| 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: 70
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Thanks for these test info's DM.
----------------------------------------I've got it 6.10.6 running on the Vista 32 bit quad. Opposed to the 6.10.4 disaster, this one ran, but took precautionary measures and it still looked at the wrong data-dir location which I told it to move during the install to a new location i.e. not fit for beta public consumption. Stopped client, copied the data from old to new and a backup store, whilst internet disconnected. After restarting client still looked in wrong place, so deleted that and only then did it start crunching with the data in new location. Somewhere a conflict I presume in the registry, which is bad. For safety added the data-dir path to the cc_config.xml. Only doing CPU crunching with GPU explicitly disabled through said cc_config.xml, but still seeing initial lines pertaining to NVidia and ATI being searched. Anyway, it's been up now for the best part of 48 hours and all continues to validate. For those interested seeing a report on the ups and downs in the rDCF, add this line to <log_flags> section. <!-- Next line activates logging of rDCF adjustments after a Task completion or benchmarks - Active since Aug.'09--> <dcf_debug>1</dcf_debug> Quickly tells you if a job ran quicker or slower than predicted. The line above it is the way to insert comments to the cc_config.xml. Found out through a short Q&A last week. ttyl edit: yes the log messages that the flag generates in example: 23/09/2009 15.22.39 WCG Computation for task HFCC_t1_02237448_TrkB_0001_0 finished 23/09/2009 15.22.39 WCG [dcf] DCF: 1.642016->1.624209, raw_ratio 1.463945, adj_ratio 0.891553 Only 1 line per finished result, minimal log filler :D
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sekerob at Sep 23, 2009 2:44:54 PM] |
||
|
|
Dataman
Ace Cruncher Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 4865 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks for the code Sek. I should have said in the second post above that this was on a Win7 64-bit machine. I fell back on it. GPUGrid has a new app out today attempting to fix problems with Win7 and hopefully for some problems unique to GTX260 cards. I will try it after I get a LOT more caffeine in me.
----------------------------------------![]() ![]() |
||
|
|
Dataman
Ace Cruncher Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 4865 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
GPUGrid's new app (6.71) seems to be working now on Win7 64-bit & GTX260 cards.
---------------------------------------- 6.10.6 continues to run WCG just fine.I reinstalled 6.10.6 and reset GPUGrid and it is now requesting work properly. Win7 64-bit, BOINC 6.10.6, nVidia 190.62, CUDA 2.3 ![]() ![]() |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Expect the unexpected, changes made without clear notification to users... sometime in the future when that red upgrade message from Berkeley appears again, many will be stumped if following that suggestion.
----------------------------------------Here's one found in a 6.10.7 Alpha discussion thread, someone having all his GPU's but loosing all the CPU's, so be warned: Message 27552 - Posted 23 Sep 2009 21:27:14 UTC - in response to Message 27550. 9/23/2009 1:34:07 PM Reading preferences override file 9/23/2009 1:34:07 PM Preferences limit memory usage when active to 1842.06MB 9/23/2009 1:34:07 PM Preferences limit memory usage when idle to 2046.73MB 9/23/2009 1:34:07 PM Preferences limit disk usage to 32.28GB 9/23/2009 1:34:07 PM Preferences limit # CPUs to 0 Is there something in your global_prefs_override.xml file (or in cc_config.xml (<ncpus>)) that could cause that message? Gruß, Gundolf Double-check <ncpus> in cc_config.xml. Back in the day, 0 meant 'ignore me, use whatever the OS tells you'. Now, 0 means zero, and you have to use -1 for 'whatever the OS says' Message 27554 - Posted 23 Sep 2009 23:37:17 UTC Last modified: 23 Sep 2009 23:43:00 UTC Will change the parameters in cc to -1 as suggested and reload 6.10.7. This worked, now have tasks running and the correct CPUs showed up as well as the floating points. Are there any other parameters that should be changed from 0 to -1? Is this new with this version? We'll follow what the answer is to this :O ____________
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sekerob at Sep 24, 2009 8:19:20 AM] |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3716 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Double-check <ncpus> in cc_config.xml. This is a strange interpretation of "upward compatibility".Back in the day, 0 meant 'ignore me, use whatever the OS tells you'. Now, 0 means zero, and you have to use -1 for 'whatever the OS says' |
||
|
|
Dataman
Ace Cruncher Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 4865 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Expect the unexpected Very true. Too bad people stopped doing regression testing. Here's one found in a 6.10.7 Alpha discussion thread, someone having all his GPU's but loosing all the CPU's, so be warned: "One step forward; two steps back." I put the whole farm on 6.10.6 yesterday and it its working well. I plan to stay with it until there is a reason to change. I've had no failed wu's in the last ~18 hours and notice no changes in runtimes. It fetches and returns work correctly ... What more can one ask for? ![]() ![]() |
||
|
|
knreed
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: Nov 8, 2004 Post Count: 4504 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Users should no longer see repeated requests to our servers for gpus apps. We have the back-off for those set to one week now. You will now only occasionally see that message (when the backoff expires or when you manually force an update).
|
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
"Show active tasks" seems like I saw a tab for this from inception of BOINC.net by Mike O. See this button now, maybe the next one needed being a button to show tasks in the scheduled order... now that I'll and a few more will keep dreaming on about, but only for a few microseconds :O)
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
Ingleside
Veteran Cruncher Norway Joined: Nov 19, 2005 Post Count: 974 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Expect the unexpected, changes made without clear notification to users... sometime in the future when that red upgrade message from Berkeley appears again, many will be stumped if following that suggestion. Hmm, one of the nice things with WIKI's is, you can look on old copies of the page, and the oldest copy of "Client configurations" from 14 April 2008 is informative: <ncpus> Act as if there were N CPUs: run N tasks at once. This is for debugging, i.e. to simulate 2 CPUs on a machine that has only 1. Don't use it to limit the number of CPUs used by BOINC; use general preferences instead. Also worth reading is the info about using zero for disabling <log_flags>, and selected flags under <options>. <ncpus> recides under <options>, and while listed, it does not show zero as an option that will disable the flag... Well, even v6.8.xx and v6.10.xx includes a bug-fix so <ncpus> finally works as it should, according to the documentation, some users will still be surprised by this change. The wast majority of affected users will be CUDA-users that ran v6.4.x previously, a few developers and alpha-testers, and some users that's been using an option even there isn't any good reason for their usage. Atleast it's an easily-fixed problem for the few affected users. ![]() ![]() "I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might." [Edit 1 times, last edit by Ingleside at Sep 24, 2009 6:15:58 PM] |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
I read the function in the Official wiki before posting, so whom are you telling? Someone did manage to get a 0 in and it not having a zero as option... none standard. The effect was... no CPU's. May users expect some consistency? No don't tell me what happens if you enter zero into <max_stdout_file_size> ... zero size or default.. which is now 2mb, still? I'm not going to test it nor am interested to learn.
----------------------------------------For now I count on the quick 6,000 crunchers that do WCG CPU crunching and GPU crunching and bet you a large number are on 6.10, the object of this thread outlined in the OP.
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
|