Cache sizes
20 Jun 2006 17:12:51 UTC
Topic 191420
(moderation:
I do not wish to be rude or abrasive, but ...
I have just completed a WU in 4,408 CPU seconds. Out of interest I chased that WU up to see when it would be validated.
Two validations are in so far and it is awaiting the third.
That WU is 117th in line in someone's WU cache.
Presently, this person is crunching at the rate of 4,600 CPU seconds. That means this WU will not come forward for validation for at least 6 days!!!
Personally, I keep a stock of only 18 in my cache so that I can get my units out to those who are waiting as quickly as I can. I believe it is both silly and inconsiderate to hog 6 pages full of uncompleted WU's at any one time. Surely there can be no need for THAT amount of WU's to be "in limbo"?
Is there anything that can be done to rein in people like this?
Cache sizes
)
Oh I dunno...
I wouldn't necessarily say that it's silly or inconsiderate at all for a person to have a 6-day cache. If you look backwards through their results, you'll see that this person sends several pages of finished work back at a time. Perhaps they are online infrequently, or work out of town during the week and send their results in on weekends, or maybe they just stocked up for possible outtages.
Regardless, they are not missing deadlines or turning in bad work. It matters not whether we wait one day or six to get our credit, as long as we get it eventually :)
Dig
As long as the deadline on
)
As long as the deadline on results is 14 days, people can easily run 7 days queues. The main change between S4 and S5 for these short results is the quorum of results, being brought back from 3 to 2. It's possible the result (or results) will be send out before that time to a 3rd host, but I doubt it. Not unless the other machine returns it outside the deadline or as an error.
So you just have to be patient.
RE: Oh I
)
With respect, I do not think I was arguing that point. There probably will be valid reasons to hold large stocks ... but I do not believe that that would be the rule ... maybe the exception.
Nor would just one instance of this cause any problem. However if you gross it up over hundreds if not more of people doing the same thing, then I believe you hit a whole new dimension of backlog.
Well, that's my view ... and I totally expect it not to be universally accepted! Them's the breaks I suppose!
DM
It doesn't seem to me to
)
It doesn't seem to me to important at all when credits are awarded as long as they are in the end. I never expect to get them any sooner than the wu due date. Any sooner than that should be a treat.
Those who don’t build must burn. It’s as old as history and juvenile delinquents.
Ray Bradbury - Fahrenheit 451
RE: It doesn't seem to me
)
Was your point that its annoying that you'll have to wait several days to see if they are validating ok,if things are functioning correctly and there haven't been anything go wrong thats messing up the units your returning?
RE: RE: It doesn't seem
)
No, not at all. I can tell if the wu's I'm returning are valid right away if I choose to look them up. Just a couple of clicks of the mouse.
What I meant to say is that if a wu is given credit before the due date, I consider it to be a nice surprise since I shouldn't expect credit before the due date. BOINC manager does a good job of shifting crunch priority of projects/wu's to meet quorum deadlines, so I don't worry about it.
I currently have about 13,200 pending credits for E@H. I'm confident that I will get at least that many credits (give or take a little - who cares) when the other crunchers get their work done.
Jim
Those who don’t build must burn. It’s as old as history and juvenile delinquents.
Ray Bradbury - Fahrenheit 451
Oops sorry ersatzjim. I meant
)
Oops sorry ersatzjim. I meant for that question for Bodley who started the thread. Thought maybe it was like when you switch to a new app and your wondering if its working proply and can't tell if its going to validate ok.
My mistake sorry.
hmm, i see nothing wrong with
)
hmm, i see nothing wrong with a 6 day cache. some folks are still on dialup, and some folks pay by the hour!.. i got in to financial strates once and had to do that.. it was cheaper for me to do all my email and web activity on weekends. so while the person is doing there email, websurfing, paying bills online, boinc can do its thing in the background.. now. think for a seccond. lets say you limited peoples caches to say no more then 3 days, what happens to thease people? back then, since i would have only been able to do and get credit for 3 days worth of work, i wouldnt even have botherd with the project.
just keep in mind not everyone has access to "unlimited" (i use that term losely, especialy if your TRANSFER is capd each month. its a dang limit and shouldnt be tolerated for high speed!) and some are in rural areas with out a local access number.... just a tholt from the "poor side"
for full disclosure i now have a 24/7 dsl connection,, the LOWEST available as im to far from the dslam (19,200 feet. cut off is 18k feet).
this allso applys to business people that travel the entire week at a time, i know a fella in canada that works for a company, he trains people to use software that tests software that tests software,,, eh? anyway, hes out of town for a week at a time, some times longer... makes since to have a long cache no?
seeing without seeing is something the blind learn to do, and seeing beyond vision can be a gift.
Paul: While your point is
)
Paul:
While your point is valid it also must be acknowledged that some contributors manipulate their cache to their credit atvanage. There are people who update several times a day but have caches of several days. Part of this could be attributed to keeping enough work to ride out a network or server failure (as I do).
RE: Paul: While your point
)
yep, I've had two cases of down friday afternoon, up monday morning network outages, and always maintain at least a 3 day cache. Longer on holidays or if I'm leaving my boxes unattended.