Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
![]() |
World Community Grid Forums
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
No member browsing this thread |
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 104
|
![]() |
Author |
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3715 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
It seems there are much different series.
----------------------------------------The first WU I got is in the E000007 batch and it behaves as you have said: relatively short (about the same as a HCC), progressing regularly, small RAM and very few page faults. All others are in the E000370 batch, and it seems to be a completely different story. Very, very slow progression, time to completion slowly but regularly increasing, and a very high rate of page faults (maybe that explains the poor progression?), although RAM is about as low as the E000007 one (40 MB). About page faults: E000007 at 87 %: 543,000 E000370 at 10,3 %: 8,850,000 E000370 at 13 %: 11,120,000 Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
GIBA
Ace Cruncher Joined: Apr 25, 2005 Post Count: 5374 Status: Offline |
With this new round, I got one WU on 3 of my four machines. The good news is, each machine is running a different version of the BOINC client. One the current WCG client, one the recommended Boinc page client, and one the newest "beta" client from the Boinc pages. :) I'll post results when they finish. At the moment they are just in queue to run, not marked high priority. Hey Zanth, will be great to compare if when you post the results, you provide one per one the Hw description and OS Sw from each machine, and the number of BOINC version running in each one. Will be great too, if you could share a little beat more information with us, based on event logs from each WU in each machine, for example, and if something distinct happened during crunching time. In my opinion, appear that you have an excellent sample of WCG kind of distribution, and your comments and feedbacks are very welcome. Thank you in advance. Best Regards. ![]()
Cheers ! GIB@
![]() ![]() Join BRASIL - BRAZIL@GRID team and be very happy ! http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/team/viewTeamInfo.do?teamId=DF99KT5DN1 |
||
|
GIBA
Ace Cruncher Joined: Apr 25, 2005 Post Count: 5374 Status: Offline |
It seems there are much different series. The first WU I got is in the E000007 batch and it behaves as you have said: relatively short (about the same as a HCC), progressing regularly, small RAM and very few page faults. All others are in the E000370 batch, and it seems to be a completely different story. Very, very slow progression, time to completion slowly but regularly increasing, and a very high rate of page faults (maybe that explains the poor progression?), although RAM is about as low as the E000007 one (40 MB). About page faults: E000007 at 87 %: 543,000 E000370 at 10,3 %: 8,850,000 E000370 at 13 %: 11,120,000 Cheers. Jean. Hi Jean, have four E000370 here with similar behavior of yours.
Cheers ! GIB@
![]() ![]() Join BRASIL - BRAZIL@GRID team and be very happy ! http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/team/viewTeamInfo.do?teamId=DF99KT5DN1 |
||
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3715 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I have 6 other ones waiting to start. It seems that I will be OK for the bronze Beta badge this time
----------------------------------------![]() Something else which might interest members with restrictions on their traffic: the E000007 has uploaded 5 MB to the servers. But maybe they return more data during the beta test than they will once in production. Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
Zanth
Advanced Cruncher USA Joined: Aug 18, 2008 Post Count: 88 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
With this new round, I got one WU on 3 of my four machines. The good news is, each machine is running a different version of the BOINC client. One the current WCG client, one the recommended Boinc page client, and one the newest "beta" client from the Boinc pages. :) I'll post results when they finish. At the moment they are just in queue to run, not marked high priority. Hey Zanth, will be great to compare if when you post the results, you provide one per one the Hw description and OS Sw from each machine, and the number of BOINC version running in each one. Will be great too, if you could share a little beat more information with us, based on event logs from each WU in each machine, for example, and if something distinct happened during crunching time. In my opinion, appear that you have an excellent sample of WCG kind of distribution, and your comments and feedbacks are very welcome. Thank you in advance. Best Regards. ![]() Yeah, I'll definitely try to post all that. It seems most of them will finish over night, and I won't have a chance to look at them til after work tomorrow. Assuming I can find them in the logs yet, I'll post it. :) ![]() |
||
|
KLM_Nederlands
Cruncher Joined: Apr 26, 2007 Post Count: 14 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Goeieavond!
I also have a beta WU: BETA_ E000370_ 089A_ 001e8z151_ 0-- In Progress 12/2/08 22:59:46 12/4/08 22:59:46 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 BETA_ E000370_ 089A_ 001e8z151_ 1-- In Progress 12/2/08 22:59:31 12/4/08 22:59:31 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 Currently running the one that ends in _0 but as it is almost 2330 here, I wont know how it goes until the morning and then I will post the result. |
||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Got several across different machines. All Windows systems.
|
||
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3715 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
According to nelsoc's post the current test is only for Windows.
----------------------------------------About the different series I mentioned earlier there is another difference between E000007 and E000370: the former have an initial distribution of 10 for a quorum of 5, while the latter are only in double distribution. It looks like we are really testing two different flavors of the same cake. ![]() Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
Ian_UK
Senior Cruncher England Joined: Oct 15, 2006 Post Count: 153 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
After many months of crunching 24/7 finally got 2 (At current rate will take another 10 years before getting a Bronze badge):
----------------------------------------1) BETA_E000007_091C_000301042_000301042_4 2) BETA_E000370_371A_001e95169_001e95169_0 Unsure if the units relate to different projects, as the number of same units sent out to validate them are different. Both appear to be working fine. Noticed that the number of page faults however are considerably different, due to differences in how I/O is handled. The unit that has been crunching 3 times longer has 10 times less page faults. BETA_E000370_371A_001e95169_001e95169_0 (12% complete) CPU 50% CPU Time 1:24:20 Mem Useage 39,628K Peak Mem Useage: 40,792K Page Faults 8,458,454 VM Size 302,524K I/O Reads 735 I/O Writes 3,365 I/O Other 1,753 I/O Read Bytes 4,506,037 I/O Write Bytes 6,871,199 I/O Other Bytes 200,322 BETA_E000007_091C_000301042_000301042_4 (90% complete) CPU 49% CPU Time 3:22:19 Mem Useage 12,368K Peak Mem Useage 33,012K Page Faults 887,111 VM Size 272,728K I/O Reads 51,415 I/O Writes 92,388 I/O Other 67,403 I/O Read Bytes 345,295,428 I/O Write Bytes 365,558,651 I/O Other Bytes 1,318,338 22/11/2008 08:09:53||Starting BOINC client version 6.2.28 for windows_intelx86 22/11/2008 08:09:53||Processor: 2 GenuineIntel Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6700 @ 2.66GHz [x86 Family 6 Model 15 Stepping 6] 22/11/2008 08:09:53||Processor features: fpu tsc sse sse2 mmx 22/11/2008 08:09:53||OS: Microsoft Windows XP: Professional x86 Editon, Service Pack 3, (05.01.2600.00) 22/11/2008 08:09:53||Memory: 2.87 GB physical, 4.72 GB virtual 22/11/2008 08:09:53||Disk: 894.26 GB total, 819.25 GB free ![]() |
||
|
Rickjb
Veteran Cruncher Australia Joined: Sep 17, 2006 Post Count: 666 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I've received 2 of these betas.
----------------------------------------The first, a E000007-series, ran in 40 min and is currently Pending Validation. I didn't catch all the uploads, but the last upload to finish was 4.08MB. I expect that these large files are full of verbose diagnostics that won't be needed in the production versions. The second, an E000370-series, is still crunching, estimated CPU time over 9hrs. On BOINC 6.2.28, its graphics can be started multiple times, no problems. Meanwhile, I've done a little snooping ... Here are some ASCII strings (error and diagnostic messages), extracted from the current Beta program binary, file: wcgrid_beta6_6.12_windows_intelx86 They may give us some hints about what it is/does. (WCG may hate me for this) =============== (CHARMM) - Developmental Version 34a2 February 15, 2007 Found same atom selected in both reactant and product list Using mass-weighting for charged molecules/sets. Adding Drude particle QMDEFN> Some atoms will be treated quantum mechanically. The number of QM path integral atoms = The number of Monte Carlo moves (av) = BAD FORTRAN UNIT NUMBER (5 or 6) * TReK (Trajectory REfinement & Kinematics) version 2.10 * Reference : S.Fischer & M.Karplus, Chem. Phys. Letters vol.194, p.252, 1992 Intel Pentium fdiv flaw detected, please update the processor ========================== Comments: * The new project looks like it will be atom-bashing, rather than climate-modelling, etc. * CHARMM will be used in Phase 2 of the Dengue project. DDDT Technical Details * The program has sections that were written by earlier researchers (TReK) * CHARMM seems to have been written in FORTRAN, which I thought went out with 80-column punched cards. * However, it seems that punched cards haven't gone out, either. Here is a line from an input file (BETA_E000370_342A_001e94xxx_001e.top) of the beta WU currently crunching: READ PARAMETERS CARDS NAME par_all22_prot_cep.inp Have you kept any computer cards? It seems it's lucky I did: ![]() (This is the machine currently crunching the beta WU. You see, there was a reason I put those cards there - apart from trying to reduce the temperatures of the CPU power-supply MOSFETs and inductors so that I don't burn my fingers on them ![]() [Edit 1 times, last edit by Rickjb at Dec 3, 2008 9:37:31 AM] |
||
|
|
![]() |