1)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Too much credit ?
(Message 2505)
Posted 26 Jul 2019 by Beyond Post: Personally I think you, like Seti, will come to regret that decision. Seti has by far the most number of people signing up to crunch for it, they do the most PR stuff so why wouldn't people start there? BUT they are also the project that most people then leave for other projects too!! Seti has numerous problems such as not being able to get the grants like they have in the past etc and are now shut down at least 2 days per week every week, this has also affected their ability to retain people who pay to crunch too. The people that do crunch there are aware of that and work around it but since people are leaving the project it also means they no longer have as many people doing the crunching and their time frame to analyze the data is reduced as a result. In short it's your decision and your project and your decisions will affect how long it keeps going at the current rate. Mikey, I agree. A few months ago the team standings on this project were turned upside down due to a huge credit anomaly. It also had the effect of singlehandedly reordering a good portion of the DC-Vault standings. Now the credits are so low here that it's folly to even think that the credit totals can be brought back into reality. GPU credits are ridiculously low. Maybe it's partly due to an inefficient GPU application. Back on topic, the crazy high credits that were spewed out for a few days were never rolled back and that's a problem. I'm sure that the people/teams that benefited are happy but no one else is. The apparently unrealized upshot is that those teams that benefited can quit work here because no one can realistically ever catch them and the teams that missed the few days of insane credits have no reason to run this project anymore as the possibility of upward mobility is virtually nonexistent. Not rolling back those crazy credit days are akin to shooting oneself in the foot as far as project participation is concerned. |
2)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Long running wu_Qsqrt421_DS1x5 units - how long to let them run?
(Message 1630)
Posted 29 Mar 2016 by Beyond Post: It has recently come to my attention that the Qsqrt421 cases suffer from the same problem that the Bounded app did a couple weeks ago. I am currently looking into a similar fix for these WUs. Thanks Eric. Aborted at 1349 hours. Longest one I've seen so far. |
3)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Long running wu_Qsqrt421_DS1x5 units - how long to let them run?
(Message 1627)
Posted 28 Mar 2016 by Beyond Post: It has recently come to my attention that the Qsqrt421 cases suffer from the same problem that the Bounded app did a couple weeks ago. I am currently looking into a similar fix for these WUs. Just got home from vacation and checked this WU again. It's at 1342 hours and 52%. Looks like it's been completed by Capital Avionics on 3/24. I assume that I should abort it? |
4)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Long running wu_Qsqrt421_DS1x5 units - how long to let them run?
(Message 1582)
Posted 5 Mar 2016 by Beyond Post: >>>The second one is now at 775 hours, still progressing (says 50% now, up from 49% yesterday). Wow! Mine's at 50.079%, 793 hours at the moment. AMD Phenom II X6 1055T CPU. |
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Long running wu_Qsqrt421_DS1x5 units - how long to let them run?
(Message 1578)
Posted 5 Mar 2016 by Beyond Post: It has recently come to my attention that the Qsqrt421 cases suffer from the same problem that the Bounded app did a couple weeks ago. I am currently looking into a similar fix for these WUs. The second one is now at 775 hours, still progressing (says 50% now, up from 49% yesterday). http://numberfields.asu.edu/NumberFields/workunit.php?wuid=12404866 No happy returns from anyone yet. |
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Long running wu_Qsqrt421_DS1x5 units - how long to let them run?
(Message 1550)
Posted 23 Feb 2016 by Beyond Post: Someone has returned a result that was validated on the first of the two work units, so you might just as well abort it and crunch some work unit that has not yet been solved. The other one has not been solved yet, so you can continue on that one. Thanks! The second one continues to run, now at 509 hours. |
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Long running wu_Qsqrt421_DS1x5 units - how long to let them run?
(Message 1544)
Posted 17 Feb 2016 by Beyond Post: It has recently come to my attention that the Qsqrt421 cases suffer from the same problem that the Bounded app did a couple weeks ago. I am currently looking into a similar fix for these WUs. I have 2 of these WUs running at the moment. One at 271 hours and the other at 385 hours. Leave them run? http://numberfields.asu.edu/NumberFields/workunit.php?wuid=12420089 http://numberfields.asu.edu/NumberFields/workunit.php?wuid=12404866 Thanks/Ed |