Multi-Directed Gravitational Wave Search

Jeroen
Jeroen
Joined: 25 Nov 05
Posts: 379
Credit: 740,030,628
RAC: 1

I have an Intel 3930K and AMD

I have an Intel 3930K and AMD 6234 running Linux and both CPU types support AVX. All the completed Multi-directed GW search tasks appear to be waiting for validation. I have not seen any tasks marked as invalid yet for this application.

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,278
Credit: 245,641,367
RAC: 11,025

Don't get fooled by

Don't get fooled by (essentially arbitrary) plan-class names. All our 64 Bit (GW) apps use AVX where possible and fall back to SSE when not, regardless of whether the plan class name includes "AVX" or not.

BM

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,146
Credit: 7,101,444,931
RAC: 1,011,187

Sometime in the last very few

Sometime in the last very few hours the server status page numbers for validations on the CV run came off their previous relentless 0,0,0 values.  Current numbers show 3050 valid tasks, 558 invalid, and only 4 inconclusive.

[edit: while I was still composing this post those numbers shifted to 4570 valid, with zeroes showing for invalid and inconclusive]

G still shows 0,0,0, so perhaps the CV validator got a trial run, maybe not yet the G validator.

Looking around a little on the result pages of for some frequent posters, I spotted some validations.

example validated CV WU 1

example validated CV WU 2

Jonathan Jeckell
Jonathan Jeckell
Joined: 11 Nov 04
Posts: 114
Credit: 1,341,945,207
RAC: 0

So does this mean that the

So does this mean that the Mac OS X version, which doesn't include an optimization in the name, is actually optimized for AVX or SSE2?

Every one of my Ubuntu 14.04 Linux machines have dumped the CV work units, but my Macs are cranking through them apace.  I converted one of my Ubuntu machines (i7-5820k) to a Hackintosh running Mac OS Sierra this weekend, and it began devouring them nicely.  However, I have no completed Linux WU to compare performance, unless GO/NO-GO counts.

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,146
Credit: 7,101,444,931
RAC: 1,011,187

Quite recently the server

Quite recently the server status page indicates some G validation activity, also the CV validation totals continue to climb.

I, personally, got a validation on a G WU.

I may have gotten more, but without filters the result pages on my GPU hosts are very, very laborious to search.

Jonathan Jeckell
Jonathan Jeckell
Joined: 11 Nov 04
Posts: 114
Credit: 1,341,945,207
RAC: 0

I too miss the ability to

I too miss the ability to look at tasks by type as well as status.  That was pretty handy, especially with high volumes of tasks.

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,146
Credit: 7,101,444,931
RAC: 1,011,187

Jonathan Jeckell wrote:I too

Jonathan Jeckell wrote:
I too miss the ability to look at tasks by type as well as status.  That was pretty handy, especially with high volumes of tasks.

We have recently been reassured that something of this sort is on a todo list.  But an application transition like this is one of the times we most regret the current lack.

rebirthman
rebirthman
Joined: 6 Jul 16
Posts: 2
Credit: 19,589,928
RAC: 0

Hello,just wanted to let

Hello,

just wanted to let the project / admin know that today various WU got cancelled by the server with the error message "no response". The time assumed as sufficient by the server was estimated by 3 days (14.10. WU assigned with 17.10. considered as deadline).

So far my observations  based on some WUs are that my machine needs more than 20 hours per WU. Three days to complete a WU doesn't seem to be sufficient from my perspective. Unfortunately the CPU time spend on the cancelled WUs is now lost.

In one of the forum posts I read that 8 hours of crunching time are considered in average. At least for my machine it took much longer and I run a i7-6700k, which should provide a decent performance.

Example: Workunit 258374930. Interestingly it took my wing man more than 25 hours to complete the WU.

Hope this helps ? Happy to assist and support in case further information is needed or considered useful

br Michael

 

 

Conan
Conan
Joined: 19 Jun 05
Posts: 172
Credit: 7,277,981
RAC: 1,292

Not sure why your i7 would be

Not sure why your i7 would be taking so long unless it is running a lot of other stuff at the same time, such as GPU work and the computer is pushed for resources.

My old AMD Phenoms, both Windows 32 bit and Linux 64 bit, get through a work unit in around 11 hours.

Conan

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,146
Credit: 7,101,444,931
RAC: 1,011,187

Conan_4 wrote:My old AMD

Conan_4 wrote:
My old AMD Phenoms, both Windows 32 bit and Linux 64 bit, get through a work unit in around 11 hours.Conan

Caution: there is more than one size WU being issued, whether measured by estimated flops as distributed, credit as awarded, or elapsed time on the same machine.  I've seen greater than 30% ET difference between two WUs with the same flops estimate on the same machine, which generally gives very reproducible timings on the applications which distribute identical work content WUs.  Not true of this latest GW work.  I've seen really huge variability (greater than 10X) for CV work.  I've not spotted nearly so much for G work, but that may be an artifact of limited observation or early distribution.

Comment viewing options

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