Looks like Rosetta 4.2 just got a batch of `miniprotein in , grab them while they iz hot
front page job que went up by millions .

I just got 25 4.2 work units and five are currently running.
Mine are regular work units, not Rosetta mini work units. But the tasks look like this:

Tue 24 May 2022 09:35:07 PM EDT | Rosetta@home | Starting task miniprotein_relax_v2_1_SAVE_ALL_OUT_IGNORE_THE_REST_5yb7eb8g_2914917_13_0

---

It may be a task that ran much longer than expected, without anything going wrong. If so, just letting it run enough longer would have let it finish.

I always leave them running unless the CPU is not actually being used. In that one, "CPU time 1d 02:32:21" I assume refers to real calculations, and "Elapsed time 1d 01:32:50" refers to actual time taken. I'm not familiar with wherever that came from, I use Boinctasks. So I think that one was calculating on a whole CPU core.

I just got 25 4.2 work units and five are currently running.
Mine are regular work units, not Rosetta mini work units. But the tasks look like this:

Tue 24 May 2022 09:35:07 PM EDT | Rosetta@home | Starting task miniprotein_relax_v2_1_SAVE_ALL_OUT_IGNORE_THE_REST_5yb7eb8g_2914917_13_0

Same here, I have about 80, some are rb (I think I got those by chance just before the onslaught) some are miniprotein, all labelled Rosetta 4.2 as the application though. So a small protein but not a small work unit?

It may be a task that ran much longer than expected, without anything going wrong. If so, just letting it run enough longer would have let it finish.

I always leave them running unless the CPU is not actually being used. In that one, "CPU time 1d 02:32:21" I assume refers to real calculations, and "Elapsed time 1d 01:32:50" refers to actual time taken. I'm not familiar with wherever that came from, I use Boinctasks. So I think that one was calculating on a whole CPU core.

CPU time is probably time used according to the small operating system inside the vbox64 emulation, which is usually close but not identical to the elapsed time,, or actual time used.

That task would be calculating on a whole or physical core if nothing else was trying to use the other virtual core for that physical core.

Multiple small proteins at once could give a long workunit.

Every single one I've had failed has had bugger all CPU time compared to wall time. I usually notice 27 seconds of work has been done in 5 hours and cancel it. Everything else has run to completion. I wonder if there's an automated way to detect suss CPU time ratios?

Ah, this is the problem. The Python book has only one use:

My quick analysis of desktop items in the photo , I see with python tasks they realy are comparing oranges with almonds . . . .

What surprises me is they couldn't afford a monitor with adjustable height.

I also like the way the width of the monitors is of no use. Bring back 4:3! 16:9 is for TVs!

With some of the long work unit names rosetta has it gives a better chance to fit them on the screen , Save_aall_the_squishy_bIt5-and -puT_the_rest0uT_for_the_traj5.rAbid_raBit names

All this digital tecknology creating a paperless society . not
More and more bits of dead tree pulverized and squashed flat and skribled on to remind us WTF all that stuff on screen is about .

I once had a colleague with 30 post it notes all around her monitor with all the passwords she used.

Paper is a renewable resource (and isn't it trapping that "evil" carbon?). At my work they said to stop using so much paper. People were alledgedly printing at 14p a page in colour. The management produced colour photocopiers that could do it for 6p a page. I pointed out we were actually using Brother printers with fake ink at 1p a page. The paper cost more than the ink even for a full colour page. Then I found out the "survey" on cost was done by the company (Xerox) renting us the photocopiers, using the cost of HP printers with genuine rip off ink. Then the arguments started.

I also like the way the width of the monitors is of no use. Bring back 4:3! 16:9 is for TVs!

I love 16:9 on my 25 inch, it's better than 16:10 for running 2 programs side by side (or three when troubleshooting logs, webclient and server side) .

That said, I've got a weird scheduling issue with my client. I have jobs that need to report before x but those jobs are not always the ones that get initiated when another job finishes. This leads to jobs reporting past their due date and I'm not sure whether that invalidates them.

Screenshot (sorted by report before date): https://imgur.com/a/wbHnfzf
There's 2 jobs that need to report before 28-5 6 am, and 2 that need to report before 11:30 am but there are 4 jobs running that need to report before 28-5 3:30pm and later.

I also like the way the width of the monitors is of no use. Bring back 4:3! 16:9 is for TVs!

I love 16:9 on my 25 inch, it's better than 16:10 for running 2 programs side by side (or three when troubleshooting logs, webclient and server side) .

That said, I've got a weird scheduling issue with my client. I have jobs that need to report before x but those jobs are not always the ones that get initiated when another job finishes. This leads to jobs reporting past their due date and I'm not sure whether that invalidates them.

Screenshot (sorted by report before date): https://imgur.com/a/wbHnfzf
There's 2 jobs that need to report before 28-5 6 am, and 2 that need to report before 11:30 am but there are 4 jobs running that need to report before 28-5 3:30pm and later.

Have you actually had jobs miss deadlines?

Boinc will choose which job to run based on your preferred resource share until and unless there are jobs in danger of missing their deadline when it will switch to running the late jobs as high priority

I have a Rosetta@home task, rosetta python projects 1.03 (vbox64), that has been running for over four days. It is two days past its deadline. Today it is now showing 00:00:00 Remaining. The task is showing very little use of CPU time in Activity Monitor. Will this task ever end? It took over two days to go from 00:00:04 to 00:00:00 Remaining. Should I just abort the task?

TASK PROPERTIES:

Application
rosetta python projects 1.03 (vbox64)
Name
aagb-NMABU-mPHE-mACHC13T-mACPenC12T_pp_6_2667468_6
State
Running
Received
Sunday, May 22, 2022 at 08:49:12 AM
Report deadline
Wednesday, May 25, 2022 at 08:49:12 AM
Estimated computation size
80,000 GFLOPs
CPU time
00:33:11
CPU time since checkpoint
00:00:01
Elapsed time
4d 11:58:29
Estimated time remaining
00:00:00
Fraction done
100.000%
Virtual memory size
65.57 GB
Working set size
2.79 GB
Directory
slots/2
Process ID
16253
Progress rate
1.080% per hour
Executable
vboxwrapper_26199_x86_64-apple-darwin

I also like the way the width of the monitors is of no use. Bring back 4:3! 16:9 is for TVs!

I love 16:9 on my 25 inch, it's better than 16:10 for running 2 programs side by side (or three when troubleshooting logs, webclient and server side) .

That said, I've got a weird scheduling issue with my client. I have jobs that need to report before x but those jobs are not always the ones that get initiated when another job finishes. This leads to jobs reporting past their due date and I'm not sure whether that invalidates them.

Screenshot (sorted by report before date): https://imgur.com/a/wbHnfzf
There's 2 jobs that need to report before 28-5 6 am, and 2 that need to report before 11:30 am but there are 4 jobs running that need to report before 28-5 3:30pm and later.

Have you actually had jobs miss deadlines?

Boinc will choose which job to run based on your preferred resource share until and unless there are jobs in danger of missing their deadline when it will switch to running the late jobs as high priority

Yeah, but I cancelled a few of those to keep it going. I'm unsure whether the overdue jobs would actually be useful which is why I cancelled them.

I had one rosetta python job miss deadline, but it still was accepted when i reported it.

I have a Rosetta@home task, rosetta python projects 1.03 (vbox64), that has been running for over four days. It is two days past its deadline. Today it is now showing 00:00:00 Remaining. The task is showing very little use of CPU time in Activity Monitor. Will this task ever end? It took over two days to go from 00:00:04 to 00:00:00 Remaining. Should I just abort the task?

TASK PROPERTIES:

Application
rosetta python projects 1.03 (vbox64)
Name
aagb-NMABU-mPHE-mACHC13T-mACPenC12T_pp_6_2667468_6

Look at these two parts:

CPU time
00:33:11

Elapsed time
4d 11:58:29

When the elapsed time gets hours more than the CPU time, the task is no longer doing anything useful, so you might as well abort it,

Some difference between the two is normal, but not that much.

Boinc will choose which job to run based on your preferred resource share until and unless there are jobs in danger of missing their deadline when it will switch to running the late jobs as high priority

No, Boinc uses no common sense when deciding to run anything. For example, I have 100 4-core tasks queued on a 4-core machine, plus 3 1-core tasks. So it quite sensibly uses the 4-core tasks to keep the whole CPU busy. But at some point, those 3 1-core tasks have to be done. So what does it do? Runs them at the same time as a 4-core task, and at the very last minute, so they would just be done in time if the 4-core one wasn't there. Obviously, they end up being returned late.

I love 16:9 on my 25 inch, it's better than 16:10 for running 2 programs side by side (or three when troubleshooting logs, webclient and server side) .

So you're basically using it like two monitors. I prefer two monitors. Or an ultrawide which is effectively two 4:3s, it's 16:6.

I have seen some of the ultra wide monitors/TV`s on the web , it must be like looking at the world through a letterbox .
nice , but expensive .