| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Support
Forum: BOINC Agent Support
Thread: Server Software Upgrade issues, Mar-6-2012 ~14:30 UTC - 21:00 UTC |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 177
|
|
| Author |
|
|
ca05065
Senior Cruncher Joined: Dec 4, 2007 Post Count: 328 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Another oddity in claiming credits: the two original WUs error with zero time but claim credits -
SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 3-- - In Progress 14/03/12 21:31:32 20/03/12 21:31:32 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 2-- - In Progress 14/03/12 21:31:31 20/03/12 21:31:31 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 1-- 613 Error 14/03/12 20:54:33 14/03/12 20:57:37 0.00 129.6 / 0.0 SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 0-- 613 Error 14/03/12 20:54:23 14/03/12 20:57:27 0.00 129.6 / 0.0 |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Another oddity in claiming credits: the two original WUs error with zero time but claim credits - SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 3-- - In Progress 14/03/12 21:31:32 20/03/12 21:31:32 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 2-- - In Progress 14/03/12 21:31:31 20/03/12 21:31:31 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 1-- 613 Error 14/03/12 20:54:33 14/03/12 20:57:37 0.00 129.6 / 0.0 SN2S_ AAF21681_ 0000018_ 0600_ 0-- 613 Error 14/03/12 20:54:23 14/03/12 20:57:27 0.00 129.6 / 0.0 HPF2 did this too: qc466_ 00024_ 21-- 640 Error 12年3月9日 03:23:52 12年3月9日 03:26:59 0.00 184.1 / 0.0 qc466_ 00024_ 13-- 640 Error 12年3月9日 02:13:06 12年3月9日 02:17:42 0.00 184.1 / 0.0 qc466_ 00024_ 3-- 640 Error 12年3月9日 02:15:23 12年3月9日 02:17:21 0.00 184.1 / 0.0 qc466_ 00024_ 2-- 640 Error 12年3月9日 02:03:19 12年3月9日 02:06:28 0.00 184.1 / 0.0 |
||
|
|
KWSN - A Shrubbery
Master Cruncher Joined: Jan 8, 2006 Post Count: 1585 Status: Offline |
Looks to be some interesting validation errors since the new server code. On this result:
----------------------------------------CMD2_ 2242-1CA1_ A.clustersOccur-2EB2_ A.clustersOccur_ 1_ 1-- 640 Error 3/15/12 06:57:19 3/15/12 19:01:26 5.71 268.5 / 0.0 CMD2_ 2242-1CA1_ A.clustersOccur-2EB2_ A.clustersOccur_ 1_ 0-- 640 Error 3/15/12 06:57:17 3/19/12 03:48:54 6.84 157.4 / 0.0 Both machines appear to have finished the work unit normally and yet they were marked as error going through the validator. I've seen similar work units where one goes error and the other goes inconclusive. I'd say it needs a closer look.  Distributed computing volunteer since September 27, 2000 |
||
|
|
jonnieb-uk
Ace Cruncher England Joined: Nov 30, 2011 Post Count: 6105 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
One of the biggest disruptions will be the new way that the server code handles identifying 'trusted' computers (ones that can process non-redundant computations without a wingman) and 'reliable' computers (ones that process resent workunits quickly). The determination of 'trusted' and 'reliable' will be changed from being determined for a specific device to being determined for a specific pairing of a device and version of a research application. This means that your computer could be trusted on FightAIDS@Home but perhaps not on Computing for Clean Water (for example). Since initially we will not have data at the device-application version level, no-one will be trusted or reliable until the data is accumulated to make that determination. This new feature is a great enhancement to the system but it will cause a short term disruption. knreed at Mar 2, 2012 9:45:15 PM Any chance of an update, by project, on progress in re-establishing 'trusted' and 'reliable' computers? |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Only now the credits are starting to flatten a bit [after 12 days of operation on the new system], suggesting that the device and pairing data collection is slowly approaching a critical mass... inertia and oscillation, some have after a spike, fallen back too much and are now rising again. Particularly the Zero Redundancy researches are dependent of sufficient data before these can be switched to going alone, and get the credit right in an automated way. See http://bit.ly/WCGCPH. Few days ago SN2S was at bottom and HCMD2 at top, yesterday it was the reverse... grasshopper needs more time I think. :>)
--//-- |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
jonnieb: If you check your results page for known zero redundancy projects, you will be able to see if you are a trusted host again for that computer....
On CEP2 one of my rigs is the only one in the quorum, meaning that it is now a trusted and reliable host. Same as one for C4CW, not only am I running it alone, but I am also being used for validation of others WU's and being WU _2+. (when others fail) Hope this helps. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
So you're seeing that the ZR has been switched on silently for at least 2 sciences. Molto Interessante.
As what I wrote this morning and the picture continuing for the morning's credit tally, the hourlies are stabilizing. If you see single "Inconclusive" and then your device getting a task after the return time of the single original is a positive sign. A 3rd copy on error or 1 or 2 inconclusives of others I'd not yet take as the reliability distribution having been activated. Let's just wait on the official word. --//-- |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Minimum Quorum:1
----------------------------------------Replication:1 E206697_ 393_ C.25.C20H14N4Si.00850792.1.set1d06_ 0-- 640 Valid 3/19/12 02:10:39 3/19/12 12:30:02 3.04 146.7 / 146.7 Minimum Quorum:1 Replication:1 c4cw_ target05_ 175029007_ 0-- 641 Valid 3/18/12 12:39:18 3/18/12 23:32:00 1.76 45.8 / 47.6  EDIT: Minimum Quorum:1 Replication:2 E206660_ 027_ C.25.C21H13NOSSi.00819853.2.set1d06_ 1-- 640 Valid 3/18/12 04:12:57 3/18/12 17:11:30 2.44 116.8 / 135.0 E206660_ 027_ C.25.C21H13NOSSi.00819853.2.set1d06_ 0-- 640 Valid 3/17/12 02:08:42 3/18/12 03:29:11 5.32 153.2 / 135.0 I added the one above to show that it is a min. quorum of 1, but two were sent out, meaning (I think), that the req. was only one valid needed for the project, but since the computer (bottom one) was not trusted yet, it sent mine much later when it asked for more in order to "validate" the other host's task. Also, I do not know the "amount" of valid WU needed to reach this point. Sekerob did not even know this switch has happened, (no official word, read above), so we'll just have to wait and see what happens. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Mar 19, 2012 2:46:25 PM] |
||
|
|
jonnieb-uk
Ace Cruncher England Joined: Nov 30, 2011 Post Count: 6105 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks spot - anything that adds to my knowledge is helpful!
---------------------------------------- I know now that one of my rigs is 'trusted' on HFCC since the most recent task is quorum 1. I run CEP on one rig but quorum/replication is still 2/2. I've checked back and all the CEP WU's units submitted since Mar 06 have been returned within 24 hours. Is a threshold for No. of tasks returned before 'trusted' or 'reliable' status? |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
There you go... HFCC too... the answers all come auto-magically.
----------------------------------------The # to return sequentially without invalid is about 77 per science which than brings a device on or below 0.2% invalid rate. Errors/Aborts don't count, they just halt the up or down and decreases the daily device quota. For each invalid intermixed, you'll roughly need to do 2 more valids. Loosing reliability is faster than to gain on a device. --//-- edit: decreases [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Mar 19, 2012 3:49:12 PM] |
||
|
|
|