Posts by Bryan

1) (Message 4287)
Posted 29 Mar 2015 by Profile Bryan
I'm experiencing 100% download failures now.
2) (Message 2754)
Posted 15 Mar 2014 by Profile Bryan

BTW, another thought has crept into my mind. Some of the lads get up to all sorts of shenanigans when there is a challenge going on. If you look at the OS recorded for each of those hosts it says they're Linux virtual hosts. I am beginning to wonder if some joker didn't fake 32 cores on a 4 core virtual machine and then clone that original into 130 bogus hosts. It's an entirely doable scenario and I know because I've done similar myself. Now each of those clones has downloaded a few thousand tasks for a total of over 100,000 but they're all running on just a single 4 core i5 CPU. Hmmmmmm?

Brilliant deduction! First of all that team wasn't in the challenge. Secondly I'm impressed that "fake" machines could throw up 61M credits in a week. I need to check into how that's done.
3) (Message 2737)
Posted 14 Mar 2014 by Profile Bryan
quick thought, given the amount of hosts and cores under one mans control, and given that the sheer amount of work units that have to be crunched by those hosts and cores,my concern is, that if this person is running several projects other than A&H, i suspect the chances are, that a lot of the A&H work units might well get timed out.

Result, those tasks will have to be sent out again adding to the validation pending times.

Am i wrong???



Look at "top participants" and look at his computers. The number 1 machine is showing this:

In progress (2687) · Validation pending (757) · Validation inconclusive (0) · Valid (667) · Invalid (183)

He is averaging over 9000s /WU w/ 32 cores so he can finish approx. 300 WU per day. That machine has 2687 WU in progress (9.2 day cache) and their due date is 3/19. I don't think he is going to get them finished in 5 days :( Secondly he is running a high rate of invalids on that machine.

The admins would help their "other" crunchers if they would do as suggested and limit the number of WU per core/thread to something reasonable.
4) (Message 514)
Posted 24 Dec 2012 by Profile Bryan
Yipppeee ... good things are happening! My pending is dropping - down 40 WU to 525 to go!!!!

Thanks for the great Christmas present :)

Merry Christmas everyone!
5) (Message 501)
Posted 21 Dec 2012 by Profile Bryan
I've seen both techniques used by multiple projects. GPUGrid for example will reissue a aborted or "errored" wu within minutes. The reissued WU carries the standard deadline.

NumberFields on the other hand reissues the WU immediately with a "high priority" tag and gives an accelerated 3 day deadline.

In any case the resends should take priority over "new" WU. I've been working the project 10 days now and keep expecting my pending WU to stabilize as on other projects. But now knowing that aborted, errored, or timed out WU aren't resent I can see why my pending keeps growing on a daily basis :(
6) (Message 499)
Posted 21 Dec 2012 by Profile Bryan
I just checked some of my 460 pending WU and found that when a wingman aborts a WU it isn't resent (9 days plus and counting on multiple WU).

There is a Boinc Stats Team Challenge on Asteroids that ends sometime today. Typically when those challenges end there are bunches and bunches of WU that get aborted. If the aborted WU don't get resent it is going to get frustrating real quick!
7) (Message 454)
Posted 13 Dec 2012 by Profile Bryan
Is there any chance that stats could be exported more than once per day? Most (not all) projects export the stats data 3-6 times a day.