Gravitational Wave search O2 Multi-Directional ("O2MD1")

Stef
Stef
Joined: 8 Mar 05
Posts: 206
Credit: 110,568,193
RAC: 0

I'm running 1 task on a 1050

I'm running 1 task on a 1050 and I do also see a few invalid results again. Zero invalid results before.

The runtimes have about doubled.

 

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,305
Credit: 248,999,241
RAC: 33,772

There is no difference in the

There is no difference in the application versions. However, the set of the workunits changed (previously "G2", now "V2"). These were timed on the CPU to run about the same time, however on the GPU they seem to behave very differently. For now I will adjust for it by doubling the credit, we should certainly factor in that runtime difference in future setups.

BM

Betreger
Betreger
Joined: 25 Feb 05
Posts: 992
Credit: 1,556,951,770
RAC: 726,353

Here is a good example of one

Here is a good example of one that failed on multiple computers.

https://einsteinathome.org/workunit/428854168
Betreger
Betreger
Joined: 25 Feb 05
Posts: 992
Credit: 1,556,951,770
RAC: 726,353

It was a very productive day,

It was a very productive day, I got a bunch ,ore validate errors.

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,305
Credit: 248,999,241
RAC: 33,772

That was indeed a problem in

That was indeed a problem in validation. Should be fixed now. "Validate errors" should have been corrected and credit granted.

BM

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,305
Credit: 248,999,241
RAC: 33,772

Betreger wrote:Here is a good

Betreger wrote:

Here is a good example of one that failed on multiple computers.

https://einsteinathome.org/workunit/428854168

This is weird - apparently in all other cases credit was granted properly when fixing the validate errors, but jut in this case it wasn't. This certainly need some manual work.

BM

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,305
Credit: 248,999,241
RAC: 33,772

Fixed.

Fixed.

BM

Betreger
Betreger
Joined: 25 Feb 05
Posts: 992
Credit: 1,556,951,770
RAC: 726,353

It seems to be so, now we can

That  seems to be so,  LOL now we can wait for the next bug to surface. 

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,305
Credit: 248,999,241
RAC: 33,772

Bernd Machenschalk

Bernd Machenschalk wrote:
There is no difference in the application versions. However, the set of the workunits changed (previously "G2", now "V2"). These were timed on the CPU to run about the same time, however on the GPU they seem to behave very differently. For now I will adjust for it by doubling the credit, we should certainly factor in that runtime difference in future setups.

There is indeed a part of the computation which efficiency is actually in opposite directions on CPU and GPU (with larger input size on the CPU it gets more efficient, while on the GPU it gets less efficient). There's, however, not much we can do about it during a "sub-run". "V2" will be finished next week, though, we will continue (on the GPUs) with an extension of "G2", which shouldn't have this problem.

BM

Mr Anderson
Mr Anderson
Joined: 28 Oct 17
Posts: 39
Credit: 148,290,406
RAC: 33,448

Are there no longer any CPU

Are there no longer any CPU based GW tasks to run? I haven't received any for over a week. I am however surprised that no-one else has said anything.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.