Advanced search

Forums : Technical Support : Host flying solo
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2

AuthorMessage
Profile Saenger
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 May 07
Posts: 110
Credit: 282,157
RAC: 0
Message 1183 - Posted: 20 Jul 2007, 7:53:58 UTC

It seems my AthlonXP 2200+ is running solo as well on some of the older WUs.

Not all of them, especially the newer seem to get a partner, but some are stuck solo for 5 days now.

I've asked this as well in the I've got unpaired WUs thread.

Mine are not 600, like veebee had as he told in the urgent problems thread, it's only about 50-60 I think, the newer ones of my 81 pending WUs are paired against others.
Grüße vom Sänger
ID: 1183 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Mr.Pernod
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 841,431
RAC: 0
Message 1193 - Posted: 20 Jul 2007, 10:24:47 UTC
Last modified: 20 Jul 2007, 10:30:40 UTC

Scott,

I created a virtual machine (free VMWare Server FTW!!), host 1171 on my Athlon MP to check what would happen.
the new, virtual host immediately picked up on the work previously sent to host 1016, so it seems the changes made to the homogenous redundancy filters are not working.
ID: 1193 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile veebee

Send message
Joined: 28 Jun 07
Posts: 9
Credit: 1,514,925
RAC: 0
Message 1200 - Posted: 20 Jul 2007, 11:24:24 UTC

Scott, I went to count the WU's still in pending, and this time gave up at 1100.

@ Mr Pernod,, are you saying that if I set up a virtual machine I can "re-crunch" them all again?

At 60 cr/hr combined for the first run through, to then do them again ....Hmmmmmmmm? ? ?

Don't think so.

I was having good fun trying to stay in the top 10 in the worl, forsaking all other projects for the effort, but this is pretty disappointing.

Please Scott, can you see to this?

Veebee
Information Officer
Boinc@Australia
ID: 1200 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Mr.Pernod
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 841,431
RAC: 0
Message 1201 - Posted: 20 Jul 2007, 11:40:29 UTC - in response to Message 1200.  
Last modified: 20 Jul 2007, 11:41:12 UTC

Scott, I went to count the WU's still in pending, and this time gave up at 1100.

@ Mr Pernod,, are you saying that if I set up a virtual machine I can "re-crunch" them all again?

At 60 cr/hr combined for the first run through, to then do them again ....Hmmmmmmmm? ? ?

Don't think so.

I was having good fun trying to stay in the top 10 in the worl, forsaking all other projects for the effort, but this is pretty disappointing.

Please Scott, can you see to this?

Veebee
Information Officer
Boinc@Australia

at first I was just looking for a quick way (took less than an hour and a half to set it up) to create a new host-record with the same cpu, to see how it would be classified by the HR-filter, but now I am going to let it crunch through the results anyway.
both the original and the virtual host get credit for the work, so why not?
ID: 1201 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile sysfried

Send message
Joined: 24 Jun 07
Posts: 114
Credit: 5,296,905
RAC: 0
Message 1205 - Posted: 20 Jul 2007, 13:51:26 UTC - in response to Message 1193.  

Scott,

I created a virtual machine (free VMWare Server FTW!!), host 1171 on my Athlon MP to check what would happen.
the new, virtual host immediately picked up on the work previously sent to host 1016, so it seems the changes made to the homogenous redundancy filters are not working.


why do you think that they're not working? It's the same cpu type that does the workunit. I have the same thing here on multiple P4 machines... two machines work on the same workunit.... but it would only create a "super host" if I would merge the hosts, which I'm not going to do.

The HR filter sends out the units so systems that have the same cpu type. so it does work.

regards,

sysfried

PS: anyone who knows the idea behind the HR filter better than me, please correct me, since I'm not 100% sure of that.
Happy member of Team: Planet 3D Now!

ID: 1205 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Mr.Pernod
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 841,431
RAC: 0
Message 1207 - Posted: 20 Jul 2007, 14:02:28 UTC - in response to Message 1205.  

why do you think that they're not working? It's the same cpu type that does the workunit. I have the same thing here on multiple P4 machines... two machines work on the same workunit.... but it would only create a "super host" if I would merge the hosts, which I'm not going to do.

The HR filter sends out the units so systems that have the same cpu type. so it does work.

regards,

sysfried

PS: anyone who knows the idea behind the HR filter better than me, please correct me, since I'm not 100% sure of that.

This thread was started to get the Athlon MP moved into the same category as the Athlon XP, as they are the same CPU-family.
Changes have been made to the HR-filter by Scott (see earlier in the thread) in an attempt to make this happen, but the new host is only getting paired up with work from the "AthlonMP"-category, not with the "AthlonXP", hence my conclusion the filters are not working.
ID: 1207 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Scott
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 07
Posts: 662
Credit: 13,742
RAC: 0
Message 1222 - Posted: 20 Jul 2007, 18:47:09 UTC
Last modified: 20 Jul 2007, 18:55:21 UTC

OK; here's the deal. I'm going to have to go through the database and take a look at which hosts are flying solo. I'll have to do it a bit later on, so for now, you may want to not accept more work if you're flying solo.

I'll keep you updated.

Sorry for the slower than usual response, but I'm back home for my brother's wedding stuff. I'll work when I can.
Scott Kruger
Project Administrator, Cosmology@Home
ID: 1222 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Bryan Siegfried
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Jul 07
Posts: 26
Credit: 3,740,940
RAC: 0
Message 1263 - Posted: 21 Jul 2007, 0:38:54 UTC

My Athlon XP 2500 also continues to fly solo...Setting up a virtual machine sounds like a great little idea, but I guess it will make it harder for Scott to pick out the computers which are flying solo.
ID: 1263 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Mr.Pernod
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 841,431
RAC: 0
Message 1285 - Posted: 21 Jul 2007, 7:27:31 UTC

I've set the Athlon MP machine(s) to NNW for now.
I have been messing around a bit with the p_model record at the XP-machines I have, so the MP might seem to not be on his own, but rest assured, she still is.
ID: 1285 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Bryan Siegfried
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Jul 07
Posts: 26
Credit: 3,740,940
RAC: 0
Message 1372 - Posted: 22 Jul 2007, 15:10:50 UTC - in response to Message 1263.  
Last modified: 22 Jul 2007, 15:12:52 UTC

My Athlon XP 2500 also continues to fly solo...Setting up a virtual machine sounds like a great little idea, but I guess it will make it harder for Scott to pick out the computers which are flying solo.



Aw heck, I started a virtual machine, too. Honestly, I had never ran a virtual machine before and so part of it was just the fun of the virtual machine, even if it was on my "older" Athlon. Now, it's ;like I have a dual core Athlon. It's pulling wu that the host OS already did, so I am getting double credit for each wu the vm does. Of course I can't run boinc on the host os without boggin it all down, and I didn't get credit the first itme around, so it is a wash overall, but at least I got a vm running, although that isn't much of an achievement on retrospect!

ID: 1372 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile veebee

Send message
Joined: 28 Jun 07
Posts: 9
Credit: 1,514,925
RAC: 0
Message 1490 - Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 22:06:26 UTC

I (finally - linux dork factor) managed to get a virtual machine up and ready on my AMD64 X2 laptop (1200 odd wu's done flying solo) only to find when I went to install kubuntu 64 bit on it that, even though the host OS is kubuntu64bit, my "cpuisnt capable of long mode".."install 32 bit version".

So I guess I have to hope that Scott will do something about the work units.

I cant work out why the machine can't be matched with another....it took 13 mins / WU (my core2duos were all about 6 mins), and Ive seen members talking about longer times than that.

even though most of them were at 6 cr/WU, even at 4.5 I'm "losing" about 5.5K in credits.

C'mon Scott, you can do it !!
ID: 1490 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
rbpeake

Send message
Joined: 27 Jun 07
Posts: 118
Credit: 61,883
RAC: 0
Message 1491 - Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 22:28:09 UTC - in response to Message 1490.  

...C'mon Scott, you can do it !!

I noticed there has been a new version release to 1.24, but don't know if that perhaps will help...
ID: 1491 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile [BAT] tutta55
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 07
Posts: 217
Credit: 710,406
RAC: 0
Message 1492 - Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 22:29:44 UTC - in response to Message 1490.  
Last modified: 24 Jul 2007, 22:30:26 UTC

I (finally - linux dork factor) managed to get a virtual machine up and ready on my AMD64 X2 laptop (1200 odd wu's done flying solo) only to find when I went to install kubuntu 64 bit on it that, even though the host OS is kubuntu64bit, my "cpuisnt capable of long mode".."install 32 bit version".


I might be mistaking, but on AMD64 64-bit virtual machines require a 64-bit host OS. Why not install the 32-bit then? The 64-bit CAMB client is not much faster than the 32-bit.

BOINC.BE: For Belgians who love the smell of glowing red cpu's in the morning
Tutta55's Lair
ID: 1492 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile ohiomike
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Jul 07
Posts: 302
Credit: 5,006,319
RAC: 0
Message 1493 - Posted: 24 Jul 2007, 23:32:25 UTC - in response to Message 1492.  
Last modified: 24 Jul 2007, 23:34:44 UTC

I (finally - linux dork factor) managed to get a virtual machine up and ready on my AMD64 X2 laptop (1200 odd wu's done flying solo) only to find when I went to install kubuntu 64 bit on it that, even though the host OS is kubuntu64bit, my "cpuisnt capable of long mode".."install 32 bit version".


I might be mistaking, but on AMD64 64-bit virtual machines require a 64-bit host OS. Why not install the 32-bit then? The 64-bit CAMB client is not much faster than the 32-bit.

1) Wrong setup on virtual machine- check the template you are using to set it up, it sounds like you used a 32 bit template for the VM.
2) I ran a quick test on i686 vs x86_64 using virtual machines on the same host (running at the same time), on average the 64 bit version was 5-10% faster. (Just playing- It is the only way to use my Mac Pro on this project right now).
PS- I anyone looks at my stats and tries to figure out where I got a single core Xeon 5150, the answer is it is one of my virtual machines running on my Mac.


Boinc Button Abuser In Training >My Shrubbers<
ID: 1493 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile veebee

Send message
Joined: 28 Jun 07
Posts: 9
Credit: 1,514,925
RAC: 0
Message 1497 - Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 1:40:39 UTC - in response to Message 1492.  

I (finally - linux dork factor) managed to get a virtual machine up and ready on my AMD64 X2 laptop (1200 odd wu's done flying solo) only to find when I went to install kubuntu 64 bit on it that, even though the host OS is kubuntu64bit, my "cpuisnt capable of long mode".."install 32 bit version".


I might be mistaking, but on AMD64 64-bit virtual machines require a 64-bit host OS. Why not install the 32-bit then? The 64-bit CAMB client is not much faster than the 32-bit.


The host laptop is running 64 bit kubuntu.

Ohiomike, pls explain (linux dork factor causing probs again) template.

Do you mean I might have installed the 32 bit version of vbox instead of 64 bit?
I'll check that.
ID: 1497 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile ohiomike
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Jul 07
Posts: 302
Credit: 5,006,319
RAC: 0
Message 1498 - Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 1:50:43 UTC - in response to Message 1497.  

I (finally - linux dork factor) managed to get a virtual machine up and ready on my AMD64 X2 laptop (1200 odd wu's done flying solo) only to find when I went to install kubuntu 64 bit on it that, even though the host OS is kubuntu64bit, my "cpuisnt capable of long mode".."install 32 bit version".


I might be mistaking, but on AMD64 64-bit virtual machines require a 64-bit host OS. Why not install the 32-bit then? The 64-bit CAMB client is not much faster than the 32-bit.


The host laptop is running 64 bit kubuntu.

Ohiomike, pls explain (linux dork factor causing probs again) template.

Do you mean I might have installed the 32 bit version of vbox instead of 64 bit?
I'll check that.


Yes, I'm not familiar with vbox, but with VMware which I use, when I create the virtual machine I have to pick the host to run & emulate (Windows..., Linux 32b, Linux 64 b, etc) before I do the install.

Boinc Button Abuser In Training >My Shrubbers<
ID: 1498 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile teemac
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Jul 07
Posts: 13
Credit: 749,995
RAC: 0
Message 1517 - Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 13:48:38 UTC

Scott - could you have a look at my little 2800+ when you get a chance - I think it is also flying solo even though it has some new longWU credited - it seems to have a coupla hundred older ones marked as pending all the way back to the 12th July - most marked with 2nd WU unsent.

Machine ID 692

Thanks mate.
ID: 1517 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Scott
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 07
Posts: 662
Credit: 13,742
RAC: 0
Message 1519 - Posted: 25 Jul 2007, 14:04:15 UTC

I'm waiting on a response from the boinc dev team about this. It might be some sort of issue with the HR code. One thing I can say for sure is that there's nothing in the host info that I can see that would cause the problem.

The investigation continues.
Scott Kruger
Project Administrator, Cosmology@Home
ID: 1519 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2

Forums : Technical Support : Host flying solo