| 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: 7
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I was happy to get this WU, but why did it arrive with a 32+ hour estimate? It completely wrecks my buffer for some time, especially when it runs with high priority. It has been days since my last Beta WU on this system and the estimates were being realistic, even on the CEP monsters, such as the one that completed the day before estimated at 43 hours and finishing at 40.49
----------------------------------------BETA_ E000050_ 151A_ 000c3d009_ 1-- Pending Validation 15/12/08 19:09:38 16/12/08 06:08:29 9.95 138.0 / 0.0 [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Jan 2, 2009 2:18:56 AM] |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3716 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
That will not help to solve these problems but I have placed a new "Start Here" item How long will this new type-A Clean Energy Project (CEP) work unit (WU) last? which might help to better estimate how long these WUs will really last.
----------------------------------------Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Then we shall wait until the technology catches up with reality.
----------------------------------------Obviously this one computer is messed up as my NRW WU are coming in with an estimate of 17+ hours. Just have to wait until the system sorts itself out. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Dec 16, 2008 10:17:23 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
How long will this new type-A Clean Energy Project (CEP) work unit (WU) last? It would be so much better if Boinc didn't try to be clever. In most cases, including this one, simply taking 'current CPU time'/'fraction done' (method 3 in your list) is quite adequate. Boinc, however, does some much more complex calculation which results in a totally bogus result. |
||
|
|
nasher
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Dec 2, 2005 Post Count: 1423 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
yes BOINC dosnt estimate well
----------------------------------------again the CEP units seem to run a tad long sometimes and yes this definatly shifts my computer to high priority ![]() |
||
|
|
Rickjb
Veteran Cruncher Australia Joined: Sep 17, 2006 Post Count: 666 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
yes BOINC dosnt estimate well / again the CEP units seem to run a tad long sometimes The way BOINC estimates task time is explained in the WCG FAQs at BOINC: Estimated Tasks "Time To Complete" Are Totally Wrong BOINC tries to do its best, but accuracy is impossible unless the task size could be estimated in advance for every WU, for every project. And it can't. CEP seems to be specially difficult. It might be possible to improve things though. I had 2 CEPs running yesterday, and noticed in task manager that the one that ran 9hrs had a mem usage of about 30MB, while the one that's still running and is estimating 40hrs is at 78MB. This may be related to something in the science, eg molecule size. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
As ever, well observed, Rickjb.
Once started, the progress is very predictable. I don't have all the details about CEP work unit generation, but I would expect each batch to contain similar sized molecules, created combinatorially. It's not like the medical projects where they use a library of drug-like compounds. The batches must be as homogeneous as possible, otherwise the WCG size estimation algorithm has no hope of success. As I said earlier, the false positives in validation are skewing the initial estimates. One solution that springs to mind, given the small size of checkpoint files, is to create a portmanteau work unit from a dozen parts of other work units. Send the checkpoint files as input files, and return checkpoint files as results. Since each started molecule would have a reliable time estimate, it would be possible to construct work units with predictable sizes. It would even be possible to construct differently sized work units on the fly. The downside? This is a very technical, very complicated solution. WCG don't have time to implement it, and there may be catches I haven't considered, such as the increased download sizes. Also, generating work based on recently returned results has hazards of its own. |
||
|
|
|