| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Beta Testing
Forum: Beta Test Support Forum
Thread: CEP2 beta test July 25, 2016 [Issues Thread] |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 45
|
|
| Author |
|
|
retsof
Former Community Advisor USA Joined: Jul 31, 2005 Post Count: 6824 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I have two to watch when it starts, with estimates of 43 hours, 55 minutes, 28 seconds and 47 hours, 1 minute, 37 seconds.
----------------------------------------I have had trouble with these hogs before when the electric went out because they did not have any or many checkpoints, and started over. I will check the timing after they finish.
SUPPORT ADVISOR
----------------------------------------Work+GPU i7 8700 12threads School i7 4770 8threads Default+GPU Ryzen 7 3700X 16threads Ryzen 7 3800X 16 threads Ryzen 9 3900X 24threads Home i7 3540M 4threads50% [Edit 2 times, last edit by retsof at Jul 28, 2016 9:23:23 PM] |
||
|
|
KerSamson
Master Cruncher Switzerland Joined: Jan 29, 2007 Post Count: 1684 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I am not sure if the following observation does reflect the reality but:
----------------------------------------- BETA_E236441_294_S.488.C51H18N4O5S6.CMVFTFJCJRSESD-UHFFFAOYSA-N.8_s1_14 > 18 hours on a Windows 7 Pro SP1 x64 powered by a i7 4770K @ 3.5 GHz, no OC - BETA_E236441_187_S.488.C52H18N2O6S6.JNGIRYRYDXRLLR-UHFFFAOYSA-N.13_s1_14 > 6.75 hours on a LinuxMint 17.3 x64 powered by a i7 6700K @ 4 GHz, no OC In the both cases, the host was fully devoted to WCG. If the observation reflects the reality, CEP2 on Windows is about half efficient than on Linux. It would also confirm old made experiences. Cheers, Yves |
||
|
|
RTS48
Veteran Cruncher Bolivia Joined: Aug 2, 2009 Post Count: 1353 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I really do not understand how one cruncher can be granted full credit for an error while others are granted zero points viz.
----------------------------------------BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 3-- Linux 4.2.6 - In Progress 28/07/16 15:16:46 30/07/16 00:52:45 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 4-- Linux 4.6.4-hardened-r2 - In Progress 28/07/16 15:16:18 30/07/16 00:52:17 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 2-- Darwin 15.5.0 700 Error 27/07/16 20:04:22 28/07/16 15:16:11 18.00 595.6 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 1-- Darwin 15.6.0 700 Error 26/07/16 20:18:15 27/07/16 15:33:45 18.00 570.2 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 0-- Darwin 15.6.0 700 Error 26/07/16 20:17:18 27/07/16 20:03:48 11.36 394.8 / 394.8
Rod Peel
----------------------------------------Santa Cruz Bolivia South America  ,  [Edit 2 times, last edit by RTS48 at Jul 29, 2016 1:10:25 AM] |
||
|
|
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher USA Joined: Jul 4, 2006 Post Count: 7844 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I really do not understand how one cruncher can be granted full credit for an error while others are granted zero points viz. BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 3-- Linux 4.2.6 - In Progress 28/07/16 15:16:46 30/07/16 00:52:45 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 4-- Linux 4.6.4-hardened-r2 - In Progress 28/07/16 15:16:18 30/07/16 00:52:17 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 2-- Darwin 15.5.0 700 Error 27/07/16 20:04:22 28/07/16 15:16:11 18.00 595.6 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 1-- Darwin 15.6.0 700 Error 26/07/16 20:18:15 27/07/16 15:33:45 18.00 570.2 / 0.0 BETA_ E236441_ 224_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.UHXUUTGPCSCBNJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 0-- Darwin 15.6.0 700 Error 26/07/16 20:17:18 27/07/16 20:03:48 11.36 394.8 / 394.8 I am going to speculate, based on the times in red, that the two units hit the 18:00 time limit without finishing the first task, while the third one, although an "error" actually got further than the first task and thus got some credit for a partially done work unit. (Of course, I could be entirely wrong.) Cheers
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers* |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Another example of an Invalid caused by Application exited with RC = 0x1 in Job #0, but with the 2 wingmen happening to both finish in Job #3.
BETA_ E236441_ 366_ S.392.C39F2H17N5O3S4.MTNGWBXHNBSYQS-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 2-- Microsoft Windows 10 Core x64 Edition, (10.00.10586.00) 700 Valid 27/07/16 13:26:13 28/07/16 23:55:37 13.34 412.0 / 231.6 BETA_ E236441_ 366_ S.392.C39F2H17N5O3S4.MTNGWBXHNBSYQS-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 1-- Microsoft Windows 10 Professional x64 Edition, (10.00.10586.00) 700 Valid 26/07/16 13:02:25 27/07/16 06:31:01 10.76 463.2 / 463.2 BETA_ E236441_ 366_ S.392.C39F2H17N5O3S4.MTNGWBXHNBSYQS-UHFFFAOYSA-N.18_ s1_ 14_ 0-- Microsoft Windows 10 Core x64 Edition, (10.00.10586.00) 700 Invalid 26/07/16 13:01:50 27/07/16 13:26:04 2.94 65.5 / 65.5 |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
And another (mine's the Invalid this time, RC = 0x1 in Job #0, the 2 wingmen in Job #3). Am I flogging a dead horse with this type of outcome
 BETA_ E236441_ 167_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.BCQPLKNUOVHWIY-UHFFFAOYSA-N.17_ s1_ 14_ 2-- Microsoft Windows 8.1 Professional x64 Edition, (06.03.9600.00) 700 Valid 28/07/16 16:14:19 29/07/16 12:24:37 5.65 170.5 / 137.0 BETA_ E236441_ 167_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.BCQPLKNUOVHWIY-UHFFFAOYSA-N.17_ s1_ 14_ 1-- Microsoft Windows 10 Core x64 Edition, (10.00.10586.00) 700 Invalid 26/07/16 20:17:28 27/07/16 07:30:27 2.44 86.1 / 34.3 BETA_ E236441_ 167_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.BCQPLKNUOVHWIY-UHFFFAOYSA-N.17_ s1_ 14_ 0-- Microsoft Windows 7 Professional x64 Edition, Service Pack 1, (06.01.7601.00) 700 Valid 26/07/16 20:16:40 28/07/16 16:14:13 3.09 103.6 / 137.0 |
||
|
|
SekeRob
Master Cruncher Joined: Jan 7, 2013 Post Count: 2741 Status: Offline |
Think so yes, you're the flogger in both last cases 😂 (The valid logically has to fall to the pair that has at least one, but most completed jobs... a pair with 2 and 4 could be valid too with proration of the assigned claim)
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I just aspire to the outcome that the 2 outputs from a successful exit in Job #0 and in Job #3 could match in the validator, with both outputs returning to the researchers. That would save the effort of a repair unit while giving the researchers the same data as now. Maybe the added validator complexity isn't worth it.
|
||
|
|
SekeRob
Master Cruncher Joined: Jan 7, 2013 Post Count: 2741 Status: Offline |
Got doubt if job #0 goes RC=0x1 there's anything 'valid' to verify against a wingman that got to e.g. job #3 ... too little to make an assumption the verifier has produced anything valid as well.
|
||
|
|
[AF>Libristes]Maeda
Cruncher Joined: Sep 1, 2011 Post Count: 43 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Just got one WU, but no checkpoint, and deadline's very short. I already have more than 10 hours, and rebooted, then I have to go from the beginning. I think I'll sent it with 1 or 2 hours late.
----------------------------------------[Edit 1 times, last edit by [AF>Libristes]Maeda at Jul 30, 2016 2:12:32 PM] |
||
|
|
|