| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: The Clean Energy Project - Phase 2 Forum
Thread: Poor crunching on this project |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 156
|
|
| Author |
|
|
kateiacy
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 23, 2010 Post Count: 1027 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Has anyone compared how CEP2's run under Ubuntu Desktop 10.10 and BOINC 6.10.58 versus Ubuntu Desktop 10.04 and BOINC 6.10.17?
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
RaymondFO
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Nov 30, 2004 Post Count: 561 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
What kernel version are you referring to? That is the key to answer your question.
Others have posted and from my own brief casual observation the 64 bit Ubuntu version is faster than the 32 bit Ubuntu version. Otherwise, I did not materially notice a difference between 6.10.58 versus 6.10.17 |
||
|
|
kateiacy
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 23, 2010 Post Count: 1027 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
What kernel version are you referring to? That is the key to answer your question. Others have posted and from my own brief casual observation the 64 bit Ubuntu version is faster than the 32 bit Ubuntu version. Otherwise, I did not materially notice a difference between 6.10.58 versus 6.10.17 I am interested in comparing what's standard with Ubuntu 10.04 versus Ubuntu 10.10, both 64-bit. So that's 2.6.32-25-generic kernel with BOINC 6.10.17 versus 2.6.35-22-generic kernel with BOINC 6.10.58. Currently I'm running all 3 of my machines with Ubuntu 10.04 with the 2.6.32-25 kernel and everything, including CEP2, is working well. I'm just trying to figure out whether there would be any benefit, with respect to WCG and CEP2, in upgrading to Ubuntu 10.10. I don't want to fix something that "ain't broke" unless there's some reason to expect an improvement. |
||
|
|
RaymondFO
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Nov 30, 2004 Post Count: 561 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Not from my experiences, other than the 64bit version did appear to run more efficiently. The only real problem I had was certain drivers were not available in the 64 bit version but were in the 32 bit version.
|
||
|
|
yose-ue
Cruncher Joined: Dec 27, 2008 Post Count: 21 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
For those of you with the problem with extreme loss of credit for time spent on this project (I am talking less than 30% efficiency not 95% efficiency). The latest version of Linux kernel that downloaded on my UBUNTU 32 bit system (kernel 2.6.32-26-generic) this week works well with efficiencies in th mid 90"s. Previously I had to use an old kernel in order to make this project practical to crunch.
|
||
|
|
Bearcat
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 6, 2007 Post Count: 2803 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Which version, 10.4 or 10.10? I have 10.4 (lucid) and seems to crunch pretty good. I think the slow down is the multiple processors running this project exclusively and waiting to write to disk, in my case 8 cores. It would be cool if there was an option to write to memory for those of us who have ram to spare. Read some posts about a ram disk but not sure if there are problems with this.
----------------------------------------
Crunching for humanity since 2007!
 |
||
|
|
|