Which CPU task(s) generate the most RAC?

Tom M
Tom M
Joined: 2 Feb 06
Posts: 390
Credit: 894,908,628
RAC: 5,804,928
Topic 224077

Gravity Wave or Gamma Ray?

My goal is to bump my total E@H RAC (for this box) up from just below 1,000,000 to the ballpark of 1,100,000.  It looks like my pair of Rx 580's aren't going to manage it so...

So which CPU task(s) generate the most bang for the buck?

Tom M

 

Proud Member of the OFA (Old Farts Assoc.)
Your are entitled to your own Opinion but not your own Data. (Senator and Prof. Pat Moynihan).

Keith Myers
Keith Myers
Joined: 11 Feb 11
Posts: 1,001
Credit: 1,041,763,360
RAC: 3,334,890

Gamma-Ray for me has always

Gamma-Ray for me has always generated more RAC.

By a wide margin.

Assuming you are speaking of the gpu apps.

 

Stacie Nelson
Stacie Nelson
Joined: 10 Aug 20
Posts: 4
Credit: 11,625,106
RAC: 31,889

Kind of off-topic, but does

Kind of off-topic, but does anyone know why I received a large batch of work units (254 units) with the deadline only 12 hours after they were downloaded to my system?  Needless to say they all timed out and were sent back as timed out-no response.  I am receiving others with more reasonable due dates.  If I had been aware I was being given some kind of speed quiz I might have shifted resources to plow through as many as possible.  I like being sent tasks but would prefer a more reasonable deadline.

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 6,737
Credit: 611,720,432
RAC: 79,320

Stacie Nelson wrote: Kind of

Stacie Nelson wrote:

Kind of off-topic, but does anyone know why I received a large batch of work units (254 units) with the deadline only 12 hours after they were downloaded to my system?  Needless to say they all timed out and were sent back as timed out-no response.  I am receiving others with more reasonable due dates.  If I had been aware I was being given some kind of speed quiz I might have shifted resources to plow through as many as possible.  I like being sent tasks but would prefer a more reasonable deadline. 

First reduce you cache and the additioanl days of work to 0.5 or even 0.1 each, this works very well for most people if you don't pay more for internet conections during the day for example.

Stacie Nelson
Stacie Nelson
Joined: 10 Aug 20
Posts: 4
Credit: 11,625,106
RAC: 31,889

Thanks.  I don't mind having

Thanks.  I don't mind having a couple days' worth of work in my que, my thinking is if the site goes down I have something to work on for awhile before I have to switch to a different project until it is back up.  But I was wondering why such a short deadline.  They downloaded at like 22:00 on the 25th and were due at like 10:00 on the 26th.  If I have at least a couple days I will gladly crank them out.

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5,355
Credit: 48,774,638,665
RAC: 59,554,554

Stacie Nelson wrote:Kind of

Stacie Nelson wrote:

Kind of off-topic, ...

Hi Stacie, welcome to Einstein.

Yep, it certainly is off-topic :-).  When someone posts a message asking for guidance with a particular question, it's not really good form to divert the conversation into something completely different :-).

I'll give you an answer here but if you have further questions, please create your own topic in the "Problems .." section of the message boards.

Stacie Nelson wrote:
... but does anyone know why I received a large batch of work units (254 units) with the deadline only 12 hours after they were downloaded to my system?

They would have had a deadline of 7 days when first issued.  For some reason - perhaps you reinstalled or did something to cause those tasks to become 'lost' in some way - your tasks disappeared from your machine.  Your BOINC client would have contacted the scheduler (at the time now showing for the "Time Reported") and reported that the tasks were gone.  The scheduler would then decide what to do.  One of the options would be to replace the lost tasks by again sending all the necessary information.  This is called 'resending lost tasks'.

The other option is to discard the tasks and invoke the status you now see - "Timed out, no response".  That is what tends to happen with the gravity wave tasks.  So that precise time of contact was 'filled in' to replace the previous deadline entry.  That is why the heading has the "or" in the wording.  Its now a "Time reported" rather than the deadline.  Except for a different status message being used, the replacing of the time happens when correct results are reported as well.

Perhaps you can remember taking some action that might have caused those tasks to be 'lost' in the first place?

The 254 tasks were all originally issued very close together, indicating a work cache size too large for the conditions.  Unfortunately, you had previously been working on gamma-ray pulsar (GRP) GPU tasks which do run a lot faster than their original estimate.  This would have caused the scheduler to think that the new gravity wave (GW) tasks would also run faster as well.  In fact, they run slower than estimate (and they only have a 7 day deadline) so you need to be very careful in how large you set your work cache size.  If you continue to allow both types of GPU tasks, you should keep your work cache size quite small to protect against receiving too many at once in the future.

Since you are supporting a number of different projects, you may be concerned about needing to set the work cache size at a low value.  If you choose either GRP or GW for the GPU tasks and exclude the other, you would more easily eliminate the big swings in numbers of tasks downloaded.  BOINC would be able to settle on a good value for the Einstein task estimate and the number of tasks fetched would more closely align with your settings.

If you have GW GPU tasks in the mix, just remember it's always a 7 day deadline so go easy on the cache size :-).

Cheers,
Gary.

Tom M
Tom M
Joined: 2 Feb 06
Posts: 390
Credit: 894,908,628
RAC: 5,804,928

Keith Myers wrote: Gamma-Ray

Keith Myers wrote:

Gamma-Ray for me has always generated more RAC.

By a wide margin.

Assuming you are speaking of the gpu apps.

Granted but the subject line said "CPU" :)

Tom

 

 

Proud Member of the OFA (Old Farts Assoc.)
Your are entitled to your own Opinion but not your own Data. (Senator and Prof. Pat Moynihan).

Stacie Nelson
Stacie Nelson
Joined: 10 Aug 20
Posts: 4
Credit: 11,625,106
RAC: 31,889

I'm embarrassed...didn't

I'm embarrassed...didn't intend to hijack Tom's thread, just meant to post where some people have been recently.  I suppose I'm used to being ignored.  Sorry!  Thanks for the advice-

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5,355
Credit: 48,774,638,665
RAC: 59,554,554

Stacie Nelson wrote:... just

Stacie Nelson wrote:
... just meant to post where some people have been recently.  I suppose I'm used to being ignored.

Please don't be too concerned.  I did stick a smiley at the end of the 'admonishment' :-).

You don't need to consider recent activity.  These boards don't get very many new posts (unless there's something really exciting or really controversial going on) and there are quite a few of the regulars who will find new posts and attempt a response, irrespective of which forum the question appears in.  You certainly wont be ignored.

Cheers,
Gary.

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5,355
Credit: 48,774,638,665
RAC: 59,554,554

Tom M wrote:Granted but the

Tom M wrote:
Granted but the subject line said "CPU" :)

There's probably not a great deal of difference between the two main CPU searches.  The GW search takes longer but gives more credit.  If anything the GRP search has a higher credit per unit of time.  This is particularly true for some LAT data files which crunch quite a bit faster than normal.

Maybe, a more important consideration is the possible outcome of each search.  For the GRP search, your computer might help find a previously unknown pulsar emitting gamma rays.  For the GW search, it potentially would be the first ever detection of the incredibly weak but 'continuous' GW emissions from a spinning, massive object.  When that happens it truly will be a big deal.  Accumulated credit would pale into utter insignificance under the glare of that tremendous scientific achievement :-).

Cheers,
Gary.

Tom M
Tom M
Joined: 2 Feb 06
Posts: 390
Credit: 894,908,628
RAC: 5,804,928

Gary Roberts

Gary Roberts wrote:
Accumulated credit would pale into utter insignificance under the glare of that tremendous scientific achievement :-).

I don't disagree with your framing about "utter insignificance".

But like most humans, I am driven more by short term rewards than either long term consequences (punishments) or rewards.

Examples include drinking/drug addiction which both have excellent short-term rewards but horrible long-term consequences (ill-health/death).  The consumption of sugar (sweet) adult diabetes.  Etc.

I have a system that I wanted to break through the top 50 threshold on using two Rx 580 8GB GPUs.  Another example of the same GPUs is running about a stable 1,100,000 RAC whereas mine is topping out at about 960-980,000 RAC.

So I was exploring devoting a limited number of CPU threads to pumping up my results.  Unless the drivers/os have changed behavior in Ubuntu 20 I can't run an R5700 on the same machine as an Rx580 and get Boinc and/or the OS to recognize/run both at the same time.

Tom M

 

 

Proud Member of the OFA (Old Farts Assoc.)
Your are entitled to your own Opinion but not your own Data. (Senator and Prof. Pat Moynihan).

Comment viewing options

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