Author |
Message |
|
I successfully completed one of these units.
http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=5228104
3 Mar 2014 | 22:14:10 UTC 3 Mar 2014 | 23:07:04 UTC Completed and validated 1,477.65 1,359.77 9.02 CPU only app v1.04
Two others are still running on my other machine.
Why are we bothering with CPU work units? They are so much slower than GPU WU.
|
|
|
MJHProject administrator Project developer Project scientist Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07 Posts: 696 Credit: 27,266,655 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
Why are we bothering with CPU work units? They are so much slower than GPU WU.
These are pathfinder WUs for a new project that we are currently scoping. Please keep crunching them, it's giving us useful information. More details on the project soon!
Matt |
|
|
AlezSend message
Joined: 17 Nov 12 Posts: 10 Credit: 185,958,753 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
v1.07 finally completed on my android without failing. Woohoo. |
|
|
|
Folding@home at Stanford just rolled out a really nifty Chrome app which just chugs along using CPU power. So easy to use!
v1.07 finally completed on my android without failing. Woohoo.
|
|
|
skgivenVolunteer moderator Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
Trailblazing again .........☺
A few basic observations (Linux):
Task progress remains at 0% and then jumps to 100%.
After tasks reach 100% they proceed to about 10000000000%
After a task reaches 100% if it's suspended it resumes from 0%.
____________
FAQ's
HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help |
|
|
|
Just started a CPU only app 1.04 on a Windows 7 box with BOINC 7.2.37. After the job ran for about a minute, the progress column now says "1.#IO%" and the Remaining column says " ---" (instead of showing hh:mm:ss).
Also running a CPU only app 1.01 on a Linux Ubuntu 13.10 box. After 6 minutes, it shows that progress is 18302.850%. Remaining says " ---". Job completed after ~10 minutes and shows that it is "Completed and Validated".
Let me know if you need more info.
captainjack |
|
|
ritterm Send message
Joined: 31 Jul 09 Posts: 88 Credit: 244,413,897 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
I'm not sure what the expected run times are, but the tasks I've completed have run between about 5000-6500 seconds.
Observations for my hosts (Win7-64, 3 Intel, 1 AMD):
1) Many tasks still running long after progress has reached 100%. WU properties show nonsensical values for the fraction done.
2) When suspended then resumed, those tasks finished shortly after starting to run again*
3) I've seen progress values in a wide range between 0%-100%. Often, WU properties fraction done does not match progress value.
*[edit]Except when they don't finish shortly after restarting.[/edit]
____________
|
|
|
|
In addition to observing the same behaviors others have already posted ...
I just attached a Win7 x64 client that does not have an NVidia card and while the server status says there are no CPU tasks available the event log message doesn't match ... says no "long" tasks available?
3/4/2014 10:04:45 PM | GPUGRID | update requested by user
3/4/2014 10:04:48 PM | GPUGRID | Sending scheduler request: Requested by user.
3/4/2014 10:04:48 PM | GPUGRID | Requesting new tasks for CPU
3/4/2014 10:04:50 PM | GPUGRID | Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
3/4/2014 10:04:50 PM | GPUGRID | No tasks sent
3/4/2014 10:04:50 PM | GPUGRID | No tasks are available for Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)
____________
Thanks - Steve |
|
|
Dylan Send message
Joined: 16 Jul 12 Posts: 98 Credit: 386,043,752 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
Look in your preferences. You have it set somewhere to only do Long runs and not do the cpu tasks. |
|
|
GDFVolunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer Project tester Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Project scientist Send message
Joined: 14 Mar 07 Posts: 1957 Credit: 629,356 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
Thanks for the help guys.
Probably the progress info is not working.
How many CPU jobs do you get per CPU core?
gdf |
|
|
skgivenVolunteer moderator Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
It's 'common' to see WU's reach 100% and run for a bit before completing. You just need to make sure the % stops at 100, and allow the estimated run times to be more accurate - didn't look but presumably the GFlops value needs to be set more accurately.
On an 8 core CPU, I expect you could get up to 8 CPU tasks. At times I was running Five CPU only 1.01 apps (as I was attached to other CPU projects, and running 2 GPU tasks). So one task per logical core/thread (on an i7 with 8 logical threads).
____________
FAQ's
HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help |
|
|
|
Thanks for the help guys.
Probably the progress info is not working.
How many CPU jobs do you get per CPU core?
gdf
I didn't test this specifically and while I never got more than 1 per "core" that was likely only because it was the amount of work BOINC thought I needed to meet my cache settings. If you release some more and I can test when I get home from work tonight - about 12 hours from now.
____________
Thanks - Steve |
|
|
MJHProject administrator Project developer Project scientist Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07 Posts: 696 Credit: 27,266,655 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
Yeah, I broke the progress reporting somehow. It's just a cosmetic problem, though admittedly an annoying one.
Matt |
|
|
|
Thanks for the help guys.
Probably the progress info is not working.
How many CPU jobs do you get per CPU core?
gdf
24 WU for 24 CPU core for me
____________
|
|
|
skgivenVolunteer moderator Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
Please, sir, I want some more...
____________
FAQ's
HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help |
|
|
WerkstattSend message
Joined: 23 May 09 Posts: 121 Credit: 333,466,036 RAC: 328,115 Level
Scientific publications
|
I have added two devices to gpugrid two days ago; have not got a single wu ... |
|
|
GDFVolunteer moderator Project administrator Project developer Project tester Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Project scientist Send message
Joined: 14 Mar 07 Posts: 1957 Credit: 629,356 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
we need to do still a couple of changes to the application for the science and for stability.
In particular one that packs for work for WU.
gdf |
|
|
VariableSend message
Joined: 20 Nov 13 Posts: 21 Credit: 440,148,605 RAC: 66,901 Level
Scientific publications
|
These are pathfinder WUs for a new project that we are currently scoping. Please keep crunching them, it's giving us useful information. More details on the project soon!
Matt
Is this a test for Android (I hope)? If so will it be in the list of available projects in the BOINC app? |
|
|
Dylan Send message
Joined: 16 Jul 12 Posts: 98 Credit: 386,043,752 RAC: 0 Level
Scientific publications
|
You can already run them on an Android device. |
|
|
VariableSend message
Joined: 20 Nov 13 Posts: 21 Credit: 440,148,605 RAC: 66,901 Level
Scientific publications
|
I see GPUgrid in the list of projects now in the BOINC app, but it says 'device not supported' and doesn't seem to be downloading work once I add the project. I have a Galaxy S4 phone. |
|
|
TrotadorSend message
Joined: 25 Mar 12 Posts: 103 Credit: 13,920,977,393 RAC: 7,489,952 Level
Scientific publications
|
I successfully run one of these units several days ago. Today, three of them have failed with the same "segment violation" error, they all in Linux in the same PC.
<core_client_version>6.10.58</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
process exited with code 193 (0xc1, -63)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# (BOINC) Mapping [ligand.db]->[ligand.db]
# (BOINC) Mapping [result.db]->[../../projects/www.gpugrid.net/T2-TONI_DBTEST1-0-1-RND0994_0_0]
# (BOINC) Mapping [protein.pdbqt]->[protein.pdbqt]
# (BOINC) Mapping [flexible.pdbqt]->[flexible.pdbqt]
SIGSEGV: segmentation violation
Stack trace (7 frames):
[0x4932ad]
[0x5242b0]
[0x4a4f61]
[0x4a3a1c]
[0x40a8eb]
[0x525aeb]
[0x400449]
Exiting...
</stderr_txt>
]]> |
|
|