My experience with Rosetta WU's

Message boards : Number crunching : My experience with Rosetta WU's

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next

AuthorMessage
pe
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 4
Credit: 318,774
RAC: 0
Message 263 - Posted: 20 Sep 2005, 22:45:14 UTC
Last modified: 20 Sep 2005, 22:48:05 UTC

i just noticed that after a reboot the correct time already spent for that workunit is shown. but after the restart of that workunit it is reset to zero.
and also the percentage done went from 83.xx down to 75%.
maybe this helps the devs.

greetz, pe.

ID: 263 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Nightbird

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 70
Credit: 32,418
RAC: 0
Message 288 - Posted: 21 Sep 2005, 18:41:45 UTC

first Wu :
9h 49 min 19 sec (35,358.59 sec)

Barton 3200+
Win2k
1 GB memory

CC 4.32

Running with Sztaki, ressource share (100/100)



ID: 288 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
RDC

Send message
Joined: 16 Sep 05
Posts: 43
Credit: 101,644
RAC: 0
Message 293 - Posted: 21 Sep 2005, 21:28:02 UTC - in response to Message 249.  

Resetting of cpu time to zero also happens if Boinc it's doing benchmarks. Application in progress will be removed from memory and if this is rosetta, then cpu time is zero after benchmarks. Just saw that on my linux box.


The last WU that I processed involved a BOINC benchmark running in the middle of the WU. It dumped the WU out of memory like it should and brought it back after the benchmarking was completed without losing any of the CPU time. Looks like they fixed that problem.
ID: 293 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile UBT - Halifax--lad
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 157
Credit: 2,687
RAC: 0
Message 297 - Posted: 21 Sep 2005, 22:06:54 UTC

yup that happened to me the other day and it just started back where it had finished
Join us in Chat (see the forum) Click the Sig


Join UBT
ID: 297 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
devn

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 18
Credit: 2,063
RAC: 0
Message 323 - Posted: 22 Sep 2005, 12:24:39 UTC

decided to try again. suspended my other 2 projects and started rosetta. success! finished in 8+ hours. ;)
ID: 323 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Webmaster Yoda
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 161
Credit: 162,253
RAC: 0
Message 324 - Posted: 22 Sep 2005, 13:06:45 UTC - in response to Message 323.  

decided to try again. suspended my other 2 projects and started rosetta. success! finished in 8+ hours. ;)


Same here, with the optimised app (4.76). Took only 2 hours and 25 minutes on my Athlon XP 3000+. Looking good.
*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***
ID: 324 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Rebirther
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 116
Credit: 41,315
RAC: 0
Message 338 - Posted: 22 Sep 2005, 20:38:56 UTC
Last modified: 22 Sep 2005, 20:39:27 UTC

With new 4.76 app 5:30h for one WU on a 3,2Ghz P4. Nice to see that without any errors but checkpoints are too high (1h) I think. It would be better after 10min.
ID: 338 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Nightbird

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 70
Credit: 32,418
RAC: 0
Message 344 - Posted: 22 Sep 2005, 22:20:13 UTC

With the new 4.76
1) 1h 36 min
2) 1h 30 min
3) 1h 34 min

no errors

Barton 3200+
Win2k

CC 4.32



ID: 344 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
devn

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 18
Credit: 2,063
RAC: 0
Message 352 - Posted: 23 Sep 2005, 3:07:40 UTC - in response to Message 323.  

decided to try again. suspended my other 2 projects and started rosetta. success! finished in 8+ hours. ;)



with the optimized app (4.76), my next wu finished in 1hr 38min. :)

ID: 352 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Polian
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Sep 05
Posts: 152
Credit: 10,141,266
RAC: 0
Message 354 - Posted: 23 Sep 2005, 4:51:09 UTC - in response to Message 352.  

with the optimized app (4.76), my next wu finished in 1hr 38min. :)


We're too efficient now! The result queue draineth! :)
ID: 354 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Ocean Archer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Sep 05
Posts: 32
Credit: 49,302
RAC: 0
Message 359 - Posted: 23 Sep 2005, 12:03:31 UTC

After running a few WUs through my machines, I'm seeing a range of 4 to 4 1/2 hours per WU.

Machines are "rescued" Dell GX110s w/CPU speed of 933meg and 256meg RAM, using Win2000Pro for OS. Cannot cycle between Rosetta and other projects without Rosetta erroring out, so these machines are banging away 100% until I set "no new work".


ID: 359 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
RDC

Send message
Joined: 16 Sep 05
Posts: 43
Credit: 101,644
RAC: 0
Message 360 - Posted: 23 Sep 2005, 13:02:24 UTC - in response to Message 359.  

Machines are "rescued" Dell GX110s w/CPU speed of 933meg and 256meg RAM, using Win2000Pro for OS. Cannot cycle between Rosetta and other projects without Rosetta erroring out, so these machines are banging away 100% until I set "no new work".



With the 1200 mhz AMD, 512 ram, WinXP PC I run Rosetta on, I've been able to cycle Rosetta with other projects with no problems at all.

ID: 360 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Ocean Archer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Sep 05
Posts: 32
Credit: 49,302
RAC: 0
Message 362 - Posted: 23 Sep 2005, 13:24:03 UTC

Cannot cycle between Rosetta and other projects without Rosetta erroring out, ...


Please excuse my incomplete comment. I meant to indicate that I could not switch between BOINC projects without losing the Rosetta WU. Normal operation of the machine complete with other tasks such as Word, Excel, etc. work fine, including play of "recreational" programs.


ID: 362 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile KWSN Sir Clark

Send message
Joined: 18 Sep 05
Posts: 46
Credit: 387,432
RAC: 0
Message 366 - Posted: 23 Sep 2005, 14:53:53 UTC

It might be a memory issue seeing as you only have 256MB of RAM and 512MB is recommended.
ID: 366 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Housing and Food Services

Send message
Joined: 1 Jul 05
Posts: 85
Credit: 155,098,531
RAC: 0
Message 367 - Posted: 23 Sep 2005, 14:55:29 UTC

512 is the reccomendation. I'm running dozens of machines with 128, and while they take a long time, they finish. The new wu's also take a lot less memory, somewhere between 50 and 100 rather than 200+.
ID: 367 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Ed and Harriet Griffith
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 39
Credit: 1,786,351
RAC: 1,223
Message 456 - Posted: 25 Sep 2005, 12:44:37 UTC

With a celeron 1.8 GHz processor, 496 mg of RAM, and windows xp, it takes about 4 hours a work unit, about 4.5 hours if BOINCing with another project.

ID: 456 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Doug Worrall
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Sep 05
Posts: 60
Credit: 58,445
RAC: 0
Message 457 - Posted: 25 Sep 2005, 12:49:35 UTC - in response to Message 209.  

Mine took about 36 hours on a 1200 mhz AMD with WinXP and 512 ram.




Using Linux have only had "Computation errors" and using my Valuable Time
I could be giving to an Experiment that will send me info "Why" or "What" I can
do to eliviate this Issue.
I have nearly 800 RAM and there should not be only Errors,unless Linuxos
is not supported?
Sluger1138
ID: 457 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Ed and Harriet Griffith
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 39
Credit: 1,786,351
RAC: 1,223
Message 506 - Posted: 26 Sep 2005, 3:05:00 UTC - in response to Message 456.  

With a celeron 1.8 GHz processor, 496 mg of RAM, and windows xp, it takes about 4 hours a work unit, about 4.5 hours if BOINCing with another project.


On further experience, it takes much longer if BOINCing because the unit keeps going back and starting over again at a previous point. The total time spent on the work unit also goes back. The temporary solution is to suspend other projects until I completely finish all Rosetta units as it takes too long otherwise. The client is stable, however, and this seems like a great project with a direction and purpose I do not see at other protein folding projects. I am confident that with more waypoints the program will be able to run smoothly with other projects.

ID: 506 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Shaktai
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Sep 05
Posts: 56
Credit: 575,419
RAC: 0
Message 507 - Posted: 26 Sep 2005, 3:23:49 UTC - in response to Message 506.  

On further experience, it takes much longer if BOINCing because the unit keeps going back and starting over again at a previous point. The total time spent on the work unit also goes back. The temporary solution is to suspend other projects until I completely finish all Rosetta units as it takes too long otherwise. The client is stable, however, and this seems like a great project with a direction and purpose I do not see at other protein folding projects. I am confident that with more waypoints the program will be able to run smoothly with other projects.


I had the same problem with my Macs. The solution was to extend the time for switching between projects from 60 minutes, to 120 or 180 minutes under general preferences. This way the next step is able to complete. Of course there may still be some fall back on each switch between projects, but it has less of an impact. Right now though, all my computers are crunching strictly Rosetta. I like this project.

Team MacNN - The best Macintosh team ever.
ID: 507 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile David E K
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 1 Jul 05
Posts: 1018
Credit: 4,334,829
RAC: 0
Message 508 - Posted: 26 Sep 2005, 3:25:09 UTC - in response to Message 457.  

Mine took about 36 hours on a 1200 mhz AMD with WinXP and 512 ram.




Using Linux have only had "Computation errors" and using my Valuable Time
I could be giving to an Experiment that will send me info "Why" or "What" I can
do to eliviate this Issue.
I have nearly 800 RAM and there should not be only Errors,unless Linuxos
is not supported?
Sluger1138


I'll look into these errors when I get back from vacation.
ID: 508 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : My experience with Rosetta WU's



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