Disk problem is solved.

I don't think we are causing the problem. I don't get any on BOINC.

Mua online bếp từ âm dương inverter, bếp đôi, bếp đơn, bếp âm... Giao hàng tận nơi, có trả góp, hàng chính hãng sunhouse, electrolux, kangaroo...

---

Mua online bếp từ âm dương inverter, bếp đôi, bếp đơn, bếp âm... Giao hàng tận nơi, có trả góp, hàng chính hãng sunhouse, electrolux, kangaroo... http://beptu.webflow.io/

---

How much work is going to be created this round? There has been work for a couple of days straight, which is a fairly long period for this project.

Why isn't anyone writing about the terrible performance of the Work Units? We've been Having the same problem across the board with all computers with 89% of ALL wu's since the project started back up in March. The work units get stuck and never complete until it self aborts after "timing out" wasting HOURS upon HOURS of valuable ENERGY and computer resources; don't you understand how intense of a program this is on our computers? Our computers are being put to the LIMIT @ aprox 1.7Gigs of ram/ W.U. Also, Very taxing on the hard drives, its even maxing out my nvme stick, @ 1.2Gig/ second.

I run each computer according to the ram I have in each unit, as to not let the ram hit over 90% usage. That being said here's a list of my computers ALL having the same problem. (at bottom) Btw, my internet runs at 250/gig/sec, new router/ no internet problems what so ever. ALL computers are running newest version of boinc and VM Oracle, except the apple laptop. This is upsetting to me, I could be wrong, but it seems as if you've never actually run the program yourself on ANY computer, just make the wu's and send them out and wait for feed back, well here it is. You would also credit us appropriately if you knew how taxing these WU's were on a computer, and how if its not dialed in correctly it will crash your computer instantly. This are the Hardest Wu's to run out of the WHOLE Boinc project, yet are the least compensated...


Computers are:

1) AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT 12-Core Processor [Family 23 Model 113 Stepping 0]
(24 processors) AMD Radeon RX 580 Series (8192MB) OpenCL: 2.0

GenuineIntel
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3470 CPU @ 3.20GHz [Family 6 Model 58 Stepping 9]
(4 processors)

AuthenticAMD
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-55 [Family 15 Model 104 Stepping 1]
(2 processors)

GenuineIntel
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-5257U CPU @ 2.70GHz [x86 Family 6 Model 61 Stepping 4]
(4 processors)

AuthenticAMD
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-57 [Family 15 Model 104 Stepping 2]
(2 processors)

I have only seen an excessively high error rate in tasks on two of my computers. One was a mobile Xeon laptop and the other a third gen i7 laptop that constantly overheats so it doesn't do much of anything very well. I don't know why, but it just wasn't able to complete any tasks successfully on the Xeon no matter what I tried. It runs everything else very well.

On my other computers, as long as I limit the number of tasks in progress so that the running tasks have enough RAM available (about 3GB per task), they have been completing about 80-90% of their tasks successfully. That's certainly not perfect since I can't use 100% of the CPU power, but it's not really a terrible completion rate. That rate is going down a bit now that we are just re-running tasks that someone else already failed, but it's still staying above 70% or so for me on the two computers that I currently have running the project (Ryzen 9 3900X and Intel i7-8700). I did get pretty good success on several other older computers, but they are just too slow and don't have enough RAM to do it efficiently so they are working on other projects instead of this one.

Unfortunately, that does mean that anyone trying to run the project without closely paying attention to it isn't going to have much success. An announcement from the admins explaining the system requirements for each batch of tasks would definitely be helpful.

Why isn't anyone writing about the terrible performance of the Work Units? We've been Having the same problem across the board with all computers with 89% of ALL wu's since the project started back up in March. The work units get stuck and never complete until it self aborts after "timing out" wasting HOURS upon HOURS of valuable ENERGY and computer resources; don't you understand how intense of a program this is on our computers? Our computers are being put to the LIMIT @ aprox 1.7Gigs of ram/ W.U. Also, Very taxing on the hard drives, its even maxing out my nvme stick, @ 1.2Gig/ second.

I have concluded that they are not intended for fast machines, or at least we should not be using our fast machines on them. That is because the one-hour timeout is probably constant no matter what you are running.
So use an Android or slow notebook. Then, the good work units will take longer, and the bad ones won't take up such a large proportion of the total time.

Therefore, until they come up with something better, I see no point in using my valuable Ryzen 3000's here.

Honestly, this lack of any communication whatsoever definitely speaks for itself. The few tasks that ran into the runtime exceeded issue account for more compute time (time that is actually just lost) than all the other valid tasks combined. All tasks that errored out did run for 4365 ± 5 sec. The incredible write speeds needed can be combatted by setting up a RAM disk but are proof of suboptimal code. Will only finish the tasks that my client pulled at least until the high invalid rate and write speeds have been sorted out.

Jim, you might be right that it's rather slower computers that might be suited for this project. Can only repeat that Ryzen 3000 series CPUs are definitely more helpful on other projects!

How SLOW of a PC do you think will always complete with valid tasks?
My Celeron J1900 is slow and my AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is even slower yet compared to anything "modern" by today's standards. Neither have had much luck getting tasks to validate either.

I chalk it up to crappy code design and/or crappy data. GIGO appears to be at play with this project.

Agree that some kind of point compensation should of been established from the beginning for the trashed tasks.

Communication from a project scientist and/or a project admin has been lacking since the start. Both have been noted many times over in the project forums.

---

The idea IMO is rather that you don't waste "more valuable" compute resources with this project. Would you rather have your AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ run into the "runtime exceeded" issues for failed tasks or your latest gen Intel/Ryzen CPUs? My stance is that my Ryzen is better off somewhere else.

Why it bothers me: The high lost compute time ratio! Even if 1 out of every 10 would fail, the lost time for the runtime exceeded task is roughly 1.5 hrs while the 9 valid tasks are usually just 2-3 min each. That is too much ... (90 min vs. 20 min compute time failed vs. valid if one were to assume a failure rate of 10%)

My Celeron J1900 is slow and my AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is even slower yet compared to anything "modern" by today's standards. Neither have had much luck getting tasks to validate either.

Don't know. I have not had a problem getting tasks validated. That may be something else.
https://boinc.nanohub.org/nanoHUB_at_home/results.php?hostid=12034

But I am on Linux, which may help with the validation. The use of VirtualBox just complicates it further.

I think this is a dead project

It comes alive when they need us, at certain times of the school year.
Halloween may see the waking of the dead.

It comes alive when they need us, at certain times of the school year.
Halloween may see the waking of the dead.

Nope, seems still dead