Message boards :
News :
Batch plan
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
I know some of you like to know the batch plan, so here it is... Batch 13x270 is nearing completion for subfield 3. After that, we will spend a week or two picking some of the low hanging fruit on subfield 7. Then it's back to subfield 3, batch 13x271. This is a very big batch, so I expect it to last until the end of December, possibly into January. |
Send message Joined: 8 Oct 19 Posts: 1 Credit: 24,632 RAC: 0 |
seti@home graphics are not working....what am i doing wrong? |
Send message Joined: 28 Oct 11 Posts: 180 Credit: 247,610,224 RAC: 150,640 |
seti@home graphics are not working....what am i doing wrong?Posting in the wrong forum. Try https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_help_desk.php - but next time, please give details of your operating system, BOINC version, and what you did prior to the change in behaviour. |
Send message Joined: 5 Jan 13 Posts: 43 Credit: 41,980,418 RAC: 56,628 |
Are DS13x271 tasks short (similar to DS13x270)? |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
Are DS13x271 tasks short (similar to DS13x270)? No, they will be about twice as long. DS13x270 took about 10 days, so DS13x271 should take about 85 days, assuming FLOPS stay the same. |
Send message Joined: 28 Oct 11 Posts: 180 Credit: 247,610,224 RAC: 150,640 |
Which raises the problem of the transition back to long tasks after our machines have adapted to the short runs from subfield 7. You may get a blip of runtime exceeded errors again, followed by another blip when the first resends try to run in half the time. Might be wise to cut down the 'maximum tasks in progress' for a while when the first long tasks are ready to flow out. |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
Which raises the problem of the transition back to long tasks after our machines have adapted to the short runs from subfield 7. You may get a blip of runtime exceeded errors again, followed by another blip when the first resends try to run in half the time. Might be wise to cut down the 'maximum tasks in progress' for a while when the first long tasks are ready to flow out. Ok. I reduced the "max_wus_in_progress" parameter just to be safe. But just to clarify, the sf7 tasks will average about .7 hours and the future 13x271 tasks average about 1 hour, so they are actually pretty close in time. For comparison the 13x270 which recently completed (just waiting on a few stragglers to trickle in) averaged .5 hours. All these times are from the same 3.6 GHz computer, running single threaded. If you run hyper-threaded, you can double the times for a better runtime estimate. |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
As predicted, sf3 DS13x271 would take until the end of December. There are about 30k WUs still outstanding, which should take about 2 weeks to trickle in. In the meantime, the search has progressed to DS14x270. The current plan is to stay on subfield 3 for the next several months and knock out DS14 and DS15. |
Send message Joined: 13 Apr 19 Posts: 26 Credit: 11,397,920 RAC: 17 |
Appreciate the update. I am assuming going off past experience DS15×271 will take about the same amount of time as DS13×271 if not longer simply because it has the same number of work units in the batch? |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
Appreciate the update. I am assuming going off past experience DS15×271 will take about the same amount of time as DS13×271 if not longer simply because it has the same number of work units in the batch? Compared to DS13x271, the total time for DS14x271 should be about 10% longer and DS15x271 should be about 40% longer. Even though DS15x271 has the same number of WUs, the average time per WU will go up about 40%. |
Send message Joined: 13 Apr 19 Posts: 26 Credit: 11,397,920 RAC: 17 |
Appreciate the update. I am assuming going off past experience DS15×271 will take about the same amount of time as DS13×271 if not longer simply because it has the same number of work units in the batch? Thank you for this information. When we hit these longer ones I will be using my GPU only |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
In case anyone notices... I have dropped in a few WUs for the {2,7} case. There are only several thousand of these and should be relatively quick, so not worth putting on the batch status page. I usually run these extra cases offline, but these were a little larger than usual. The final results will be some extra rows in this table (look for the entries with S={2,7}): https://numberfields.asu.edu/NumberFields/FieldTables/Decics52.html |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
Just a quick status update... Data set 14x271 is almost complete (just waiting for final WUs to be returned). Moving on to Data set 15x271. |
Send message Joined: 13 Apr 19 Posts: 26 Credit: 11,397,920 RAC: 17 |
According to that the batch status page all of Data set 14x271 has been returned |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
According to that the batch status page all of Data set 14x271 has been returned Actually, there are about 2k left. I marked it as done since it was 99.95% complete. |
Send message Joined: 13 Apr 19 Posts: 26 Credit: 11,397,920 RAC: 17 |
Thanks for the update Eric |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
In case anyone notices... I have added an extra "catch all" table to the batch status page. These are quick cases relative to the current monster {2,5} case. I will release them in small amounts in parallel to the current 15x271 case so as not to perturb things too much. The goal of these cases is to fill in some more rows of this table: https://numberfields.asu.edu/NumberFields/FieldTables/Decics52.html |
Send message Joined: 28 Oct 11 Posts: 180 Credit: 247,610,224 RAC: 150,640 |
I've noticed that I have received a few of the sf7_DS-16x4 tasks, which match the {2,11} row in your new table with 7680 tasks in the batch. They're coming in with a 3 day deadline, but with a runtime estimate nearly three times the baseload batch (20,000 GFLOPs instead of 7,000 GFLOPs). That's going to skew the runtime estimates, if they're really 'relatively quick' runners. |
Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1342 Credit: 514,743,271 RAC: 578,149 |
I've noticed that I have received a few of the sf7_DS-16x4 tasks, which match the {2,11} row in your new table with 7680 tasks in the batch. I gave them a higher priority so they would go out first. The accelerated retries then drops their delay bound, something I had forgotten about. I'll disable that again until these are through. These should be about 30% faster than the 15x271 cases on average. I recently increased the fpops_est in the template file. I did this because I was noticing people getting more work than they could finish, resulting in a lot of abortions. The hope was that the server would dish out fewer work units, at least on new hosts connecting for the first time. Maybe I increased it too much. Also, just to clarify, by "quick" I meant the batch as a whole. Many of these new cases have only a few thousand WUs as opposed to millions. Individual tasks are nominally 1 hour. |
Send message Joined: 13 Apr 19 Posts: 26 Credit: 11,397,920 RAC: 17 |
Thanks Eric for adding the "miscellaneous searches" table, nice to be able to see how far through a number we are (without having to work it out) |