Why losing average credit.

Message boards : Number crunching : Why losing average credit.

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Thomas Hoganas

Send message
Joined: 8 Apr 06
Posts: 1
Credit: 96,973
RAC: 0
Message 96541 - Posted: 15 May 2020, 20:12:56 UTC
Last modified: 15 May 2020, 20:17:03 UTC

Whats wrong ?? I losing average credit. Befor i hold a line on 2300 average credit on 8-10 houers (8core i7 3770k). .. now i droping to 1950 on 15-20 houers. Roseta runs on cpu and gpugrid and primegrid working on gpu. The work time on rosetta work have go from 4,5 houer to 8,5 houer and i get around 35-150 cred normaly now. I change my cpu cooler so i lower my temp from 80 celcius to 35. it increse the cpu woring speed from 2,9 Mhz (87%) to 3,68 Mhz (+100%) Is it setting or what? On prime and gpugrid i running 47000 -120000 cred on 4 hours. (I have try to reload /resett rosetta acount to get the new url adress if thats the problem. )
ID: 96541 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mod.Sense
Volunteer moderator

Send message
Joined: 22 Aug 06
Posts: 4018
Credit: 0
RAC: 0
Message 96545 - Posted: 15 May 2020, 22:27:04 UTC - in response to Message 96541.  

The new URL will not impact credit nor RAC. Also, if you were not aware, removing and readding the project with the new URL that has the "S" in it, will abort all of your currently downloaded tasks. So you may want to mark R@h for no new work, and work down the ones you already have started before making the change.

When GPU tasks run, they also consume CPU. Are you leaving a CPU available to service the GPU tasks?
Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense
ID: 96545 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
CIA

Send message
Joined: 3 May 07
Posts: 100
Credit: 21,059,812
RAC: 0
Message 97167 - Posted: 2 Jun 2020, 18:18:24 UTC - in response to Message 96545.  
Last modified: 2 Jun 2020, 18:23:04 UTC

I didn't really want to start a new thread so I'm piggybacking on this one. Also note I don't really care too much about credit, but I found this interesting:

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/workunit.php?wuid=1071103338

Due to the upload issue, I crunched for 24 hours and produced 5 decoys (Submitted 2hrs late). Someone else crunched for only 5 hours and produced a single decoy. Yet we both got the same credit. Is this normal?
ID: 97167 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Brian Nixon

Send message
Joined: 12 Apr 20
Posts: 293
Credit: 8,432,366
RAC: 0
Message 97170 - Posted: 2 Jun 2020, 19:27:10 UTC - in response to Message 97167.  

CIA wrote:
I crunched for 24 hours and produced 5 decoys (Submitted 2hrs late). Someone else crunched for only 5 hours and produced a single decoy. Yet we both got the same credit. Is this normal?
Yes, that is how BOINC works
ID: 97170 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Bryn Mawr

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 18
Posts: 376
Credit: 10,758,043
RAC: 6,645
Message 97183 - Posted: 3 Jun 2020, 10:13:23 UTC - in response to Message 97170.  

CIA wrote:
I crunched for 24 hours and produced 5 decoys (Submitted 2hrs late). Someone else crunched for only 5 hours and produced a single decoy. Yet we both got the same credit. Is this normal?
Yes, that is how BOINC works


Then applying rule 2 in your link :-

When a computer reports a result, it claims a certain amount of credit, based on how much CPU time was used.

The credits should not be the same.

Also, we’ve always been told that the number of decoys produced is a better measure than the processing time.
ID: 97183 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Brian Nixon

Send message
Joined: 12 Apr 20
Posts: 293
Credit: 8,432,366
RAC: 0
Message 97184 - Posted: 3 Jun 2020, 11:47:54 UTC - in response to Message 97183.  
Last modified: 3 Jun 2020, 11:49:16 UTC

But ultimately (if I’ve understood correctly): all computers that complete a work unit receive the same credit for it.

That scheme probably only works well for projects that follow the fixed work / variable duration task model, and will indeed lead to disparities like this on Rosetta (fixed duration / variable work)…
ID: 97184 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Bryn Mawr

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 18
Posts: 376
Credit: 10,758,043
RAC: 6,645
Message 97198 - Posted: 3 Jun 2020, 20:54:54 UTC - in response to Message 97184.  

But ultimately (if I’ve understood correctly): all computers that complete a work unit receive the same credit for it.

That scheme probably only works well for projects that follow the fixed work / variable duration task model, and will indeed lead to disparities like this on Rosetta (fixed duration / variable work)…


My understanding is that the credits received are dependant on the number of decoys completed and is a measure of the work done.
ID: 97198 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
mikey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 06
Posts: 1894
Credit: 8,769,835
RAC: 5,482
Message 97203 - Posted: 3 Jun 2020, 22:31:19 UTC - in response to Message 96541.  

Whats wrong ?? I losing average credit. Befor i hold a line on 2300 average credit on 8-10 houers (8core i7 3770k). .. now i droping to 1950 on 15-20 houers. Roseta runs on cpu and gpugrid and primegrid working on gpu. The work time on rosetta work have go from 4,5 houer to 8,5 houer and i get around 35-150 cred normaly now. I change my cpu cooler so i lower my temp from 80 celcius to 35. it increse the cpu woring speed from 2,9 Mhz (87%) to 3,68 Mhz (+100%) Is it setting or what? On prime and gpugrid i running 47000 -120000 cred on 4 hours. (I have try to reload /resett rosetta acount to get the new url adress if thats the problem. )


Think of RAC as a speedometer...you were crunching faster so you were crediting credits faster, now it's taking longer for each workunit so you are slowing down.

The question is why you are slowing down...my guess is yout gpu is stealing time from your cpu which is then slowing down your Rosetta crunching. You have an Nvidia GTX980 gpu, under Boinc most Nvidia gpu's need a whole cpu core to make them run at their max.
ID: 97203 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Grant (SSSF)

Send message
Joined: 28 Mar 20
Posts: 1498
Credit: 14,724,224
RAC: 16,206
Message 97211 - Posted: 4 Jun 2020, 9:20:15 UTC - in response to Message 96541.  

What's wrong ?? I losing average credit.
You need to process Rosetta Tasks in order for your Rosetta RAC to stop falling. Since you haven't processed any for some time, your RAC continues to fall.
Grant
Darwin NT
ID: 97211 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mod.Sense
Volunteer moderator

Send message
Joined: 22 Aug 06
Posts: 4018
Credit: 0
RAC: 0
Message 97246 - Posted: 5 Jun 2020, 16:50:39 UTC - in response to Message 97198.  

My understanding is that the credits received are dependant on the number of decoys completed and is a measure of the work done.


Yes, the number of decoys is the basis for granting credit. However, in your extremely rare case where two machines both completed the same WU, all are granted the same credit. In essence there is a BOINC rule superseding the project's method of computing credit.

R@h does not request the WU verifications that some other BOINC projects do. It is better to spend that time exploring new models.

It is because:
a deadline was passed
and a new task for the WU was issued
and both the expired task and the reissued task were reported back
... that you got the result you see. If any of those three things had not happened, things would have been normal.
Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense
ID: 97246 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Bryn Mawr

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 18
Posts: 376
Credit: 10,758,043
RAC: 6,645
Message 97250 - Posted: 5 Jun 2020, 19:31:42 UTC - in response to Message 97246.  

My understanding is that the credits received are dependant on the number of decoys completed and is a measure of the work done.


Yes, the number of decoys is the basis for granting credit. However, in your extremely rare case where two machines both completed the same WU, all are granted the same credit. In essence there is a BOINC rule superseding the project's method of computing credit.

R@h does not request the WU verifications that some other BOINC projects do. It is better to spend that time exploring new models.

It is because:
a deadline was passed
and a new task for the WU was issued
and both the expired task and the reissued task were reported back
... that you got the result you see. If any of those three things had not happened, things would have been normal.


OK, I understand. Thank you for the clarification.
ID: 97250 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote

Message boards : Number crunching : Why losing average credit.



©2024 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org