BRP5 validation has been halted while we investigate the validate errors.
There were some values in the new (random) template bank that exceeded the limits of the validator.
The problem should be fixed, a new validator is running, the old "validate error" results should be examined by the new validator again.
BM
Bernd, this is excellent news!
A swathe of my pendings have now validated and boosted my RAC to the point where I have become the latest member of the millionaire club!! (For today at least) :-)
A swathe of my pendings have now validated and boosted my RAC to the point where I have become the latest member of the millionaire club!! (For today at least) :-)
Gavin.
Welcome to the club :-).
I've been secretly watching your HD7970 hosts in the top computers first page. Current rankings of 6, 8, 10, 13, 16 and 20, I believe. It's impressive that you are getting 140K RAC from a single 7970. You are showing just what's possible if you take care in choosing hardware and setting it up properly. Well done!!
Jeroen is way out in front but he has 3 7970s in his. I'm sure he has got his tweaked to the max so there's quite a penalty in running multiple GPUs in one host, as you would expect.
However the most intriguing aspect of the top hosts page is the several 'anonymous' hosts that have dual 7970s that claim to have 256 processors. Anyone have any ideas about what advantage there would be to pretending to have so many cores? Or is it, perhaps, some sort of cluster that has a single hostID?
However the most intriguing aspect of the top hosts page is the several 'anonymous' hosts that have dual 7970s that claim to have 256 processors. Anyone have any ideas about what advantage there would be to pretending to have so many cores? Or is it, perhaps, some sort of cluster that has a single hostID?
Hi Gary,
The 256 processor has nothing to do with reality, IMO. You will notice as you scan through the Top Hosts that Win7 Home Premium x64 is the common thread (and culprit) and has been reporting this way for well over a year. As I understand it, WHP can recognize up to 256 cores and it seems more than willing to report the max here at E@H in spite of what is truly inside the case.
... You will notice as you scan through the Top Hosts that Win7 Home Premium x64 is the common thread (and culprit) and has been reporting this way for well over a year. As I understand it, WHP can recognize up to 256 cores and it seems more than willing to report the max here at E@H in spite of what is truly inside the case.
Thanks very much for the explanation. I'm quite illiterate when it comes to Windows idiosyncracies these days. I continued looking past the first page of hosts and I did see quite a few more WHP x64 hosts showing 256 processors. I also saw several showing the correct number of cores so there must be a way of configuring Windows to correct the problem. At least I can stop being intrigued by it :-).
Hi Gary,
The 256 processor has nothing to do with reality, IMO. You will notice as you scan through the Top Hosts that Win7 Home Premium x64 is the common thread (and culprit) and has been reporting this way for well over a year. As I understand it, WHP can recognize up to 256 cores and it seems more than willing to report the max here at E@H in spite of what is truly inside the case.
Gord
Hi Gord,
What you say seems plausible, any thoughts on exactly why its mainly Win7 H.P.x64 hosts? Surely the underlying architecture is the same for all flavours of Win7 and as such we should see the misreporting from Windows 7 in general.
Then... to throw a spanner in the works, this host is reporting 1024 processors!!!
I have always assumed that the higher CPU count on some hosts here was down to some sort of hack, perhaps to overcome daily task download limits in an attempt to avoid very fast hosts running out of work at other projects...
I have just scanned through the top 100 hosts and you are correct about the connection to Win7 H.Px64 but did you also notice the users are all 'anonymous' too?
Scanning through Top Hosts it appears there is a real mix wrt W7 HP. Named Owners appear to be correct, whereas Anonymous Owners are the ones with wonky processor counts. So it might just be a bug in the web page code. An Event Log from an Anonymous m/c would determine if the bug runs a bit deeper, but that's a bit more difficult to access.
Perhaps 'them that can' may find the time and discover a reason that explains this phenomenon?
But in reality I think that, whether you have 8 or 108 processors at Einstein, you will struggle to exceed the daily limit of 32 tasks per logical CPU in any given PC. Taking the present Einstein applications and their observed runtimes, I don't really see any advantage between having 8 and 256 or 2 million processors, here. Hence my idea that the processor count is related to other projects...
Don't be afraid of Windows running on "big iron". Windows threads are mapped 1:1 to logical processors in the system hardware. The current limit is 256 logical processors in the DataCenter Edition. (linux > 6000).
But a maximum of 64 cores (threads) are organized in one process group. Machines with 256 physical cores will have 4 process groups with 64 logical cores per process group. A process can not use more than 64 cores due to the process group boundary. (Einstein starts more processes so it can use all physical cores). WHP has support for 4 cores. A real machine with 256 cores would be number one for sure. May be it is possible to create a VM in VirtualBox or kvm with 256 cores. But without real hardware it would be worthless. Afaik only SGI has machines with more than 8 Sockets (120Cores) in its UV series NUMA machines. (One OS per machine not a cluster of machines). WHP would not recognize 256 Cores it would crash during installation. So the 256 Cores are coming from somewhere else.
RE: RE: BRP5 validation
)
Bernd, this is excellent news!
A swathe of my pendings have now validated and boosted my RAC to the point where I have become the latest member of the millionaire club!! (For today at least) :-)
Gavin.
RE: Bernd, this is
)
Welcome to the club :-).
I've been secretly watching your HD7970 hosts in the top computers first page. Current rankings of 6, 8, 10, 13, 16 and 20, I believe. It's impressive that you are getting 140K RAC from a single 7970. You are showing just what's possible if you take care in choosing hardware and setting it up properly. Well done!!
Jeroen is way out in front but he has 3 7970s in his. I'm sure he has got his tweaked to the max so there's quite a penalty in running multiple GPUs in one host, as you would expect.
However the most intriguing aspect of the top hosts page is the several 'anonymous' hosts that have dual 7970s that claim to have 256 processors. Anyone have any ideas about what advantage there would be to pretending to have so many cores? Or is it, perhaps, some sort of cluster that has a single hostID?
Cheers,
Gary.
RE: However the most
)
Hi Gary,
The 256 processor has nothing to do with reality, IMO. You will notice as you scan through the Top Hosts that Win7 Home Premium x64 is the common thread (and culprit) and has been reporting this way for well over a year. As I understand it, WHP can recognize up to 256 cores and it seems more than willing to report the max here at E@H in spite of what is truly inside the case.
Gord
RE: ... You will notice as
)
Thanks very much for the explanation. I'm quite illiterate when it comes to Windows idiosyncracies these days. I continued looking past the first page of hosts and I did see quite a few more WHP x64 hosts showing 256 processors. I also saw several showing the correct number of cores so there must be a way of configuring Windows to correct the problem. At least I can stop being intrigued by it :-).
Cheers,
Gary.
RE: Hi Gary, The 256
)
Hi Gord,
What you say seems plausible, any thoughts on exactly why its mainly Win7 H.P.x64 hosts? Surely the underlying architecture is the same for all flavours of Win7 and as such we should see the misreporting from Windows 7 in general.
Then... to throw a spanner in the works, this host is reporting 1024 processors!!!
I have always assumed that the higher CPU count on some hosts here was down to some sort of hack, perhaps to overcome daily task download limits in an attempt to avoid very fast hosts running out of work at other projects...
I have just scanned through the top 100 hosts and you are correct about the connection to Win7 H.Px64 but did you also notice the users are all 'anonymous' too?
The plot thickens :-)
Gav.
Hi Gav, Scanning through
)
Hi Gav,
Scanning through Top Hosts it appears there is a real mix wrt W7 HP. Named Owners appear to be correct, whereas Anonymous Owners are the ones with wonky processor counts. So it might just be a bug in the web page code. An Event Log from an Anonymous m/c would determine if the bug runs a bit deeper, but that's a bit more difficult to access.
Gord
Hmmm... you may be onto
)
Hmmm... you may be onto something here, Gord.
Perhaps 'them that can' may find the time and discover a reason that explains this phenomenon?
But in reality I think that, whether you have 8 or 108 processors at Einstein, you will struggle to exceed the daily limit of 32 tasks per logical CPU in any given PC. Taking the present Einstein applications and their observed runtimes, I don't really see any advantage between having 8 and 256 or 2 million processors, here. Hence my idea that the processor count is related to other projects...
I am though, still very curious :-)
Gav.
Don't be afraid of Windows
)
Don't be afraid of Windows running on "big iron". Windows threads are mapped 1:1 to logical processors in the system hardware. The current limit is 256 logical processors in the DataCenter Edition. (linux > 6000).
But a maximum of 64 cores (threads) are organized in one process group. Machines with 256 physical cores will have 4 process groups with 64 logical cores per process group. A process can not use more than 64 cores due to the process group boundary. (Einstein starts more processes so it can use all physical cores). WHP has support for 4 cores. A real machine with 256 cores would be number one for sure. May be it is possible to create a VM in VirtualBox or kvm with 256 cores. But without real hardware it would be worthless. Afaik only SGI has machines with more than 8 Sockets (120Cores) in its UV series NUMA machines. (One OS per machine not a cluster of machines). WHP would not recognize 256 Cores it would crash during installation. So the 256 Cores are coming from somewhere else.
RE: There were some values
)
Has this problem returned? There seems to be an unusual number of invalids for hosts w/ AMD cards...
Gord
Are the results you are
)
Are the results you are referring to marked "invalid" or "validate error"?
BM
BM