Posts by fjpod

1) Questions and Answers : Android : No task for android via GRCPool (Message 91383)
Posted 18 Nov 2019 by fjpod
Post:
I'm a returning cruncher. Getting no work either on Android kindle fire... For about a week now.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Why are my Rosetta tasks running in High Priority? (Message 71784)
Posted 10 Dec 2011 by fjpod
Post:
I'd like to add a similar question to this thread...
My rig is running Rosetta tasks in high priority when I have even older Rosetta tasks that is haven't even started yet. Shouldn't Boinc start the tasks with the earliest expiration dates? All my tasks have about a 4 hour run time.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : AMD 9850 quad...client errors (Message 71378)
Posted 5 Oct 2011 by fjpod
Post:
The same rig never turns in a client error on Seti. Could it be because I am running an old client? 5.xx
4) Message boards : Number crunching : AMD 9850 quad...client errors (Message 71375)
Posted 5 Oct 2011 by fjpod
Post:
hmmm...I'll need some time to check it out. All other server functions seem to be fine though.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : AMD 9850 quad...client errors (Message 71365)
Posted 3 Oct 2011 by fjpod
Post:
Computer 1480644...

Everything is running stock. I get a large percentage of client errors. It's a server, but it sits, largely unused. Any recommendations
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta stops crunching (Message 71364)
Posted 3 Oct 2011 by fjpod
Post:
good to know that I am not the only one to notice this. I was beginning to think something was wrong with my hardware. I think the WUs are defective, because once a batch gets processed, the next batch will be OK.

...and the right way to allow more cpu use is to raise the number from 10 to 20 to...80, and finally 00. The 00 really should be 100 (%) useage. The 00 is really a misnomer and counter-intuitive...but hey, who's complaining.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta stops crunching (Message 71344)
Posted 27 Sep 2011 by fjpod
Post:
OOPS...I was already running on zero restriction, so that can't be it...and usually if cpus stop due to this restriction, they all stop, but in my case, only one or two are stopping. The only way to get them going again is to shut down Boinc and restart it. In the case of busy cpus, Boinc manager notifys you that cpus are suspended...but not in my case. The countdown clock keeps going as if nothing is wrong.

Anybody else seeing this?
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta stops crunching (Message 71343)
Posted 27 Sep 2011 by fjpod
Post:
I had raised this number to 50 or 60 when I went on 6.12, because at 25 the CPUs were stopping frequently. I'll give zero a try...thanks.
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta stops crunching (Message 71336)
Posted 26 Sep 2011 by fjpod
Post:
Is it just me?? For the past week, one of my computers (dual core) would spontaneously stop crunching Rosetta on one core only. The timer keeps going way up, but when the work isn't getting done. When you look in task manager, you can see that 50% of the cores are idle. At first I thought something was going wrong with my computer/CPU, but now it is also happening on one of my other computers (Q6700).

Is there something wrong with the WUs?
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta Stalls in the last 5% (Message 56470)
Posted 25 Oct 2008 by fjpod
Post:
Check your task manager. See if some other process is stealing reasources when this is happening. If this is the case, the clock will run very slowly.
11) Message boards : Number crunching : What's been up with R@H? (Message 56074)
Posted 28 Sep 2008 by fjpod
Post:
I run R@H on about 10 computers. All but one are working fine. The problem one wasn't reporting finished WUs. Communications were automatically deferred for 24 hours. Been going on for about 2 days, so after trying one last update, I reset the project which didn't work either. I finally deleted the project and went to re-attach and it's telling me R@H is temporarily unavailable. Why on only one of my computers? All the others are receiving and reporting work.
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Best Hardware Platform for Rosetta@home ??? (Message 55749)
Posted 14 Sep 2008 by fjpod
Post:
I've been using 64 bit Linux Ubuntu on a Q6700 with 2 gig of Ram. I don't see any consistently higher crunching rate than when I run the same rig in Windows xp 32 bit. The Linux box shows higher memory bandwidth available, but I suspect it's not being used. Even while I am running other programs concurrently with R@H, memory use does not exceed 1 gig.
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Claimed credit vs grant credit (Message 53396)
Posted 27 May 2008 by fjpod
Post:
I appreciate all the attempts to explain this, but I still don't get it. So, again, what you are saying is if I have a fast machine and someone else with a slow machine finishes a work unit first and gets, say 80 credits, if I go and finish that same workunit later in half the time, I will probably not get the 80 credits, but maybe 40 or 50. If I am correct, this doesn't seem fair. I'm not mad. I'm just trying to understand the beast.

zmsybe my problem is I don't really understand what a decoy is.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Claimed credit vs grant credit (Message 53365)
Posted 27 May 2008 by fjpod
Post:
Claimed credit is based on the benchmarks your computer runs when you set up the BOINC client. The factors that affect it include IntegerOps/second, FloatingPointOps/second, and so forth.

For Rosetta, granted credit is based on the number of models/decoys that your computer actually builds during the time it is running the task, irrespective of the amount of time it takes to build each model.

The very first person to report a particular type of task gets exactly the same granted credit as claimed credit.

For each person who reports after the first, the granted credit is a running average of all of the claimed credits previously.

The following is my understanding of how the system works. I could be wrong. I humbly submit to correction by anyone better informed than myself.

Example:

The first person to report completes 10 models and claims 100 credits. They get exactly what they claimed. Those models are worth 10 credits each, regardless of how long it took to make them.

The second person to report completes 8 models and claims 170 credits. They get 80 credits, because the models were worth 10 credits each when they reported. However, the models will be worth a little more to the next person.

At this point, 18 models have been completed and 270 credits have been claimed. The models are now worth 15 credits each.

The third person to report completes 12 models and claims 90 credits. They get 180 credits, because models were worth 15 credits each when they reported. However, the models will be worth a little less to the next person.

At this point, 30 models have been completed and 360 credits have been claimed. The models are now worth 12 credits each.

And so on...


Again, I remind you that the above is my understanding of the process, and my understanding may be flawed.

So if I understand this, having a really fast computer is not necessarily a help in acquiring credits. However, being the first one to complete a unit might be helpful. But if a bunch of slow computers have finished a workunit before you get to it, then you have no advantage if you have a fast one?
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Crunching and overclocking...validate errors? (Message 51968)
Posted 15 Mar 2008 by fjpod
Post:
Pardon me for starting a new thread, but I haven't found one on the subject, and any of the threads that I have found are old...

I have an Intel q6700 that is mildly overclocked to 3.25gHz and I am getting validate errors. My rig is perfectly overnight stable on Prime95 and Orthos.

Is overclocking the cause of errors, or is it something else.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Compute error (Message 51877)
Posted 9 Mar 2008 by fjpod
Post:
I've searched the other threads and can't seem to find anything specific related to compute errors. I am getting an error every dozen or so WU's. Is it likely me or R@H?

I just checked one and my wingman had a compute error also. Can I assume it's R@H?
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Trouble with Memory (Message 48795)
Posted 18 Nov 2007 by fjpod
Post:
I am having "waiting for memory" problems running a dual core,P4, xp, with .5gig RAM running Rosie only. So even though these memory intensive Rosie WUs are being sent to machines with .5 gig or greater, the two cores are gobbling up all the memory, and there's not enough left to finish. Other than get more memory, which I plan to do, any suggestions?






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