progress bar not really working

Message boards : Number crunching : progress bar not really working

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile Saenger
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Apr 09
Posts: 53
Credit: 48,633
RAC: 77
Message 996 - Posted: 11 Aug 2009, 18:27:55 UTC

The progress bar goes nearly asap from 0 to 91.666 and stays there for the rest of the WU.
The intermediate steps are:
8.333
33.333
50.000
58.333
66.666
83.333
91.666

The first will last only for a few seconds if one at all each, the last one anythimg from 50 secinds to 25 minutes.
Gruesse vom Saenger

For questions about Boinc look in the BOINC-Wiki
ID: 996 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 998 - Posted: 11 Aug 2009, 18:47:08 UTC - in response to Message 996.  

this is normal of the app currently out...
Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 998 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
John McLeod VII
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Aug 09
Posts: 10
Credit: 17,643
RAC: 0
Message 1164 - Posted: 2 Sep 2009, 23:49:20 UTC

Is there any way to rework the % complete so it looks more like:

0.01
0.05
0.1
0.5
1
3
5

?


BOINC WIKI
ID: 1164 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1166 - Posted: 3 Sep 2009, 0:29:47 UTC - in response to Message 1164.  
Last modified: 3 Sep 2009, 0:33:21 UTC

it could be done, but considering that the app uses a wrapper the progress bar does show the work being done, somewhat. jack is focused on gpu gromacs for the time being, this is on the list, just at the bottom-----way bottom!!!.
Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1166 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
John McLeod VII
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Aug 09
Posts: 10
Credit: 17,643
RAC: 0
Message 1228 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 16:57:26 UTC

The other problem with the progress bar is the massively wrong estimates for fpops. They have recently gotten much worse. I believe that they may have been divided by some number between 60 and 70 when they should have been multiplied by about that amount. the tasks still take a couple of hours, but are now tagged at < 1 minute.


BOINC WIKI
ID: 1228 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Jack Shultz
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Apr 09
Posts: 503
Credit: 120,150
RAC: 0
Message 1229 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 17:16:40 UTC - in response to Message 1228.  

estimating the fpops is a difficult problem. I have not seen instructions that really make any sense or work. I tried using a tool that gives a distribution in fpops. There is scater ranging in 3 orders of magnitude on both our apps. I have not taken any estimates on GPUs. Just got them loaded Monday and I'm not even sure they are working properly. Last step is to make these progress bars more helpful.
ID: 1229 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Ageless
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 09
Posts: 172
Credit: 7,631
RAC: 0
Message 1232 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 17:50:58 UTC - in response to Message 1228.  

According to David it can be calculated by taking the number of the measured floating point speed of a computer multiplied by the amount of seconds a task has taken. If you know of a better way, please tell.

Jord

'Cause you seem like an orchard of mines, Just take one step at a time.
ID: 1232 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Jack Shultz
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Apr 09
Posts: 503
Credit: 120,150
RAC: 0
Message 1234 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 18:26:53 UTC - in response to Message 1232.  

And does this vary from one computer to another?
ID: 1234 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1237 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 20:42:09 UTC - in response to Message 1234.  
Last modified: 9 Sep 2009, 20:43:14 UTC

i believe, if not mistaken and ageless will correct me eventually(lol), that it is based on individual cpu MFPS.

a quad is faster than a Pentium 4 processor at running through the wu's.
Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1237 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile nenym

Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 99
Credit: 512,506
RAC: 2,093
Message 1238 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 21:27:24 UTC
Last modified: 9 Sep 2009, 21:28:58 UTC

Currently downloaded CPU autodock 1.24 tasks P9_LEU75... has 00:00:00 estimated time. Boinc is out of his minds (high priority run). Any nonsense is better than zero.
ID: 1238 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1239 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 21:37:42 UTC - in response to Message 1238.  
Last modified: 9 Sep 2009, 21:37:52 UTC

nem what boinc version are you running?
Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1239 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Ageless
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 09
Posts: 172
Credit: 7,631
RAC: 0
Message 1240 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 21:38:36 UTC - in response to Message 1234.  
Last modified: 9 Sep 2009, 21:46:49 UTC

And does this vary from one computer to another?

Well, the newer computers have a higher value for their measured floating point, but they run the tasks quicker than the older computers do. So in the end that should even itself out.
Jord

'Cause you seem like an orchard of mines, Just take one step at a time.
ID: 1240 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile nenym

Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 99
Credit: 512,506
RAC: 2,093
Message 1241 - Posted: 9 Sep 2009, 21:45:15 UTC - in response to Message 1239.  
Last modified: 9 Sep 2009, 21:53:39 UTC

nem what boinc version are you running?

6.4.7 because 6.6.xx has got a lot of scheduler bugs, 6.6.36 I use only on hosts with CUDA and needs baby-sitting.

EDIT: 6.6.36 shows 00:00:03
ID: 1241 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive

Message boards : Number crunching : progress bar not really working


©2017 All rights reserved | Design by Digital BioPharm Ltd