Posts by James Lee*
|
1)
(Message 6353)
Posted 11 Sep 2019 by James Lee* Post: Jesse, Also, porting to OpenCL would allow AMD Radeon cards to crunch here, as well. James |
|
2)
(Message 6347)
Posted 10 Sep 2019 by James Lee* Post: Gunnar It would not surprise me if Kyong did want to clear out the batch. And it is ridiculous the members here fill their buffers to the max. I use .1 days of ALL buffers - no extra time, so that I am working "current". It just amazes me, even though the project is clearing, I STILL have 649 WUs "waiting for validation"! Looking in on the "hogger" machines that are slowing down this process, and I can see turnaround times measured in 8 to 9 days! Mine is ONLY .12 days. AND, I have also seen machines with 100s of WUs buffered go down - never to reappear - and ALL of those WUs have to be recycled. I would hope that Kyong would set a reasonable time frame - 3 days max. Although I may run close to 60 cores on the project, it can take over two weeks for an actual effective RAC - because of the LONG validation times caused by "hoggers". When there are new WUs available, my machines will automatically kick back to this project, as I have set this project as a higher priority. This also keeps my machines from being "down" during these "hogger" clearing periods. James |
|
3)
(Message 5646)
Posted 16 Jan 2018 by James Lee* Post: At first I thought it was just of my machines, but, affecting ALL 13. Kyong is looking at it. |
|
4)
(Message 5561)
Posted 25 Nov 2017 by James Lee* Post: Georgi, Over the years on this project, the one thing that I have found is that this project has one solid piece of glue that holds it all together. That glue is Kyong. He is our fearless leader that has a full time job elsewhere, but puts all of his efforts in here to try to make things run as smooth as possible. All this, even though there are changes of equipment, personal living moves, job changes, etc. AND, he has to put up with bad, incorrect, or improperly formatted received data that all has to be straightened out. Yes, he could probably use our help more than we give. This project does not receive a lot of donations as others, nor the amount of engineers that could make things run what we would like as "smoother" or passing along more information about what is going on. If Kyong spent even thirty 30 minutes doing some of those things, then there are other areas that would suffer. My suggestion would be more of asking Kyong, via PM, what those qualified can do to help.. time, formatting, donations, etc. He is the TRUE HERO behind the scenes. But, even heroes can use our help! James |
|
5)
(Message 5559)
Posted 24 Nov 2017 by James Lee* Post: On the Home page, there is an link that takes you to DAMIT. It also explains the light inversion theory that used to collect an asteroids info. The info collected is broken down into the Work Units (WUs) that we process. So, If you go to http://astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz/projects/asteroids3D/web.php?page=db_tumblers you can find some great info, and if you download the •2008 TC3 (MPEG-4/AVI 22.6 MiB) listed there, you will see the result of our work on that one particular asteroid. Somewhere, there is a listing with what would be "pictures" of the asteroids, and who worked on them. Hope this helps. James |
|
6)
(Message 5445)
Posted 15 Jul 2017 by James Lee* Post: Since the 14th, I have noticed that WUs take about 15% to 20% longer to process. This is true on ALL of my machines crunching. What is the difference now? |
|
7)
(Message 5421)
Posted 15 Jun 2017 by James Lee* Post: Tom, What you are doing is perfectly reasonable. The ones that we REALLY hate are the hoarders that HAVE AN AVERAGE OF OVER 10 DAYS per task/WU! Nice of them to contribute - but at the expense of someone that has just completed a task, and then get NO CREDIT as it is "cancelled by server". Since I run 12 machines 24/7 with a turn around time of only 4 hours, I get these "computational wizards" hand-me-downs that have been re-assigned, but theirs just squeak in in time to have my task cancelled after completion. There is NO reason to have a turnaround time greater than 9 days. This causes duplicate work with NO CREDIT! They should be banished! As this is a standard of what happens when a task is re-assigned, NOT the exception - so almost every task that "they" complete, another is cancelled by the server. |
|
8)
(Message 5376)
Posted 26 Apr 2017 by James Lee* Post: Kyong... Read and laugh.. but can you do this? I don't expect the rest of you to run with no buffers, as I choose to do. And, I know, for some of you, THAT would be too complicated. Let me explain... Phil... I could not agree more. BUT, there are some here that "hoard" WUs by setting their buffers too high. If a WU is going to get completed in 10 days, but 2 people that get that WU and are each working off the bottom of a ten day buffer, that WU may never get completed by those 2 "confused" persons and possibly passed off to die in our custody. Solution - The system keeps track of average turn around time on a per-machine basis. (Kyong) Give WUs to like-minded buffering volunteers. I HATE seeing a WU waiting for all the "Chucks" and "Administrators" that have an average turnaround time of 6 days or more. MY AVERAGE TURNAROUND IS LESS THAN 3 HOURS! Therefore, I want to get a WU match with someone WITH SIMILIAR turnaround time, or at least, someone whose turnaround, is less than a day. Give the "confused" person with a 5 to 10 day average turnaround per WU to another 5 to 10 day "confused" person. We just need WUs going to like-minded bufferers. Some volunteers may grumble that they need a larger buffer so they do not have down time when the site is down or when we are waiting on WUs. To those users, I say, "GET A BRAIN!". YOU NEED TO HAVE A BACKUP PROJECT! This is a wonderful site run by a GREAT admin, but there are some limits to man and machine and there will be those time that you should be ready to run another project as a backup plan. Since I have a dozen machines crunching here, I have a greater investment than most in what "down" time would cost. Yet, I have no problem using priorities to have ALL my machines still crunch when WUs are lean here for some reason or another. AND even though I do have so many machines crunching, there is NO REASON for me to get nearly a thousand WUs waiting for validation. Makes Phil and I want to reach through the screen and "strangle" you "confused" persons here that cause "cancelled by server" messages when we have done/are doing the work. Also, if I were to buffer my machines for 10 days - averaging one WU every 3 minutes - , and the system just came up, it would not help when I suddenly send almost 5000 completed WUs to Kyong's poor Asteroid's system... with EVERYONE else doing the same! Right now, as set up, I would only be sending 60. And Again... Just coming off a team event for crunching a 15 day PrimeGrid challenge, and although back at Asteroids now for quite a few days, almost all my WUs go to "waiting validation" because of all the "confused" buffering, and will not show a true reflection of work accomplished here for almost 2 weeks. A proper working BOINC setup needs little if no buffering, But if you feel the need, for some reason, set your days for MAX buffer to just 3, or 4, at the most. Any more than that and YOU ARE JUST CONFUSED! AGAIN.. I don't expect the rest of you to run with no buffers, as I choose to do. And, I know, for some of you, THAT would be too complicated. James Lee, A loyal Kyong and Asteroids fan and cruncher. |
|
9)
(Message 5000)
Posted 28 Sep 2016 by James Lee* Post: Errors just came back on all machines. |
|
10)
(Message 4990)
Posted 24 Sep 2016 by James Lee* Post: The errors have stopped. I do not have ANY buffer set up, so those that have buffers may find errors for WUs received from 9/21 thru 9/23. |
|
11)
(Message 4986)
Posted 22 Sep 2016 by James Lee* Post: Melvyn and Alex, Same issues. Hope the moderators check this and post a response. In the mean time, I had to change to different projects. I hate doing that, Asteroids has been what started my BOINC "career", and I want to get back to it. |
|
12)
(Message 4981)
Posted 21 Sep 2016 by James Lee* Post: I have 10 machines running Asteroids, and ALL of them just started computation errors. I had to open my machines to other projects until this is fixed. |
|
13)
(Message 4863)
Posted 13 May 2016 by James Lee* Post: Yes, Kind of a problem as I upload a WU result every 5 minutes. Hope Kyong (FoxKyong) is on it. He's real busy and it might take him awhile to notice. |
|
14)
(Message 4681)
Posted 6 Nov 2015 by James Lee* Post: Out of WUs |
|
15)
(Message 4668)
Posted 31 Oct 2015 by James Lee* Post: Out of WUs. |
|
16)
(Message 4657)
Posted 14 Oct 2015 by James Lee* Post: out of work units |
|
17)
(Message 4643)
Posted 24 Sep 2015 by James Lee* Post: Out of work units! |
|
18)
(Message 4591)
Posted 9 Aug 2015 by James Lee* Post: Out of work units? |
|
19)
(Message 4566)
Posted 13 Jul 2015 by James Lee* Post: Since Asteroids is my number one Boinc project, I like to keep most of my PCs (especially the quad cores) racing thru the Asteroids units. And I USED TO (heavy on the USED TO) keep about a week of work to do in case of any problems. Then I saw how work backed up in the validation area, and I could lose tasks due to Boinc timeouts - work seemed to be done usually just before timing out when the queue depths are so deep and there would be timeouts if the power went out for a day or 2 - even several times a day from storms. So.. I backed off to only have a .05 day reserve with no extra days, and everything - all task units - fly thru with no backlog. HOWEVER, sometimes I end up waiting for over a week for validation as others (lol) are doing what I used to do. For example, I wondered what had happened to a task waiting to validate, I looked for it, it was assigned validation to a 6 cpu computer that has an "in progress" level of 235 tasks, waited a week there, and when timed out, assigned to another computer with a several day turnaround time. Today I sit and wonder as I have 140 (sometimes nearly 200) tasks waiting for validation, while only a dozen "in progress" and all are actually being worked one. I would just ask that some people set their queue depths a little lower. This keeps tasks from timing out - which requires the unit to be re-assigned, and all the work will all get done at the same speed, and validation won't be such a bottleneck. Thnx. (OK... I opened up a can of worms.. - Let's hear it.) |
|
20)
(Message 4498)
Posted 8 Jun 2015 by James Lee* Post: "I also have a tablet 4 with 4 cores crunching . I hope they do real work ;-]" I was curious how the 4 core tablet was doing. |
Next 20