and restore WU (models) (Message 10343) Posted 4 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: > CPDN allows computation of WUs to be resumed in these cases. Even where the > server state shows an error, it will continue to accept trickles and the final > result files. Credit will only be given on work returned beyond the failure > point. Thanks! This was new for me. But on reporting a crashed wu you normally get new work. What you're doing with this? Storing it to crunch it after completing the formerly crashed wu? But on reproting the formerly crashed wu as finished you get an additional new wu? Or recognizes the sheduler that he has allready given you a new wu? Just confused. Ciao, Tom
73) Message boards : Number crunching : backup and restore WU (models) (Message 10341) Posted 4 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: I've problems to understand the following. Maybe somebody can explain this? You want to backup the cpdn model 'cause of lost models? Means this they crashed on computation? But does'nt boinc contacts the sheduler in this case and reports this workunit as completed with computation error? What makes it sense to compute further on this model. Is'nt it that you will get no further credit on this wu? Ciao, Tom
74) Message boards : Number crunching : Model going defunct shortly after starting (Message 10287) Posted 3 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Maybe the hadsm3 4.10 executable is damaged? Perhaps a reset of project may work? ciao, tom
75) Message boards : Number crunching : seti project renamed as climate prediction (Message 10285) Posted 3 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: but be careful do'nt change areas enclosed in signed_xml> tags.
76) Message boards : Number crunching : Moving Goal Post (Message 10284) Posted 3 Mar 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Take simply a copy of the complete BOINC Folder to CD or any removable drive, then reinstall your system with clean win xp2 then recopy the saved copy of complete BOINC project to your clean system. That should work, since it functioned with me so far on each computer. Ciao, Tom
77) Message boards : Number crunching : Totally lost (Message 9888) Posted 24 Feb 2005 by old_user2467 Post: >I like 4.23 and would prefer to keep using it. > I didn't checked out v4.23 yet. I'm always using v4.19. Can you tell why you would prefer 4.23? Are there new features? Or why? On any new version 'till now I didn't found any new features. I updated cause it was mentioned by the sheduler. The only changed setting I recognized 'till v4.19 was the new handling of backing work on hosts.
78) Message boards : Number crunching : Are you teamless? (Message 9753) Posted 22 Feb 2005 by old_user2467 Post: > What's wrong with me offering a discount. No one has to buy travel from my > site. I'm simply looking for a way to get people to join my group. > > If you don't want to, fine, don't. > > Like I said in my original post on this, no one here is compensated for their > crunching, but a lot of people end up spending a lot of money on electricity > and buying/upgrading equipment jsut to crunch. That's great. That's what they > decided to do. > BUT, at the same time if they are going to travel, why not get it at a > discounted rate as my way of saying for me to personally say thank you for > crunching!?! And you are so honorous to compensate users for their effort? And that simply without any minds behind? Whats your benefit from doing so? And consider that the users are not able to reconstruct whether they are really getting a discount or not. So it seems to me you're only advertising your business with offering an honorous behaviour and the benefit lies only with you in geeting new customers that pay in the final result the original price.
79) Message boards : Number crunching : Is there a problem with uploader1.atm.ox.ac.uk? (Message 9650) Posted 20 Feb 2005 by old_user2467 Post: > Dumb noob question, but how can I change my uploader to the suisse handler? My > current upload handler is the one in question, and I have had too many > retries. Running OSX... > > thx, dave > I don't know whether it is allowed to change the handlerurl of the results... but perhaps you may try it and post your results... but be better backing your client_state.xml before proceding... if it is allowed the destination of your changes should be the following i think: ======================================= \|file_info\| \|name\|1r0d_400102496_1_5.zip\|/name\| \|nbytes\|0.000000\|/nbytes\| \|max_nbytes\|5000000.000000\|/max_nbytes\| \|generated_locally/\| \|status\|0\|/status\| \|upload_when_present/\| <b>\|url\|http://phkup21.unibe.ch/boinc/file_upload_handler\|/url\|</b> \|signed_xml\| \|name\|1r0d_400102496_1_5.zip\|/name\| \|generated_locally/\| \|upload_when_present/\| \|max_nbytes\|5000000\|/max_nbytes\| \|url\| http://phkup21.unibe.ch/boinc/file_upload_handler \|/url\| \|/signed_xml\| \|xml_signature\| 4a94eeae403ac910a0332ef67e6b2afc704ea77f42faf0cfee8d159c91494740 41d6491036968191e720d0cbf88f199cfbf1adcc155bdb0e22a0b9c2e00475d0 6abfbf9bf583a7a9a1c1714290221b5fc6f474d496653d88e7f958a46fbf3035 bcb4ce015b27bcbb8fe2049c2eaf7574d8a994961071c20b54e5d7a3ebf90d52 . \|/xml_signature\| ========================= but don't change the "signed_xml" areas... i believe to remember that changes to this areas are nonvalid...
80) Message boards : Number crunching : Is there a problem with uploader1.atm.ox.ac.uk? (Message 9636) Posted 20 Feb 2005 by old_user2467 Post: Only one machine of me has completed a new trickle, but I could upload this to "http://phkup21.unibe.ch/boinc/file_upload_handler" without any problems. Ciao, Tom > Same problem for me. Can't upload my (crashed) model. > >

Previous 20 · Next 20