1) Forums : General Topics : BOINC Pentathlon 2014 (Message 19991)
Posted 8 Apr 2014 by Profile microchip
Post:
Added Team Belgium
2) Forums : General Topics : C@H Word Link 2 (Message 12660)
Posted 9 Mar 2013 by Profile microchip
Post:
Cat
3) Forums : General Topics : C@H Word Link 2 (Message 12633)
Posted 4 Mar 2013 by Profile microchip
Post:
Bullet
4) Forums : General Topics : C@H Word Link 2 (Message 12630)
Posted 4 Mar 2013 by Profile microchip
Post:
Machine
5) Forums : Technical Support : Error While Downloading (Message 12316)
Posted 12 Jan 2013 by Profile microchip
Post:
The people in charge are aware of the problem. Are they working on it? I don't know.
6) Forums : Technical Support : Red icon with white rectangle (Message 12282)
Posted 25 Dec 2012 by Profile microchip
Post:
Does the CAMB task run? If so, I think you can ignore it
7) Forums : Technical Support : Elapsed Time reduced after hibernating (Message 12279)
Posted 23 Dec 2012 by Profile microchip
Post:
A task that was at 28+ hours run-time last night when I hibernated (not shutdown) showed up at 25 Hours this morning. I believe this has been happening, but this is the first time I paid attention & caught it. Is this on your radar to get fixed?


This is due to checkpointing I suspect, which are far in between. Do you have "keep applications in memory" checked in BOINC?
8) Forums : General Topics : Something Is Seriously Wrong (Message 12194)
Posted 26 Nov 2012 by Profile microchip
Post:
Hi.
I have the following problem, which may relate to the one brough up here: when I suspend the project (or turn BOINC off, and later restart it), tasks are usually reduced to 60% of completion, and the remaining time increases. Moreover, the same happens when a computation is suspended due to a high CPU usage. And, for this sake, I receive messages, that tasks are overdue, and I may not get credit for them, though it seems that tasks will be processed infinitely.

If this problem persists, I would have to leave the project.


I don't know about the increasing time/overdue problem, but WUs on here have checkpointing far in between hence it starts crunching from the last checkpoint which can be way back - I know, it's annoying me too. I tried to tell the people involved to add more checkpointing but got no reply thus far.
9) Forums : General Topics : Suggestions, Concerns, and Requests (Message 12099)
Posted 31 Oct 2012 by Profile microchip
Post:
Please add more checkpointing to the WUs. I don't crunch 24/7 and it really annoys me when I close BOINC at say 80% of a WU then start BOINC again and the WU starts crunching from 60%
10) Forums : General Topics : Work Unit of 80+ hours?? (Message 9715)
Posted 30 Nov 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Ok, after further investigation I found out why C@H is running such long tasks on my host. It is because of shitty checkpointing issue.

Suppose a WU has crunched to 85%. When BOINC suspends it to run another WU from some project and then goes back to the C@H WU, instead of continuing from 85%, it starts crunching it from 70% instead.

I guess Ben doesn't care much about adding more checkpoints (as I've seen others complain as well) so I'll also not care much and am detaching from C@H. Enough is enough. Good bye!
11) Forums : General Topics : Why do you participate in Cosmology@Home? Who is the \"most surprising\" participant? (Message 9691)
Posted 21 Nov 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
I'm a junior Linux sys admin at a Belgian chip design house (Essensium, Mind department). I have a vast interest in cosmology and physics in general. Since I'm too stupid for most of the stuff going on in physics & the universe (though I understand the basics and maybe a little bit beyond) I'd like to contribute to C@H since I can't contribute in other manner. I crunch on my server and on my desktop while it's on. I also crunch for other space/physics related projects (Einstein, Milkyway, etc. Though I don't crunch for SETI as I think they'll never get a signal from extraterrestrial intelligent life).
12) Forums : General Topics : Work Unit of 80+ hours?? (Message 9635)
Posted 3 Nov 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Workunits here usually run way shorter, between 4 and 12 hours (lately more of the shorter ones occur) would be normal and I haven't had such a long running one so far. I guess there has been something wrong with the workunit or the host somehow had a problem with it.

Normal Cosmo result credits are not too low here in average and deadlines are quite comfortable.

If your next one runs that long again, I would rather suspect that there is something that somehow collides with the Cosmo ressource requirements on your host.


Actually, I tried on a different host and I get the same result. WUs between 36 and 70 hours (which I aborted as it was a test) so it's not just this one host that gets them.

About the credits, I have to disagree. I favor a credits system (which is also used by virtually all other projects) that gives credit based on amount of work you do. Not a fixed-credit system like on here.

If you run other projects as well and get such a long WU, the deadline definitely becomes a problem, hence why I asked to increase it a bit :)
13) Forums : Wish list : CUDA (Message 9624)
Posted 31 Oct 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
+1 for GPU processing :)
14) Forums : General Topics : Work Unit of 80+ hours?? (Message 9623)
Posted 31 Oct 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Sorry that it did not help,
I had a look at the specs of your pc it has got every thing it needs to run well,
You do run a lot of other projects on it,
Do the other projects you do work units for run for similar times on their systems,
is it just cosmo that is running slow.


It is just cosmology@home that has such long work units. All other projects I'm attached to have WUs between 1 hour and 34 hours (excluding the GPU projects).

I really don't mind running very long WUs, but the deadline should be extended for those. Also the credits system on here definitely needs a review. :)
15) Forums : General Topics : Work Unit of 80+ hours?? (Message 9619)
Posted 30 Oct 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Do you have `Leave applications in memory while suspended` ticked for `yes`
In BOINC manager preferences, if not, it will make work units take a very long tome to finish.
Checkpoints in cosmo are a long way apart and you loose work done on all other projects as well when BM switches between projects if this is not ticked.
BM will move the data out to swap / virtual memory until it is needed again.


Yes, I have it ...
16) Forums : General Topics : Suggestions, Concerns, and Requests (Message 9617)
Posted 29 Oct 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Two things:

1) Someone needs to review the credits system. For a 127 hour long WU, I got a measly 420 credits. Unacceptable. Give credit according to work done, don't make it a fixed credit system which sucks

2) Please either increase the reporting deadline or send out smaller WUs. As I mentioned above, I just finished a 127 hours WU (on a modern CPU) and I barely made it. As I crunch for other projects too, the high-priority problem becomes a concern in BOINC, which will lock the long WU in that mode for days thus locking one of the cores to that WU only.
17) Forums : General Topics : Work Unit of 80+ hours?? (Message 9616)
Posted 29 Oct 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Forget the 80 hours WU. I just finished one that took 127 hours to compute on an AMD Phenom II x6 1090T CPU and what did I get for it? A measly 420 credits. Ridiculous. BOINC was running it for the past 3 days in high priority mode. This is enough.

Ben, please increase the deadline or send smaller WUs and also review the credits system

Also, I am with mickydl*. I crunch for a bunch of other projects too and have never seen such a long WU. The high priority mode becomes easily a problem when you also crunch for other projects, even though my server runs 24/7.
18) Forums : General Topics : Work Unit of 80+ hours?? (Message 9504)
Posted 6 Oct 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Hi Ben,

I'd like a bit smaller units as when I get such a long one, BOINC goes into "high priority" mode and assigns one of the cores to that WU only for the complete time it needs to be computed, thus nothing else but C@H can run on this core. I also crunch for other projects as well and would like BOINC to switch every hour between the various projects but with a WU from C@H in high priority mode, this doesn't happen.

So either sent smaller WU's or increase the reporting deadline in order not to make BOINC go into high priority mode from the start.
19) Forums : General Topics : Work Unit of 80+ hours?? (Message 9494)
Posted 23 Sep 2011 by Profile microchip
Post:
Hi,

I almost completed a WU that took more than 80 hours to compute. Even on recent hardware, I think this is way too much as C@H is not multi-threaded so it runs on one core only thus needing such a long time to compute. Can we please get a bit smaller WUs?