Pending work passing deadline

BarryAZ
BarryAZ
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 190
Credit: 54,017,647
RAC: 796
Topic 189573

I've noticed that the computers in my farm tend to 'fall behind the curve' of due dates for workunits. As a result I tend to end up spinning CPU cycles on units for which I'll get no credit since I submit results too late.

My current workaround is to periodically do a project reset, blowing away work to do and downloading a fresh set with due dates I meet.

I am not sure if there is a way to avoid this problem, but figure this is a place to ask.

Paul D. Buck
Paul D. Buck
Joined: 17 Jan 05
Posts: 754
Credit: 5,385,205
RAC: 0

Pending work passing deadline

Is Einstein@Hoem the only project? what is your usual up time? are all of your systems having the same problem?

Blank Reg
Blank Reg
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 228
Credit: 40,599
RAC: 0

Your Acct shows 14 computers,

Your Acct shows 14 computers, if you do not have that many you need to merge... Your Average turnaround time is high for some of your box's, which leads me to believe your are either connected to other projects and use a high connect to time and do not run 24/7/365 or any combination of the three. So I recommend, connect longer and or cut the connect to time down......

Owner BarryAZ
Created 10 Jun 2005 3:06:30 UTC
Total Credit 1,523.65
Recent average credit 34.13
CPU type GenuineIntel
Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.20GHz
Number of CPUs 1
Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
Professional Edition, Service Pack 2, (05.01.2600.00)
Memory 1022.07 MB
Cache 976.56 KB
Measured floating point speed 1595.02 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 4858.3 million ops/sec
Average upload rate 3.36 KB/sec
Average download rate 167.98 KB/sec
Average turnaround time 6.94 days
Maximum daily WU quota per CPU 8/day
Results 15

BarryAZ
BarryAZ
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 190
Credit: 54,017,647
RAC: 796

RE: Is Einstein@Hoem the

Message 14251 in response to message 14249

Quote:
Is Einstein@Hoem the only project? what is your usual up time? are all of your systems having the same problem?

In some cases it is the only project. In others, it is being shared with Seti.

Systems typically are running 24 hour up times (though some were offline for a bit as they restarted while I was in hospital this past week).

However the problem seems across the board -- with shared and dedicated and with full uptime cycles and restarted systems.

It is as if the deadlines established assume say 110% efficiency. What happens with this is as I get toward the end of the 'cycle' units don't spend much time in pending status. When I reset of course, the first batch of units end up in pending status for a while before credit is given. I'm in that mode now -- on Sunday I was down to about 750 credit pending (a bit over 1% of my total awarded credit) but I was also getting 'too late 0 credit' results. Now, after resetting a batch of workstations, I'm already up to 3K plus credit pending (4.4%) but am no longer losing credit for submitting past deadline.

BarryAZ
BarryAZ
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 190
Credit: 54,017,647
RAC: 796

Many of my systems are

Message 14252 in response to message 14250

Many of my systems are sharing with SETI (one of the strong arguments for BOINC in converting SETI classic folks like myself was the ability to support multiple projects -- seems that this might be something of a mixed blessing scenario -- but with BOINC SETI having various 'phases of the moon' scenarios of its own, being able to have Einstein running has been useful.

Uptimes on most of the computers I run is 24/7 -- aside from the vagaries of computer crashes. Last week I wasn't able to check in on computers as I had a hospital visit which included surgery and left me in hospital from Monday through Sunday.

Keck_Komputers
Keck_Komputers
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 376
Credit: 5,744,455
RAC: 0

I looked at one of your

I looked at one of your computers and noticed you are running CCv4.19. If you can upgrade to the latest version it will pay better attention to the deadlines. Other than that you will need to lower your queue setting. I generally advise not more than the shortest deadline divided by the number of projects for a max, and half the shortest deadline divided by the number of projects as the recomended size.

BOINC WIKI

BOINCing since 2002/12/8

BarryAZ
BarryAZ
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 190
Credit: 54,017,647
RAC: 796

RE: I looked at one of your

Message 14254 in response to message 14253

Quote:
I looked at one of your computers and noticed you are running CCv4.19. If you can upgrade to the latest version it will pay better attention to the deadlines. Other than that you will need to lower your queue setting. I generally advise not more than the shortest deadline divided by the number of projects for a max, and half the shortest deadline divided by the number of projects as the recomended size.

Hmm -- well I was rather unhappy with the multiple various iterations of post 4.19 clients I've seen over the past many months -- though I suppose at some point the newer clients will have adequate plus side changes to offset some of the introduced oddities I've seen (or seen reported) on the SETI side.

Regarding queue settings -- I had it at two days for Einstein until earlier today -- which I considered quite short. For Seti, I use longer queue settings to offset the irregularities that they have been going through over the past months.

John McLeod VII
John McLeod VII
Moderator
Joined: 10 Nov 04
Posts: 547
Credit: 632,255
RAC: 0

RE: Hmm -- well I was

Message 14255 in response to message 14254

Quote:

Hmm -- well I was rather unhappy with the multiple various iterations of post 4.19 clients I've seen over the past many months -- though I suppose at some point the newer clients will have adequate plus side changes to offset some of the introduced oddities I've seen (or seen reported) on the SETI side.

Regarding queue settings -- I had it at two days for Einstein until earlier today -- which I considered quite short. For Seti, I use longer queue settings to offset the irregularities that they have been going through over the past months.


Most of the complaints were about the new CPU scheduler doing what it was supposed to - getting work done by the deadline. And then attempting to follow the resource shares you set up by not downloading work from some projects for a while. However, since you are having trouble meeting deadlines, I would strongly suggest that you switch to 4.45settiis, y It for each setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting.

Jim Baize
Jim Baize
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 116
Credit: 582,144
RAC: 0

I'm confused... how many

Message 14256 in response to message 14255

I'm confused... how many queue settings would he have? :D

Jim

Quote:
Most of the complaints were about the new CPU scheduler doing what it was supposed to - getting work done by the deadline. And then attempting to follow the resource shares you set up by not downloading work from some projects for a while. However, since you are having trouble meeting deadlines, I would strongly suggest that you switch to 4.45settiis, y It for each setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting. This means that you only have one queue setting.


Jim

BarryAZ
BarryAZ
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 190
Credit: 54,017,647
RAC: 796

RE: I'm confused... how

Message 14257 in response to message 14256

Quote:
I'm confused... how many queue settings would he have? :D

Looked like about 10 to me (smile).

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5,179
Credit: 39,740,230,920
RAC: 46,026,751

RE: Regarding queue

Message 14258 in response to message 14254

Quote:

Regarding queue settings -- I had it at two days for Einstein until earlier today -- which I considered quite short. For Seti, I use longer queue settings to offset the irregularities that they have been going through over the past months.

The combination of 2 days queue, sharing with seti and CC4.19 is the lethal mix that is causing you to have far too much work on hand. If you were to set your queue to between 0.5 and 1.0 days, your problems would probably vanish. This would be the quickest and easiest "fix" if you really wanted to stay with 4.19.
Please remember that the simple act of having just two projects (where one seems to be very reliable anyway) largely negates the need for large queues.

JM7 (before they led him off to the mental farm, jabbering uncontrollably :). ) gave you a more elegant solution - use 4.45, but that means you have to upgrade each box individually. Not quite so easy. It also means you should resist the urge to fiddle with things - something many of us find hard to do :).

If, for the benefit of science, you want to maximise your throughput, you might consider something like the following. You can stay with 4.19 if you wish.

1. Download and install the appropriate optimised Seti client which speeds up your seti crunch times considerably. Check Seti boards for details.
2. Set your EAH/SAH resource share to something like 70/30 since Seti will be crunching more anyway.
3. Set your queue to 1.0 days max (perhaps higher if you go to an optimised CC4.45 and are obsessive about having a *lot* of work on hand).
4. Start crunching.

Notes:
1. Continued use of CC4.19 inflates your credit claim for EAH but probably deflates your claim for an optimised SAH.
2. Use of CC4.45 gives the "correct" credit claim for EAH but deflates it for an optimised SAH.
3. Use of an optimised CC4.45 inflates your claim for EAH (but not as much as using CC4.19) and gives the "correct" claim for an optimised SAH.
4. Credit claimed is largely irrelevant as the other members of your quorum will tend to "fix" claims that are either too high or too low.
5. At the moment there seem to be quite a few too low claims so a bit of high claiming might help to redress the balance (ie stay with 4.19 :). ).
6. The best science outcome is achieved by using an optimised SAH client, irrespective of the Core Client used or amount of credit claimed.

Hope some of this helps with what you decide to do. Whatever else happens, please try to stop having to ditch expired work as this is a big negative for the health of the EAH server which surely must start to buckle under the ever increasing load at some point.

Cheers,
Gary.

Comment viewing options

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