New updated applications released

Message boards : News : New updated applications released
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile Kyong
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 12
Posts: 578
Credit: 52,667,664
RAC: 0
Message 1816 - Posted: 28 Sep 2013, 14:58:15 UTC

There are new updated applications released for almost all platforms. There are some improvements in CPU optimization (mainly for ARM processors) and a problem that caused some workunits didn't pass through validator was removed.

Radim VanĨo (Kyong)
ID: 1816 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile den777

Send message
Joined: 22 Jun 13
Posts: 15
Credit: 3,118,560
RAC: 0
Message 1818 - Posted: 28 Sep 2013, 16:16:19 UTC

New apps show ridiculous crunching time, around 25 hours.
ID: 1818 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Overtonesinger
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Sep 13
Posts: 23
Credit: 31,256,520
RAC: 47,650
Message 1835 - Posted: 29 Sep 2013, 12:22:57 UTC - in response to Message 1818.  

On my android-tablet (Cortex A8 1.0 GHz) it is also 25 hours (no change from the old one, because it probably has no hardware double precision floating point).
And so I let Einstein-at-Home to compute there (effectively - nearly the same time like on my HTC One-V (1.0 GHz Snapdragon CPU).

On my HTC One-V (Snapdragon) new asteroid WUs seem faster approx. by 12 percent. They now complete (in average) in 15.333333333 hours. Old units were nearly 17h.
Melwen - child of the Fangorn Forest
ID: 1835 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
AmigaForever

Send message
Joined: 11 Jul 13
Posts: 49
Credit: 1,416,720
RAC: 12
Message 1866 - Posted: 1 Oct 2013, 1:21:00 UTC - in response to Message 1818.  

New apps show ridiculous crunching time, around 25 hours.

I evens out. User HA-SOFT, s.r.o. has described it perfectly:
It's not real time. Times should be same as before. Boinc client will adjust time estimation after some complete workunits.

You can find this in another thread, to be precise here: http://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/forum_thread.php?id=198
ID: 1866 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ChertseyAl

Send message
Joined: 18 Jun 12
Posts: 34
Credit: 1,537,551
RAC: 0
Message 1868 - Posted: 1 Oct 2013, 10:59:43 UTC

Some very quick benchmarks done on 6 machines, average CPU times in seconds:


Machine 'L' P4 XP32

v100.00 43956
v101.00 (sse2) 6054
v102.10 12853
v102.10 (sse2) 13650 SLOWER


Machine '2' Celeron XP32

v100.00 39362
v101.00 (sse2) 9920
v102.10 (sse3) 9839


Machine '5' P4 Linux32

v101.00 (sse2) 9138
v102.00 20213
v102.10 (sse2) 9101


Machine '6' P4 Linux32

v100.00 87784
v101.00 (sse2) 6989
v102.00 16181
v102.10 7416
v102.10 (sse2) 7031


Machine 'V' Celeron laptop XP32

v100.00 24582
v101.00 (sse2) 8380
v102.10 (sse2) 8397


Machine 'B' P4HT XP32

v100.00 48963
v101.00 (sse2) 9341
v102.10 18592
v102.10 (sse2) 18779 SLOWER


Basically, the new versions are at best no faster, and in 2 cases much slower.

Cheers,

Al.
ID: 1868 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile HA-SOFT, s.r.o.
Project developer
Project tester

Send message
Joined: 21 Dec 12
Posts: 176
Credit: 129,425,280
RAC: 58,860
Message 1869 - Posted: 1 Oct 2013, 12:00:55 UTC - in response to Message 1868.  

There is no significant change in calculation between v101 and v102.
ID: 1869 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile BilBg
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Jun 12
Posts: 221
Credit: 623,640
RAC: 0
Message 1871 - Posted: 1 Oct 2013, 20:40:29 UTC - in response to Message 1868.  

Some very quick benchmarks done on 6 machines, average CPU times in seconds:

Machine 'L' P4 XP32

v100.00        43956
v101.00 (sse2) 6054
v102.10        12853
v102.10 (sse2) 13650 [b]SLOWER[/b]


Machine '2' Celeron XP32

v100.00        39362
v101.00 (sse2) 9920
v102.10 (sse3) 9839


Machine '5' P4 Linux32

v101.00 (sse2) 9138
v102.00        20213
v102.10 (sse2) 9101


Machine '6' P4 Linux32

v100.00        87784
v101.00 (sse2) 6989
v102.00        16181
v102.10        7416
v102.10 (sse2) 7031


Machine 'V' Celeron laptop XP32

v100.00        24582
v101.00 (sse2) 8380
v102.10 (sse2) 8397


Machine 'B' P4HT XP32

v100.00        48963
v101.00 (sse2) 9341
v102.10        18592
v102.10 (sse2) 18779 [b]SLOWER[/b]


Basically, the new versions are at best no faster, and in 2 cases much slower.

Cheers,

Al.

To retain formating use:
[pre]
[/pre]

SSE2 CPU times to be the same as with the plain version is very unusual.
Are you sure the CPU was not downclocking (e.g. because of overheat or some powersave setting)?





- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)
ID: 1871 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ChertseyAl

Send message
Joined: 18 Jun 12
Posts: 34
Credit: 1,537,551
RAC: 0
Message 1872 - Posted: 2 Oct 2013, 16:47:00 UTC - in response to Message 1871.  
Last modified: 2 Oct 2013, 16:47:44 UTC

No, nothing unusual with any of the machines, they work as expected on other projects, it's the apps that are wrong, not the hardware :) I'll just go NNW on everything that's got slower as it seems a bit silly burning the same amount of electricity to do less work.

I see none of my WUs have been validated today and I still have a huge backlog of work waiting for valiadation. Time to take a break and wait for everything to catch up I think :)

Cheers,

Al.
ID: 1872 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
frankhagen

Send message
Joined: 18 Jun 12
Posts: 15
Credit: 5,027,400
RAC: 0
Message 1873 - Posted: 2 Oct 2013, 18:46:40 UTC - in response to Message 1872.  

I see none of my WUs have been validated today and I still have a huge backlog of work waiting for valiadation. Time to take a break and wait for everything to catch up I think :)


business as usual - DB inflated due to noobs at work ;)

no offense, but there really is no need to keep old results in the DB for months.

huge DB = slow server..
ID: 1873 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Kyong
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 12
Posts: 578
Credit: 52,667,664
RAC: 0
Message 1874 - Posted: 3 Oct 2013, 7:24:15 UTC
Last modified: 3 Oct 2013, 8:26:55 UTC

I will do some improvements, but I didn't have much time now. The problem is that we do need the old results because we need backward records to know by whom which result what computed and some other minor data. I will reduce the database but I can't do that just like that. It is better to wait than to hurry up and then realize that what was needed is gone.
If anyone doesn't know the background and needs, can't say anything for sure.
ID: 1874 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ChertseyAl

Send message
Joined: 18 Jun 12
Posts: 34
Credit: 1,537,551
RAC: 0
Message 1875 - Posted: 3 Oct 2013, 16:27:27 UTC

I haven't had a single WU validated since: 1 Oct 2013, 23:25:12 UTC

I guess the validator must be working, or someone would have complained. Therefore it must be connected to the WUs I've run, which are all linux ones since then.

Cheers,

Al.
ID: 1875 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Kyong
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 12
Posts: 578
Credit: 52,667,664
RAC: 0
Message 1876 - Posted: 3 Oct 2013, 18:42:02 UTC

Just patience please, I have many things to do now and it takes a while server to validate it after some improvements.
ID: 1876 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile BilBg
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Jun 12
Posts: 221
Credit: 623,640
RAC: 0
Message 1880 - Posted: 4 Oct 2013, 15:43:11 UTC - in response to Message 1874.  


Just out of curiosity - can you post the specs of the new server?

SETI do this on the 'Server status page' ('Hosts' at bottom):
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_status.html

(Over time they added more and more RAM to use as disk cache which as you know greatly improves the database search speed.
Of course you may need money to do that. Special 'Donate for Server RAM' thread in the News may probably help)





- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)
ID: 1880 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile HA-SOFT, s.r.o.
Project developer
Project tester

Send message
Joined: 21 Dec 12
Posts: 176
Credit: 129,425,280
RAC: 58,860
Message 1881 - Posted: 4 Oct 2013, 15:51:26 UTC - in response to Message 1880.  

I think. Today, the lack of IO throughtput is the case. But I'm out of the box.
ID: 1881 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Kyong
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 12
Posts: 578
Credit: 52,667,664
RAC: 0
Message 1884 - Posted: 5 Oct 2013, 8:12:44 UTC

I will add the server specification to the server_status page.
ID: 1884 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
cyrusNGC_224@P3D

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 13
Posts: 37
Credit: 153,393,480
RAC: 3,867
Message 1903 - Posted: 8 Oct 2013, 20:46:02 UTC - in response to Message 1868.  

"ChertseyAl" wrote:
Machine 'L' P4 XP32

v100.00 43956
v101.00 (sse2) 6054
v102.10 12853
v102.10 (sse2) 13650 SLOWER


Machine 'B' P4HT XP32

v100.00 48963
v101.00 (sse2) 9341
v102.10 18592
v102.10 (sse2) 18779 SLOWER


Basically, the new versions are at best no faster, and in 2 cases much slower.

It seems that this slower through hyper-threading. Limit the multicore utilization to 50% (one core).
ID: 1903 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Andrew Davis

Send message
Joined: 8 Aug 13
Posts: 46
Credit: 1,503,000
RAC: 0
Message 1904 - Posted: 8 Oct 2013, 22:56:12 UTC - in response to Message 1903.  

I've got over 30 projects to report. Is the server down again?
ID: 1904 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile dgibson1313
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 13
Posts: 4
Credit: 258,600
RAC: 0
Message 1907 - Posted: 9 Oct 2013, 2:27:06 UTC - in response to Message 1904.  

ID: 1907 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Jan Vaclavik

Send message
Joined: 26 Jan 13
Posts: 31
Credit: 1,431,360
RAC: 235
Message 1944 - Posted: 15 Oct 2013, 21:24:49 UTC - in response to Message 1903.  

"ChertseyAl" wrote:
Machine 'L' P4 XP32

v100.00 43956
v101.00 (sse2) 6054
v102.10 12853
v102.10 (sse2) 13650 SLOWER


Machine 'B' P4HT XP32

v100.00 48963
v101.00 (sse2) 9341
v102.10 18592
v102.10 (sse2) 18779 SLOWER


Basically, the new versions are at best no faster, and in 2 cases much slower.

It seems that this slower through hyper-threading. Limit the multicore utilization to 50% (one core).

More like some of those larger 240 credit WUs...
ID: 1944 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile BilBg
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Jun 12
Posts: 221
Credit: 623,640
RAC: 0
Message 1945 - Posted: 16 Oct 2013, 3:23:27 UTC - in response to Message 1944.  

More like some of those larger 240 credit WUs...

Not possible on/before 1 Oct 2013 (the original post)

Longer-running WUs sending started ~14 Oct 2013
http://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/forum_thread.php?id=206





- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)
ID: 1945 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : News : New updated applications released




Copyright © 2022 Asteroids@home