This computer has reached a limit on tasks in progress (10)

Author	Message
Mumps [MM] Send message Joined: 19 Aug 11 Posts: 8 Credit: 253,606,519 RAC: 0	Message 194 - Posted: 13 Sep 2011, 22:09:20 UTC Hmmm. I guess I should have my hosts with more than 10 cores doing something else to keep them busy. :) Unless the admin is interested in setting the limit to at least match the number of CPU's a host happens to have. ID: 194 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Eric Driver Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1366 Credit: 607,856,767 RAC: 669,138	Message 195 - Posted: 14 Sep 2011, 4:59:16 UTC - in response to Message 194. Hmmm. I guess I should have my hosts with more than 10 cores doing something else to keep them busy. :) Unless the admin is interested in setting the limit to at least match the number of CPU's a host happens to have. Hey Mumps! Sorry about that. I just bumped it up to 16. ID: 195 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Mumps [MM] Send message Joined: 19 Aug 11 Posts: 8 Credit: 253,606,519 RAC: 0	Message 198 - Posted: 14 Sep 2011, 20:58:49 UTC Thanks. You may not have noticed, but some of my hosts actually have 24 cores. 8-) ID: 198 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Eric Driver Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1366 Credit: 607,856,767 RAC: 669,138	Message 201 - Posted: 15 Sep 2011, 1:38:47 UTC - in response to Message 198. No, I hadn't noticed. I will bump it up to 24 when I get home tonight. Thanks! ID: 201 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Mumps [MM] Send message Joined: 19 Aug 11 Posts: 8 Credit: 253,606,519 RAC: 0	Message 204 - Posted: 16 Sep 2011, 5:28:12 UTC - in response to Message 201. If it's of concern to have other hosts, with fewer cores, having 24 jobs waiting, it's fine to leave the setting lower. I was more thinking about getting it to just match the number of Procs a given host has. I noticed many of my 4 thread boxes now had 16 tasks, so there's going to be many more waiting on other hosts out there. And I recall you not wanting to waste much effort in case some of the WU's end up being numbers that get factored elsewhere and represent work no longer needed. As I mentioned, BOINC is good at allowing you to share resources with other projects. So it's not a big deal to me if I spend a couple cores on something else. :-) ID: 204 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Eric Driver Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1366 Credit: 607,856,767 RAC: 669,138	Message 205 - Posted: 16 Sep 2011, 6:09:50 UTC - in response to Message 204. If it's of concern to have other hosts, with fewer cores, having 24 jobs waiting, it's fine to leave the setting lower. I was more thinking about getting it to just match the number of Procs a given host has. I noticed many of my 4 thread boxes now had 16 tasks, so there's going to be many more waiting on other hosts out there. And I recall you not wanting to waste much effort in case some of the WU's end up being numbers that get factored elsewhere and represent work no longer needed. As I mentioned, BOINC is good at allowing you to share resources with other projects. So it's not a big deal to me if I spend a couple cores on something else. :-) That's funny, my computers aren't exhibiting that behavior. But you may have a point, especially with new users who attach to the project for the first time. ID: 205 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote