| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Beta Testing
Forum: Beta Test Support Forum
Thread: Beta Deadline Issues |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 8
|
|
| Author |
|
|
[B-S] Gamma-Ray
Cruncher Joined: Feb 27, 2008 Post Count: 24 Status: Offline |
I think there should be some added time given to these work units lately. As I just downloaded two 2 6.03's and started crunching on them instantly, and yet will NOT make their deadlines. Here is one of the ones I just downloaded....
----------------------------------------4/19/2008 11:01:42 PM|World Community Grid|Started download of BETA_dddt0202b0062_100019_dddt0202b0062_100019.gpf Which was at 11:01 Pm (My Time), and the deadline for it is 4/20/2008 3:50:04 am. Thats a deadline of apx. 4:48 Hours to run it and yet as of now its been running for 4:42 Hours with another 1:45 hours to go. The other work unit I downloaded about the same time is the same way with the deadlines. They both are already past the deadlines so obviously there was no way to had crunched them in time (No other work units were running against them). I know these are Beta's but I still hate wasting 12 hours of CPU time. G^R [Edit 1 times, last edit by [B-S] Gamma-Ray at Apr 20, 2008 9:55:21 AM] |
||
|
|
Van Fanel
Cruncher Joined: Dec 27, 2006 Post Count: 42 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I had the same problem.
The problem doesn't seem to be on the deadline, but on the time estimated to run. It is clearly underestimated on all my machines. Consequently, my machines download a all bunch of workunits which obviously can't be delivered on time... |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
This was probably caused by the estimation error on the previous beta.
It takes a little while for the estimation to readjust. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hello [B-S] Gamma-Ray,
The only purpose for a deadline on Beta work units is to make BOINC run them quickly. Otherwise, ignore the deadline. Lawrence |
||
|
|
[B-S] Gamma-Ray
Cruncher Joined: Feb 27, 2008 Post Count: 24 Status: Offline |
I see that they were still validated even though returned late (Thanks). I still hope that the deadlines be extended abit, as I wonder how many users may suspend or abort jobs that cannot make it to their deadlines. I do feel that a "Grace" period should be given for work units that may go longer than the average run time (Different machines, Different run times).Lastly, There are times when several work units (Beta) are sent to a machine, Given all of them are so close already to their deadlines the BOINC client goes into "Panic" mode and puts them all on High Priority to which I noticed on my linux box it would suspend one after the user set run time and switch to another work unit etc. Seems this is kinda a waste of cycles since each suspend/resume means starting back over at the last checkpoint. Just some thoughts anyway.
Regards G^R |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
The shortening deadlines is a concatenation of multiple 'make up' copy distributions. The time should be 20% with minimum to match the original distribution deadline. The request to improve the logic was issued, but not done as it could have database performance impact. One work around, i guess, was already to extend AC@H from 5 days to 10 days so 'make-up/repair jobs' would at least get 2 days for this project. 10 days with Beta is obviously a luxury not afforded.... 'Heads down and crunch'.... no one will bite it off if you don't make it :D
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
breathesgelatin
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Aug 5, 2006 Post Count: 117 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The shortening deadlines is a concatenation of multiple 'make up' copy distributions. The time should be 20% with minimum to match the original distribution deadline. The request to improve the logic was issued, but not done as it could have database performance impact. One work around, i guess, was already to extend AC@H from 5 days to 10 days so 'make-up/repair jobs' would at least get 2 days for this project. 10 days with Beta is obviously a luxury not afforded.... 'Heads down and crunch'.... no one will bite it off if you don't make it :D The problem for me is I've been getting DDD-T Betas for which it is the case that even if I start crunching them immediately (and I do), there is no way I can make the deadline. I haven't had the problem with FAAH or the new project Betas. It just seems silly to send out WUs that machines can't possibly finish in time only to have them resent to someone else. I guess if it would affect the database your hands are tied.  |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Yes, as indicated, we know the logic is not perfect, and possibly some batches were automatically canceled when the techs realized thing were in a vicious circle (they not always tell about all the balls they are juggling). I understand the beta went very well and was ahead of schedule, so we'll see next if and when more testing is needed in these volumes of thousands or just a few hundred to dot the eye.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
|