I have noticed that the running time of the current Einstein tasks can vary on my computer by up to about 27%. Will the new S5R5 tasks also vary the same as the current tasks? I was just wondering if the larger "dwell time" per sky location would change this running time variability.
Runtime variation will not disappear in S5R5, if anything it will get a bit more pronounced and certainly less predictable (greater "wiggles" in the runtime graphs discussed in other threads here). This is because there will be fewer sky-points per WU to average out some runtime-irregularities over the course of a single WU.
It *might* be possible to model the credits per WU somewhat more realistically, so that WUs that take longer will be awarded some more credits, not sure this gets implemented in time for S5R5 tho, we'll see.
Any idea when the cut over to S5R5 is likely to happen? So we can plan the above steps, well the first one at least.
Currently there's a telecon scheduled for tomorrow which covers the subject. Once the final decision is made actually starting the run is a matter of days.
I'll keep you posted.
BM
Directly from telecon: Further (internal) testing / simulations needed, expected timeframe for this is another week.
Thank you both for your replies, Winternight and Bikeman.
Apologies Winternight I did not mean to imply that I did not know that variation was normal, I was just trying to phrase it simply and did it poorly. I have read some of the runtime analysis threads, though I never managed to check the 49 consecutive tasks I did 3 weeks ago.
If "runtime-irregularities over the course of a single WU" means that they process faster at some times and slower at other times, then I have noticed this variation in the KBoincSpy "Instantaneous processing speed" value. I don't know if this value is accurate at all though because it seems to vary quite often and by a large amount.
The runtime variation being a bit more pronounced will not concern me because the total runtime will be half as long on average. So even if the percentage variation is higher the time taken by the variation should be less.
I'm keen to get stuck into some of these S5R5 tasks. I hope the tests and simulations are successful then I can go, go, go.
I've been busy lately with other priorities, and so have not been following along with EAH developments closely.
I'm confused on a couple of points in this thread though.
1.) First off, isn't it a little early to be worrying about R5 at this point? AFAICT, there is still over a year to go for R4 according to the Status page.
2.) Second, what's the story with the bug mentioned in the OP? I can't seem to find any reference in the fora to a problem which would lead to R4 run to be canceled in favor of going straight to R5.
I've been busy lately with other priorities, and so have not been following along with EAH developments closely.
I'm confused on a couple of points in this thread though.
1.) First off, isn't it a little early to be worrying about R5 at this point? AFAICT, there is still over a year to go for R4 according to the Status page.
2.) Second, what's the story with the bug mentioned in the OP? I can't seem to find any reference in the fora to a problem which would lead to R4 run to be canceled in favor of going straight to R5.
Alinator
It's in a post by Bernd buried in the middle of the v6.05 power app thread.
maybe redundant by now, but the answer to question one is that S5R5 will analyze the S5R4-data, but faster and without bugs, so they're not going to wait until this run finishes, but replace it with the new run/application.
At least that's what I got from following the discussions a bit ^_^
Any idea when the cut over to S5R5 is likely to happen? So we can plan the above steps, well the first one at least.
Currently there's a telecon scheduled for tomorrow which covers the subject. Once the final decision is made actually starting the run is a matter of days.
I'll keep you posted.
BM
Directly from telecon: Further (internal) testing / simulations needed, expected timeframe for this is another week.
BM
So how is it coming along? Can we expect it in two days? (5 november + 7 days = 12 november ^^) or is it going to take longer?
Simulations show that with the currently planned (and preliminarily implemented) S5R5 setup we would miss some signals. More tuning needed, will take at least another week.
RE: I have noticed that
)
Runtime variation will not disappear in S5R5, if anything it will get a bit more pronounced and certainly less predictable (greater "wiggles" in the runtime graphs discussed in other threads here). This is because there will be fewer sky-points per WU to average out some runtime-irregularities over the course of a single WU.
It *might* be possible to model the credits per WU somewhat more realistically, so that WUs that take longer will be awarded some more credits, not sure this gets implemented in time for S5R5 tho, we'll see.
CU
Bikeman
RE: RE: Any idea when the
)
Directly from telecon: Further (internal) testing / simulations needed, expected timeframe for this is another week.
BM
BM
Thank you both for your
)
Thank you both for your replies, Winternight and Bikeman.
Apologies Winternight I did not mean to imply that I did not know that variation was normal, I was just trying to phrase it simply and did it poorly. I have read some of the runtime analysis threads, though I never managed to check the 49 consecutive tasks I did 3 weeks ago.
If "runtime-irregularities over the course of a single WU" means that they process faster at some times and slower at other times, then I have noticed this variation in the KBoincSpy "Instantaneous processing speed" value. I don't know if this value is accurate at all though because it seems to vary quite often and by a large amount.
The runtime variation being a bit more pronounced will not concern me because the total runtime will be half as long on average. So even if the percentage variation is higher the time taken by the variation should be less.
I'm keen to get stuck into some of these S5R5 tasks. I hope the tests and simulations are successful then I can go, go, go.
Hmmmm... I've been busy
)
Hmmmm...
I've been busy lately with other priorities, and so have not been following along with EAH developments closely.
I'm confused on a couple of points in this thread though.
1.) First off, isn't it a little early to be worrying about R5 at this point? AFAICT, there is still over a year to go for R4 according to the Status page.
2.) Second, what's the story with the bug mentioned in the OP? I can't seem to find any reference in the fora to a problem which would lead to R4 run to be canceled in favor of going straight to R5.
Alinator
RE: Hmmmm... I've been
)
It's in a post by Bernd buried in the middle of the v6.05 power app thread.
maybe redundant by now, but
)
maybe redundant by now, but the answer to question one is that S5R5 will analyze the S5R4-data, but faster and without bugs, so they're not going to wait until this run finishes, but replace it with the new run/application.
At least that's what I got from following the discussions a bit ^_^
Do we get native 64-bit apps
)
Do we get native 64-bit apps for this run?
(Linux, Mac, and Windows?)
Regards,
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
RE: RE: RE: Any idea
)
So how is it coming along? Can we expect it in two days? (5 november + 7 days = 12 november ^^) or is it going to take longer?
Update: Simulations show
)
Update:
Simulations show that with the currently planned (and preliminarily implemented) S5R5 setup we would miss some signals. More tuning needed, will take at least another week.
BM
BM
Thanks for the update bernd.
)
Thanks for the update bernd.