Longer Sieve WUs
log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : Longer Sieve WUs

Previous · 1 · 2
Author Message
EG
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 13
Posts: 74
Credit: 28,774,490,299
RAC: 27,262,103
Message 23603 - Posted: 19 Dec 2016, 9:58:37 UTC
Last modified: 19 Dec 2016, 9:58:59 UTC

Well, I hope today's credit totals are an aberration from the changeover, cause everyone did 33% less than they did yesterday.

The larger WU's should be in full swing about now.....
____________

Profile [FB]The Temptations
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 10 Jul 10
Posts: 14
Credit: 514,791,339
RAC: 1,263,457
Message 23604 - Posted: 19 Dec 2016, 10:22:52 UTC

My problem I have a small card and I can not work all day long units long pme penalize in points help I want to do it but it must remain fun.......
____________

Rymorea
Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 14
Posts: 100
Credit: 200,411,819
RAC: 4
Message 23605 - Posted: 19 Dec 2016, 10:35:52 UTC

I am happy new longer wus. Less network is good because of high payments. Don't make short tasks technology going up every day and old less efficient power hungry HW must be absolute in time. And look at the other GPU projects mostly stop old hw applications. Run times getting higher every new app released. Look Milkyway they start packed tasks a couple of weeks ago, at beginning a lot of people hate but continue to be crunch. Seti continues to support old hw but their gpu app become cpu hungry so I lower the project priorty, cause I want to crunch other cpu projects also. In credit perspective I don't care much but I know Slicker do some corrections :)

Happy new year and happy crunching...
____________
Seti@home Classic account User ID 955 member since 8 Sep 1999 classic CPU time 539,770 hours

numbermaniac
Send message
Joined: 26 Jul 14
Posts: 30
Credit: 5,977,334
RAC: 15,755
Message 23612 - Posted: 20 Dec 2016, 3:21:11 UTC

I'm not too happy about the massive size increase. These tasks used to take about 25 minutes on my Intel GPU; even though it heated it up quite a bit, I was ok running one task every so often, since it was a fairly short burst. But now it's predicting 3 hours for this task to complete, and I'm not too keen on having the computer run at high temperature for that long...

Martin
Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 16
Posts: 3
Credit: 10,318,329
RAC: 27,965
Message 23615 - Posted: 20 Dec 2016, 14:01:36 UTC

I have just started to get the new 8x WUs. On my CPU based machines, the old WUs were taking 15 hours or thereabouts, which was quite long enough. The new WUs are estimating 5 DAYS. If anything goes wrong, I could be losing several days of computing time.

For the sake of others like myself without the GPU co-processors, could there be any way in which we could opt for the 1x WUs?

el_teniente
Send message
Joined: 9 Sep 15
Posts: 40
Credit: 3,527,164,723
RAC: 7,387,339
Message 23618 - Posted: 20 Dec 2016, 21:20:47 UTC

very good innovation---the worst of my card(R7 360) spends about 50 min per WU

and such a massive supply of "food" in a case of longer "project maintenance", many thanks!

Kombizahl
Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 09
Posts: 12
Credit: 158,620,174
RAC: 204
Message 23623 - Posted: 21 Dec 2016, 18:18:43 UTC

How high is the credit now ?
____________
Greetings

EG
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 13
Posts: 74
Credit: 28,774,490,299
RAC: 27,262,103
Message 23625 - Posted: 22 Dec 2016, 4:39:06 UTC
Last modified: 22 Dec 2016, 4:48:37 UTC

For the last two days I was getting WU's that took 12.5 minutes to run giving approx 28,000 in credit. A direct 8x size increase from the previous 90 second WU's. with a proportional 8x credit increase per WU.

For the last couple of hours now, I'm getting WU's that run twice as long as that, 25 minutes for approx 37,200 credit per WU.

Basically an x16 WU 16 times more work than a 90 second WU.

That's a reduction in credit on average of 15,700 per WU.

What's happening there?

A 20% reduction in credit per longer x16 WU.

More work for less credit?

Nevermind, I found the problem. 32 bit WU's!

I didn't have the .config file set up for 32 bit WU's so when it started issuing them the WU crunch time of course doubled cause the client wasn't configured for them.

MY BAD, SORRY.

But it serves as a good reminder to make sure we have the .config files properly set up....
____________

Profile Slicker
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Jun 09
Posts: 2525
Credit: 740,580,099
RAC: 1
Message 23635 - Posted: 23 Dec 2016, 20:32:02 UTC - in response to Message 23625.

For the last two days I was getting WU's that took 12.5 minutes to run giving approx 28,000 in credit. A direct 8x size increase from the previous 90 second WU's. with a proportional 8x credit increase per WU.

For the last couple of hours now, I'm getting WU's that run twice as long as that, 25 minutes for approx 37,200 credit per WU.

Basically an x16 WU 16 times more work than a 90 second WU.

That's a reduction in credit on average of 15,700 per WU.

What's happening there?

A 20% reduction in credit per longer x16 WU.

More work for less credit?

Nevermind, I found the problem. 32 bit WU's!

I didn't have the .config file set up for 32 bit WU's so when it started issuing them the WU crunch time of course doubled cause the client wasn't configured for them.

MY BAD, SORRY.

But it serves as a good reminder to make sure we have the .config files properly set up....


It amazes me that optimizing the config can make that much of a difference and yet there are people who have to de-optimize the default config so that their GPU can compute at all.

Martin
Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 16
Posts: 3
Credit: 10,318,329
RAC: 27,965
Message 23683 - Posted: 4 Jan 2017, 9:18:50 UTC - in response to Message 23615.

As suspected, it has happened. I had to make a re-boot on one machine which had two cores running Collatz Sieve 1.20, and were about 36 hours into a 5 day WU. When the machine booted up, both WU's (and two more waiting to run) had all crashed with computation error.

I would like to repeat my request. For those without GPU co-processors, could we please have the option of the old WU length.

EG
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 13
Posts: 74
Credit: 28,774,490,299
RAC: 27,262,103
Message 23684 - Posted: 4 Jan 2017, 11:25:16 UTC - in response to Message 23683.

Have you tried running the micro collatz WU's

You should be able to switch over to them in your configuration preferences page on the site.

They are much smaller.
____________

Brent
Send message
Joined: 25 Jun 14
Posts: 38
Credit: 182,100,565
RAC: 223,718
Message 23685 - Posted: 5 Jan 2017, 20:03:28 UTC

https://boinc.thesonntags.com/collatz/results.php?userid=63311&offset=0&show_names=0&state=6&appid=

On 3 Jan 2017, 8:42:20 UTC I lost alot of CPU time due to a power glitch. Not a happy camper!
____________
Brent
Link to website
See BOINC Stats

Brent
Send message
Joined: 25 Jun 14
Posts: 38
Credit: 182,100,565
RAC: 223,718
Message 23686 - Posted: 5 Jan 2017, 20:35:41 UTC - in response to Message 23685.

I tried setting up Micro workunits to no avail, but it removed the error files referred to in my original post. I lost about 840000 CPU seconds due to this glitch.

Brent
____________
Brent
Link to website
See BOINC Stats

Profile step2000
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 1 Aug 13
Posts: 96
Credit: 1,478,150,367
RAC: 1,946,382
Message 23687 - Posted: 5 Jan 2017, 21:48:02 UTC

Have you tried scandisk on your hard drive and reinstalled the runtime?

Profile James Lee*
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 10 Sep 15
Posts: 27
Credit: 4,284,523,040
RAC: 1,317,793
Message 23741 - Posted: 13 Jan 2017, 17:46:47 UTC
Last modified: 13 Jan 2017, 17:52:12 UTC

After reading through all the situations about the length of the new WUs... here goes... I am running 13 DIFFERENT computers that ALL have DIFFERENT Motherboards and 13 different CPUS. I am, also, running 11 DIFFERENT GPUs. The new longer WUs are NOT a problem. But, I have tweaked every machines' config file for optimal performance, AND I NEVER reboot without "suspending" all activity. This all goes for added productivity and fewer problems. Of course, this requires a lot of heating problems, but are solved with proper coolers and ventilation. Most machines do not even have their covers on. Mine may be a unique environment, but I believe that Slicker's plan on longer WUs has been largely successful. Count me in as a +1.

Thanks, Slicker!
____________

Profile heffalumpen
Send message
Joined: 2 Mar 11
Posts: 15
Credit: 1,024,271,094
RAC: 1,203,660
Message 23841 - Posted: 6 Feb 2017, 18:32:17 UTC

So,I have now finished my first 12-day WU's(they lasted 13 days on my pc),and I'm almost laughing. 13 days of work gives fewer points than the 45 minutes ones!!! Any explanations for this?
____________

Previous · 1 · 2
Post to thread

Message boards : Number crunching : Longer Sieve WUs


Main page · Your account · Message boards


Copyright © 2018 Jon Sonntag; All rights reserved.