Posts by Bryn Mawr

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Is it possible to turn on the setting "Max # of simultaneous tasks" ? (Message 2251) Posted 4 days ago by Bryn Mawr Post: Note that the <max_concurrent> tag in the app_config.xml file sets the maximum number of tasks of a specific application to run at a given time. It does not control the work cache size, meaning if you set the max_concurrent to "2" say, it will download tasks to fill whatever cache size and the cpu thread to use that you specified. It will only run 2 tasks irrespective of your cache size. However there is a bug in the boinc manager (not sure what version that is) that could potentially load more tasks that you need and override the cache size. Just fyi. The bug has been fixed in the latest versions of the Boinc Client. Even before that, I have been running max_concurrent with a small cache size for several years without a problem - each project (including SiDock and CPDN) working according to their project weighting. (If anything it’s WCG that overfills the cache with respect to its project weighting). Hi Bryn Yeah i use BOINC 8.0.0 already, so you say that if I set <max_concurrent>1</max_concurrent> will only request 1 task from server ? I only will be able to try this in few days or so cause I need to crunch multiple SiDock tasks that i already got .. Thank you As pututu has said, it will limit the client to running 1 task at a time rather than requesting one task at a time but because the scheduler then knows that it only has one core to play with it will restrict the number of tasks requested as well. Indeed, with a small cache, what tends to happen is that it will only request a new task shortly before the existing task completes. I’m running 5 projects (of which 3 are currently supplying work) and it works well for me.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Is it possible to turn on the setting "Max # of simultaneous tasks" ? (Message 2248) Posted 5 days ago by Bryn Mawr Post: Note that the <max_concurrent> tag in the app_config.xml file sets the maximum number of tasks of a specific application to run at a given time. It does not control the work cache size, meaning if you set the max_concurrent to "2" say, it will download tasks to fill whatever cache size and the cpu thread to use that you specified. It will only run 2 tasks irrespective of your cache size. However there is a bug in the boinc manager (not sure what version that is) that could potentially load more tasks that you need and override the cache size. Just fyi. The bug has been fixed in the latest versions of the Boinc Client. Even before that, I have been running max_concurrent with a small cache size for several years without a problem - each project (including SiDock and CPDN) working according to their project weighting. (If anything it’s WCG that overfills the cache with respect to its project weighting).
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Is it possible to turn on the setting "Max # of simultaneous tasks" ? (Message 2241) Posted 5 days ago by Bryn Mawr Post: Thank you for reply @pututu. Let me clarify Besides Sidock, I crunch multiple projects (wcg, rosetta etc) which may have tasks outage periods, that is why i keep setting to cache work for ~1 day Computer has 8 CPUs and about 40-60 various tasks in the queue, and usually with these projects, the task deadlines are quite short, for example 3 days with Rosetta. Sidock has about 6 days to deadline Other projects crunch a task in about 1-3 hours, while Sidock crunches in about 2 days Computer is 80% turned on. So, when Boinc client requests Sidock, computer usually gets 8 tasks and this immediately puts all tasks at risk cause instead of 1 day cache it now has ~3 days cache and this causes Boinc to juggle the tasks It would be more convenient to set a limit to avoid such issue Set up an appconfig.xml file in the SiDock project directory with a max_concurrent command :- https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/ClientAppConfig
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Is it just me? (Message 2118) Posted 22 Oct 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: It was the benchmarks after all, just took a little longer than I expected to take effect.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Is it just me? (Message 2117) Posted 22 Oct 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: Hello Bryn! There have been no changes in recent weeks (or even months). Looks like credit "arranging" due computing stats gathering and counting. Thanks, I’ll investigate further.
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Is it just me? (Message 2115) Posted 21 Oct 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: Due to a wasp infestation whilst I was away from home both of my desktops crashed, one being dead for 9 days and the other being dead for about a week, up for an hour or so (in which time it aborted the SiDock tasks it had been working on and then loaded a new set) before crashing again and being down for 14 days. When I sorted the problem the existing tasks ran to completion in the normal 24 hours(ish) and were granted the normal 1,000 to 1,500 credits. All the tasks downloaded after the recovery have run successfully in the same timescale but have only been granted 100 to 150 credits. As soon as I noticed this I ran benchmarks on both machines guessing that the values had reset but tasks downloaded after the benchmark are still being granted reduced credits. Is it only me or has there been a change in the past week or so?
7) Message boards : Number crunching : establish new subprojects for new hours on WUprop? (Message 2055) Posted 16 Apr 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: Hello Natalia, hello hoarfrost. I am reaching 25.000 hours 25,000 How very parochial - not everyone lives in the UK or uses British conventions.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : process exited with code 195 (Message 2052) Posted 29 Mar 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: The WUs that are running should complete soon and I’ll confirm when they do. This is good news! Thank you for notice! The next 6 WUs have all finished clean in just over 24 hours with several more about to finish. Happy days :-) WOO HOO!!! You may have just solved a problem since the beginning of Boinc!! I sure hope so anyway!!! You should get that adde4d to the Wiki page of Boinc errors. If you point me at it I'll update it :-)
9) Message boards : Number crunching : process exited with code 195 (Message 2050) Posted 28 Mar 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: The WUs that are running should complete soon and I’ll confirm when they do. This is good news! Thank you for notice! The next 6 WUs have all finished clean in just over 24 hours with several more about to finish. Happy days :-)
10) Message boards : Number crunching : process exited with code 195 (Message 2048) Posted 28 Mar 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: I have just restarted my secondary pc after a year’s absence and I’m seeing many WUs crashing with the above exit code, mostly after a few seconds. (So far no WUs have successfully completed but a couple are running ok). The system is a Ryzen 9 3900 with 16gb ram and 256gb nvme running Ubuntu 22.04 and Boinc 7.18.1. My first guess is memory, maybe fuzz on the connectors but I thought I’d ask if anyone had had similar problems? It's not confined to the SiDock Project so probably a workunit config that works on most systems but not on every one for some reason...I don't know. https://yafu.myfirewall.org/yafu/forum_thread.php?id=305#1157 Now that thread is from 2018 but I see it on other Projects as well. Thanks, that was exactly the stderr output I was seeing but it looks clean now.
11) Message boards : Number crunching : process exited with code 195 (Message 2047) Posted 28 Mar 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: I have just restarted my secondary pc after a year’s absence and I’m seeing many WUs crashing with the above exit code, mostly after a few seconds. (So far no WUs have successfully completed but a couple are running ok). Hello! Would you try: 1. Project reset; 2. If reset didn't help: 2.1. Get multiple tasks; 2.2. Suspend network activity immediately after that; 2.3. After errors occur, copy files with names like <task_name>_1 and <task_name>_0 (if present) into separate directory and post it (or link to download) here. Perhaps, these files will contain a clue. Thank you for participation! I shut down the pc, removed the memory and cleaned the connectors, reseated the memory and restarted. Since then it’s run clean overnight so I think it was just that the machine had been sitting unused for too long. The WUs that are running should complete soon and I’ll confirm when they do.
12) Message boards : Number crunching : process exited with code 195 (Message 2041) Posted 27 Mar 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: I have just restarted my secondary pc after a year’s absence and I’m seeing many WUs crashing with the above exit code, mostly after a few seconds. (So far no WUs have successfully completed but a couple are running ok). The system is a Ryzen 9 3900 with 16gb ram and 256gb nvme running Ubuntu 22.04 and Boinc 7.18.1. My first guess is memory, maybe fuzz on the connectors but I thought I’d ask if anyone had had similar problems?
13) Message boards : Number crunching : i7-8700K performance (Message 2023) Posted 3 Mar 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: My R9 3900 averages about 40 so that sounds about right. Right, within project. But with TN-Grid or Universe the difference is at most 10% to 15%. What makes SiDock so different? 40 credits an hour seems to be normal across the projects I work. Sometimes better when a new type of task is introduced but there or thereabouts.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : i7-8700K performance (Message 2021) Posted 3 Mar 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: I'm averaging just around 29 points per hour with this cpu. Full resources committed .. running Linux .. at 4.5Ghz. My newer Ryzen 5700's produce considerably more, over 52. Are there optimizations (SSE,AVX, etc) missing with the i7 which explains the considerable difference? The differences aren't nearly as pronounced in other projects like TN-Grid or Universe. My R9 3900 averages about 40 so that sounds about right.
15) Message boards : News : Target # 22: corona_RdRp_v2 (Message 1911) Posted 21 Jan 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: Mmm I couldn't find how to "restart" a task, I tried to suspend it and let it run again, but it seemed to continue the same way, so I cancelled it :/ Thanks for the answer anyway. You need to turn “leave non GPU tasks in memory” off before you suspend the task or it won’t force a checkpoint restart.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Tasks hanging - (Message 1860) Posted 18 Jan 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: I haven't looked at the logs but most all my WU's are showing 2d+ left till completion and the returned credit at Free-DC for this project has taken a sharp nosedive today implying it's a systemic problem in the WU's. No, they’ve moved from tasks taking an hour or so to tasks taking a day or so. Credits will pick up when the long tasks finish and the average 1,500 credits per task kick in.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Tasks hanging - (Message 1822) Posted 16 Jan 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: Hi folks! I caught one of them and now try to reproduce the problem. If it succeeds, it will greatly help. Thank you for reports! I note that all the tasks giving me problems are RdRp_v2_sample whereas all of the successful tasks are Sprot_delta_v1_RM_sidock Are the sample jobs a faulty batch and should I abort them on sight? Not so for me, I have not got to the RdRp yet. The ones I have hangs on are Sprot. Current is https://www.sidock.si/sidock/workunit.php?wuid=49502557 Paul. Having reset the 3 that appeared to be hanging they’re running ok for now with an apparent 17 hour expected run time.
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Tasks hanging - (Message 1820) Posted 16 Jan 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: Hi folks! I caught one of them and now try to reproduce the problem. If it succeeds, it will greatly help. Thank you for reports! I note that all the tasks giving me problems are RdRp_v2_sample whereas all of the successful tasks are Sprot_delta_v1_RM_sidock Are the sample jobs a faulty batch and should I abort them on sight?
19) Message boards : Number crunching : how long can "long tasks" be? (Message 1818) Posted 15 Jan 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: The circumstances that led to the unit hanging hasn't changed so I just abort them to avoid the possibility the same thing happens again to the same task. No, the circumstances that led to the unit hanging are intermittent, by going back to the last checkpoint the likelihood of it happening again is the same as the likelihood of it happening in the first place.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : how long can "long tasks" be? (Message 1812) Posted 15 Jan 2023 by Bryn Mawr Post: Something might be wrong with those tasks. Use your Process Manager and see if they actually are using CPU. I'd kill those. Or do what the admin says in this message: https://www.sidock.si/sidock/forum_thread.php?id=224&postid=1787#1787 They are most likely using 100% CPU. In computing options set leave on memory off, then read config files. Suspend the task(s) then resume Set leave in memory back on then read config files. That will force the task(s) to restart at the last checkpoint and all should be ok.

Next 20