| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Retired Forums
Forum: Member-to-Member Support [Read Only]
Thread: 2 hrs 50 mins and still 0.0%?? |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 27
|
|
| Author |
|
|
jeffwy
Advanced Cruncher Taiwan Joined: Nov 17, 2004 Post Count: 77 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
It doesn't seem like I got points for mine that froze t 54% either. It finished one during the night and then had 54% done by the next morning, but it disappeared soon after and a new one was downloaded...
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Seems what i have the same problem. more then a hour of work and 0.0 percentage completed. i have athlon xp 2200+. First unit completed in 5+ hours. Ok..problem solved, finally its showing 0.4% BUT that was after 9 hours of processing timeat 0.0% then duno for some reason the program reset the CPU time to 0 and started recouting again. WTHell..Wasted My WhOle Day Of ProcEssinG TIme! A "work unit" consists of various data including the protein sequence. The longer the sequence the "harder" it is to predict the fold. Longer sequence proteins take longer to process (sometimes much longer). Due to the nature of the work, it's impossible to predict how long any specific work unit may take. i.e. it's non-determinsitic. That's really the beauty of putting this on a grid: it's a difficult computation problem. Sometimes a work unit may not "converge" as we call it. This means it just hasn't found any way to fold this specific protein in a given amount of time and gives up. When it determines it can't converge it just stops working on it, sends it back (telling us it didn't converge) and you get a new work unit. However, it will try very, very hard before it gives up. This would explain why you saw it processing for probably 4 hours and still be at 0.0%...then suddenly you saw it go to 0.4% and the CPU time went down. Points-wise, you should still get credit for the effort though. Have some faith in that you really are helping to promote our understanding of the human proteome. If this was easy to do, we wouldn't have put it on the grid! Thanks for this info Rick, it answered some questions that where building up to a post from my side. So that explains why my first unit went 20Hrs smooth, and from there it has been downloading a unit, processing it for 2Hrs @ 2 % and then it's as if it spits it out, and gets a new unit. My WCG Agent has been doing this the whole morning, its now busy with No 6 for the day inspecting if it is processes able. Hang in there ppl, I would believe it is not easy, as the man says “”it's a difficult computation problem.””  |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
This comp has both more ram and more disk space than some of the others are dedicating to the task although with my 1st work unit it's 3hrs in and 0 is indicated on the front page of the application. On the second page though it's 0.3%.
I'll let the machine run and see whether it speeds up after a certain percentage as does the seti program. |
||
|
|
joatmon
Senior Cruncher Joined: Nov 17, 2004 Post Count: 185 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I'll let the machine run and see whether it speeds up after a certain percentage as does the seti program. so far I've done all of one workunit, so I don't have a lot of data but I watched that one, and kept calculating projected completion time, and as it went through, the %complete per hour went down. When it stated, the numbers projected 40 hours to complete on my PC, ended up only taking 22, so on my one it did speed up. I can't say if that was because of the nature of the computation, or if it was related to how much other work I was doing on the PC.your mileage may vary |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Just to throw in my experiences here as well, the work units are definitely not uniform in amount of computer processing time required to complete.
But then again, this makes sense a bit as well. If there are specific rules on how a protein can fold, and if you happen to get a protein where the total number of ways it could fold is very limited so it will complete quicker. The converse applies as well to a unit with a huge number of folding capabilities would take much longer to complete. I have anecdotal evidence though that the work units I've been getting definitely seem to be getting more difficult to grind through. I'm willing to bet this is just the luck of the draw. I'm patient. ;) The nice thing appears to be that the points are awarded based on complexity of the work unit as well as how fast your computer grinds through it. I'm sure it all balances out over time. Regards, -tim |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Yeah, but still, they should base the work unit size on the speed on the computer, as in the slower it is, the smaller the WU given. Cause now my current WU is like taking 100hours before it reaches 100% (Currently: 34hrs/35%)
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I am currently running on an AMD Athlon XP 2000+.
My first two WU's completed in about 26 hours each and were worth about 860 points each. That's an average of 3.85% per hour. I am now on my third WU. Something interesting is that after 5 hours, it's only at 3% completed. Seems this WU is either more complex or larger than the first two I received. |
||
|
|
|