No credit?

Author	Message
HTH Send message Joined: 29 Apr 12 Posts: 5 Credit: 5,746 RAC: 0	Message 635 - Posted: 1 May 2012, 12:50:38 UTC No credit, although I swear I have finished at least a couple of WUs. What gives? ID: 635 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Greg Tucker Project administrator Project developer Project tester Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 46 Credit: 7,144,042 RAC: 0	Message 636 - Posted: 1 May 2012, 22:51:22 UTC - in response to Message 635. Looks like you have 8 in progress. None are reported as completed. ID: 636 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

HTH Send message Joined: 29 Apr 12 Posts: 5 Credit: 5,746 RAC: 0	Message 637 - Posted: 2 May 2012, 11:39:01 UTC - in response to Message 636. Looks like you have 8 in progress. None are reported as completed. Some of them (at least two) went to 100% (or near) then suddenly CPU time was back at 0:00... ID: 637 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Eric Driver Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1373 Credit: 648,557,392 RAC: 868,151	Message 638 - Posted: 2 May 2012, 21:04:40 UTC - in response to Message 637. Looks like you have 8 in progress. None are reported as completed. Some of them (at least two) went to 100% (or near) then suddenly CPU time was back at 0:00... That sounds very odd. There's not much we can do at this end. Could you look at the boinc client messages to see if that gives any insight. The percent done is computed based on the value of an outer loop variable and is a monotonically increasing function; the only way for that to decrease is if that variable was somehow being overwritten, or if something got hosed up with the client. Another thing that could cause that is if the checkpoint file was modified by an external source and then boinc was restarted. Or another thought. Could something be preventing the checkpoint file from being written. Then if the client was restarted, it would go back to 0%. Are you seeing this on both computers? ID: 638 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

HTH Send message Joined: 29 Apr 12 Posts: 5 Credit: 5,746 RAC: 0	Message 639 - Posted: 4 May 2012, 6:59:20 UTC - in response to Message 638. Or another thought. Could something be preventing the checkpoint file from being written. Then if the client was restarted, it would go back to 0%. Are you seeing this on both computers? What is a normal crunching time for NumberFields@home WU? Now one is running on my 2.8 GHz Pentium D 920 with 6 gigabytes of RAM. 5 hours and 42% at the moment... ID: 639 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

HTH Send message Joined: 29 Apr 12 Posts: 5 Credit: 5,746 RAC: 0	Message 640 - Posted: 4 May 2012, 13:57:36 UTC - in response to Message 639. Last modified: 4 May 2012, 14:01:21 UTC #1: 92%, 12 hours, wu_DS-15x120_Grp33189of34134_0 #2: 30%, 6 hours, wu_DS-15x120_Grp33351of34134_0 Let's see what happens. ID: 640 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

HTH Send message Joined: 29 Apr 12 Posts: 5 Credit: 5,746 RAC: 0	Message 641 - Posted: 4 May 2012, 15:37:13 UTC - in response to Message 640. #1: 92%, 12 hours, wu_DS-15x120_Grp33189of34134_0 Let's see what happens. I got credit (400.57) for it! Thanks! :) ID: 641 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Eric Driver Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 8 Jul 11 Posts: 1373 Credit: 648,557,392 RAC: 868,151	Message 642 - Posted: 4 May 2012, 21:29:07 UTC - in response to Message 639. Or another thought. Could something be preventing the checkpoint file from being written. Then if the client was restarted, it would go back to 0%. Are you seeing this on both computers? What is a normal crunching time for NumberFields@home WU? Now one is running on my 2.8 GHz Pentium D 920 with 6 gigabytes of RAM. 5 hours and 42% at the moment... Normal crunch time obviously depends on cpu and clock speed. At 2.8 GHz I would expect it to be faster than 12 hours. I wonder if your cpu is being throttled. Average run time on my 3.3 GHz Core i5 is less than 4 hours. Every now and then there is the occasional statistical outlier. Maybe you got one of those... ID: 642 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote