CPU usage

Message boards : Number crunching : CPU usage

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4

AuthorMessage
Warped

Send message
Joined: 15 Jan 06
Posts: 48
Credit: 1,788,185
RAC: 0
Message 62124 - Posted: 8 Jul 2009, 11:01:03 UTC - in response to Message 62122.  
Last modified: 8 Jul 2009, 11:06:35 UTC

This is a standard message because there were people that said they never heard a newer version was available. Use the version you like, if the project you like requires a higher version it will be made known on their boards that you will have to upgrade.


I don't know why they threw out 5.10.45. As far as I'm concerned it was the most stable version available. This CUDA rubbish is has really messed up BOINC IMHO. Apart from all sorts of problems with the performance whenever I've tried to use it, the comparative statistics are now meaningless as well.
Warped

ID: 62124 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62126 - Posted: 8 Jul 2009, 12:14:58 UTC - in response to Message 62121.  

Your problem in Windows is that you are using one of the 6.6. ? Boinc versions


So if I understand this, the problem is that Rosetta doesn't work with Boinc 6.6.X, correct? I have to assume this because all my other projects work fine with Boinc 6.6.X.

ID: 62126 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Evan

Send message
Joined: 23 Dec 05
Posts: 268
Credit: 402,585
RAC: 0
Message 62131 - Posted: 8 Jul 2009, 17:00:26 UTC
Last modified: 8 Jul 2009, 17:01:59 UTC

So if I understand this, the problem is that Rosetta doesn't work with Boinc 6.6.X, correct?


I'm on v6.6.20 using win xp (sp3) and I haven't noticed any significant problems.
ID: 62131 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
mikey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 06
Posts: 1894
Credit: 8,756,601
RAC: 13,157
Message 62139 - Posted: 9 Jul 2009, 10:44:16 UTC - in response to Message 62131.  

So if I understand this, the problem is that Rosetta doesn't work with Boinc 6.6.X, correct?


I'm on v6.6.20 using win xp (sp3) and I haven't noticed any significant problems.


The problems with the 6.6.? version is in the scheduling when you crunch for multiple projects on one machine. I believe it works just fine if you only crunch for one project per machine, most people however do not do this.
ID: 62139 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
mikey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 06
Posts: 1894
Credit: 8,756,601
RAC: 13,157
Message 62140 - Posted: 9 Jul 2009, 11:06:05 UTC - in response to Message 62126.  

Your problem in Windows is that you are using one of the 6.6. ? Boinc versions


So if I understand this, the problem is that Rosetta doesn't work with Boinc 6.6.X, correct? I have to assume this because all my other projects work fine with Boinc 6.6.X.


No I think this is an oversimplification of the problems you are seeing. I think for you Rosetta is not where you should be crunching right now. I think Rosetta is a very good project and most people will find it rewarding to crunch here. However you seem to be having problems that are not being fixed by whatever you have tried so far and to continue down this path will not be rewarding to you. In fact I think it will continue to be a pain until whatever is causing the problem for you is fixed. It could be Rosetta, it could be your hardware, your other software, your settings, even a combination of things, but until things change I would just move on. There are many other Boinc projects that would enjoy your help just as much as Rosetta does now. Please DO come back periodically to see if it works again however!! I am NOT telling you to leave, I am just saying if it were me, I would be gone already! My opinion is my own and is not in any way a reflection of this, or any other, Project. As you can tell by my stats I have been Boincing for a while now, I believe in Boinc and how it lets us regular folks contribute in ways we never could otherwise. I also believe that in some cases it is better to move on than struggle with something that isn't worth my time and effort. I think you have given it the old 'college try' and it is now up to you to decide to continue here or move on. There are alot of active Distributed Computing Projects out there, here is a link to a page listing some of them http://distributedcomputing.info/projects.html The Boinc ones have Boinc next to them. Good Luck in your choice.
ID: 62140 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Evan

Send message
Joined: 23 Dec 05
Posts: 268
Credit: 402,585
RAC: 0
Message 62146 - Posted: 9 Jul 2009, 17:36:23 UTC

The problems with the 6.6.? version is in the scheduling when you crunch for multiple projects on one machine.


Could it be that people are expecting too much out of a machine with restricted memory? If I have interpreted michaelmastro's computer correctly he has about 2000mb ram while running vista which in itself takes over 1000 mb. Perhaps an increase in ram might help?
ID: 62146 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62147 - Posted: 9 Jul 2009, 18:04:35 UTC - in response to Message 62146.  

Could it be that people are expecting too much out of a machine with restricted memory? If I have interpreted michaelmastro's computer correctly he has about 2000mb ram while running vista which in itself takes over 1000 mb. Perhaps an increase in ram might help?


Then why would I have no problems with any aps but Rosetta+

ID: 62147 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Evan

Send message
Joined: 23 Dec 05
Posts: 268
Credit: 402,585
RAC: 0
Message 62148 - Posted: 9 Jul 2009, 19:05:22 UTC

My presently active applications are taking 430, 340, 223 and 157 mb (virtual memory size) respectively. So perhaps yours are draining the available resources.
ID: 62148 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62149 - Posted: 9 Jul 2009, 19:12:07 UTC - in response to Message 62148.  

My presently active applications are taking 430, 340, 223 and 157 mb (virtual memory size) respectively. So perhaps yours are draining the available resources.


I don't think that's it. Rosetta would run fine for a while, then all of a sudden cpu usage would drop to nothing, Elapsed Time, and To Completion would get completely out of sinc. I would have to restart the computer and everything would go back to normal for a short time. Then a new issue came up - Boinc got stuck on Rosetta for three days and wouldn't switch projects, and work time went from a few hours to a few days. As I have said repeatedly, the only trouble I have is with Rosetta.

ID: 62149 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
mikey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 06
Posts: 1894
Credit: 8,756,601
RAC: 13,157
Message 62161 - Posted: 10 Jul 2009, 9:11:32 UTC - in response to Message 62149.  

My presently active applications are taking 430, 340, 223 and 157 mb (virtual memory size) respectively. So perhaps yours are draining the available resources.


I don't think that's it. Rosetta would run fine for a while, then all of a sudden cpu usage would drop to nothing, Elapsed Time, and To Completion would get completely out of sinc. I would have to restart the computer and everything would go back to normal for a short time. Then a new issue came up - Boinc got stuck on Rosetta for three days and wouldn't switch projects, and work time went from a few hours to a few days. As I have said repeatedly, the only trouble I have is with Rosetta.


The getting stuck problem is the version of Boinc you are using, 6.6.36 is what you are using and all 6.6.? versions have scheduling problems. They can't seem to figure out that we want to crunch for multiple projects with our own % of time given to each. To fix it you have to go into a file and change the LTD or Long Term Debt settings. The stopping crunching problem is what I have no idea of how to fix.
ID: 62161 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62167 - Posted: 10 Jul 2009, 14:10:40 UTC - in response to Message 62161.  

The getting stuck problem is the version of Boinc you are using, 6.6.36 is what you are using and all 6.6.? versions have scheduling problems.


Once again - THE ONLY PROBLEM IS WITH ROSETTA. If this was a Boinc problem, wouldn't I be having similar problems with all projects?!

ID: 62167 · 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 62169 - Posted: 10 Jul 2009, 17:45:08 UTC

Not disagreeing with you michaelmastro, but do keep in mind the memory requirements of Rosetta are rather high when compared to many projects. And it seems some work units of late have higher then normal memory usage as well. So, it is possible that this exposes underlaying issues in BOINC that other projects and systems do not encounter.
Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense
ID: 62169 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62172 - Posted: 10 Jul 2009, 21:24:11 UTC - in response to Message 62169.  

Not disagreeing with you michaelmastro, but do keep in mind the memory requirements of Rosetta are rather high when compared to many projects. And it seems some work units of late have higher then normal memory usage as well. So, it is possible that this exposes underlaying issues in BOINC that other projects and systems do not encounter.


Understood. Thank you.

ID: 62172 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62192 - Posted: 11 Jul 2009, 22:54:29 UTC - in response to Message 62172.  

I've reinstalled Boinc 6.2.19 and reattached to Rosetta. So far no problems. Stay tuned...
ID: 62192 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62266 - Posted: 17 Jul 2009, 16:05:21 UTC - in response to Message 62192.  

I've reinstalled Boinc 6.2.19 and reattached to Rosetta. So far no problems. Stay tuned...


Rosetta is running with no problems...

ID: 62266 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Greg_BE
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 May 06
Posts: 5659
Credit: 5,695,445
RAC: 1,982
Message 62272 - Posted: 17 Jul 2009, 21:40:25 UTC - in response to Message 62266.  

I've reinstalled Boinc 6.2.19 and reattached to Rosetta. So far no problems. Stay tuned...


Rosetta is running with no problems...



You can probably bump up to 6.4.7 without encountering any problems.
I saw some of the same scheduling problems that have been talked about.
I dropped back to 6.4.7 and things are back to normal.
Also noticed that I got a 10 deg. F drop in cpu temp by going back to 6.4.7.
ID: 62272 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Greg_BE
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 May 06
Posts: 5659
Credit: 5,695,445
RAC: 1,982
Message 62301 - Posted: 20 Jul 2009, 0:26:34 UTC - in response to Message 62298.  

About that temperature drop. Do you really believe that will happen when going to 6.4.7? In my opinion it is purely coincidental. I'm guessing some other things were changed when you started using that version.



I had the same tasks running on 6.6.x when I changed to 6.4.7 and saw the immediate drop in temp. I watched the temp graph for the next 10-20 mins and did not see any rise back to the old temp. The "bounce" in the graph was exactly the same as in 6.6.x but at 10 deg. F lower on the graph.

I was running 165+ with peaks around 170 or a bit more. now the peaks barely cross the 165 mark at max. With my current batch of lr8 tasks i am running with a low temp of 152F average and a high of 158F. I will go back to 6.6.x for a little bit to see where things are. I will post again when I get up in the morning what I see as the results of going back to 6.6.x for temperature. we already know the scheduler issues.
ID: 62301 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Greg_BE
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 May 06
Posts: 5659
Credit: 5,695,445
RAC: 1,982
Message 62304 - Posted: 20 Jul 2009, 7:56:42 UTC

Well, It would seem that Transient was right.
There is no considerable difference in temperature between 6.6.x and 6.4.7.
That must have been a fluke in my system when I changed versions and the temperature dropped.

The only issue I see, that has been talked about by many people is the scheduling problem of 6.6.x. Over night I had 3 Rosie tasks complete and they did not report.
With 6.4.7 they would have reported automatically.

I am running with a dual core intel with official clock speed of 3.0 and OC'd to a max of 3.6 (could run higher, but the built in graphics chip crashes if I do).
I run 24/7 at 100% cpu usuage. I have a Gemin II heat sink radiator with 2 large fans running at medium speed to keep my temperature around the 155 F mark. No side panel of course and the back panel has a few places open in the slots. This is how I run on the cooler side of things.

Anyway..thanks Transient for questioning the temperature drop.
ID: 62304 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62525 - Posted: 27 Jul 2009, 22:47:02 UTC - in response to Message 62266.  

Rosetta is running with no problems...


Well... After running smoothly for a week or so, Rosetta no longer receives downloads:

7/27/2009 5:36:53 PM|rosetta@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 1729728 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
7/27/2009 5:37:19 PM|rosetta@home|Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks

ID: 62525 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
michaelmastro
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 05
Posts: 51
Credit: 1,530,918
RAC: 0
Message 62526 - Posted: 27 Jul 2009, 22:48:41 UTC - in response to Message 62525.  

My apologies - I just read what I should have read before I posted.
ID: 62526 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4

Message boards : Number crunching : CPU usage



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