Ironically, this project doesn't have "tasks in progress" limit....

Message boards : SETI@home Enhanced : Ironically, this project doesn't have "tasks in progress" limit....
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile Mr. Kevvy
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Apr 13
Posts: 23
Credit: 2,253,909
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 45625 - Posted: 23 Apr 2013, 15:12:54 UTC

... so when I attached my hosts to it, I ended up with 7K tasks in progress, and one host with 2.5K of them.

Kind of strange that SETI@Home production has the hard 100/200 limit that no one wants and this project doesn't! (Even though fast turn-arounds of work are required, and caches may need to be cleared when a new client executable is released.)

So I will be disabling work fetch on all my hosts when I get home and keeping it off until I've run my cache down. Wish I'd known this before I signed up!
ID: 45625 · Report as offensive
William
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 13
Posts: 606
Credit: 588,843
RAC: 0
Message 45626 - Posted: 23 Apr 2013, 15:45:41 UTC

you are mainly suffering from 'add new project to Boinc 7'

what with the new REC driven scheduler, it will fecth and run almost exclusively the new project untill the REC has caught up with whatever the other projects have. ways around that are limiting with app_config.xml and max_concurrent and simply editing client_state.xml to give the new project an even REC. may not be quite feasible with that many hosts.

Additionally beta testers tend to run quite small caches, to improve turnover.

Personally, I'd edit REC in client_state.xml, reduce cache and give beta a smaller resource share than main.
A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read. (Mark Twain)
ID: 45626 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 3 Jan 07
Posts: 1451
Credit: 3,272,268
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 45627 - Posted: 23 Apr 2013, 15:57:45 UTC

The other thing you can do is to reduce

<rec_half_life_days>X</rec_half_life_days>
A project's scheduling priority is determined by its estimated credit in the last X days. Default is 10; set it larger if you run long high-priority jobs. New in 6.13.1

(from client configuration)

Reduce the number to 1 day or less to encourage things to balance themselves out more quickly.
ID: 45627 · Report as offensive
WezH
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 3 Jun 07
Posts: 51
Credit: 2,861,562
RAC: 0
Finland
Message 46319 - Posted: 14 Jun 2013, 14:58:01 UTC - in response to Message 45626.  

Additionally beta testers tend to run quite small caches, to improve turnover.


Well, not all of them. One user has 12945 workunits in progress. That is about 36% of all Beta workunits in progress. Turnover is from 4 to 19 days...

Just found it out when one of my workunits is still pending, it was completed 19th May.

That can't be good for Beta testing...
ID: 46319 · Report as offensive
Profile Raistmer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Aug 05
Posts: 2423
Credit: 15,878,738
RAC: 0
Russia
Message 46332 - Posted: 14 Jun 2013, 20:33:41 UTC

agree.
+1 for task limit per host here and make such limit bigger on main.
ID: 46332 · Report as offensive
WezH
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 3 Jun 07
Posts: 51
Credit: 2,861,562
RAC: 0
Finland
Message 46463 - Posted: 2 Jul 2013, 19:21:54 UTC - in response to Message 46319.  

Additionally beta testers tend to run quite small caches, to improve turnover.


Well, not all of them. One user has 12945 workunits in progress. That is about 36% of all Beta workunits in progress. Turnover is from 4 to 19 days...

Just found it out when one of my workunits is still pending, it was completed 19th May.

That can't be good for Beta testing...


Well, this user, CElliot, does have now 37.8% "In Progress" of all workunits in Beta. I did use on my calculations SSP of beta, don't know how accurate that is...

Turnover is 22.47 - 16.6 - 12.65 - 27.1 days in his four hosts...

Somebody with connections to staff of Seti@Home Beta staff, please give them my worries... This has to be bad for Beta test...
ID: 46463 · Report as offensive
Profile Steve Hawker*
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Oct 12
Posts: 8
Credit: 1,055,466
RAC: 0
United States
Message 46485 - Posted: 8 Jul 2013, 16:13:42 UTC - in response to Message 46463.  

Additionally beta testers tend to run quite small caches, to improve turnover.


Well, not all of them. One user has 12945 workunits in progress. That is about 36% of all Beta workunits in progress. Turnover is from 4 to 19 days...

Just found it out when one of my workunits is still pending, it was completed 19th May.

That can't be good for Beta testing...


Well, this user, CElliot, does have now 37.8% "In Progress" of all workunits in Beta. I did use on my calculations SSP of beta, don't know how accurate that is...

Turnover is 22.47 - 16.6 - 12.65 - 27.1 days in his four hosts...

Somebody with connections to staff of Seti@Home Beta staff, please give them my worries... This has to be bad for Beta test...


I'd be happy just to have ONE wu in progress...
ID: 46485 · Report as offensive
Claggy
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 29 May 06
Posts: 1037
Credit: 8,440,339
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 46595 - Posted: 8 Aug 2013, 13:06:31 UTC - in response to Message 46463.  

Additionally beta testers tend to run quite small caches, to improve turnover.


Well, not all of them. One user has 12945 workunits in progress. That is about 36% of all Beta workunits in progress. Turnover is from 4 to 19 days...

Just found it out when one of my workunits is still pending, it was completed 19th May.

That can't be good for Beta testing...


Well, this user, CElliot, does have now 37.8% "In Progress" of all workunits in Beta. I did use on my calculations SSP of beta, don't know how accurate that is...

Turnover is 22.47 - 16.6 - 12.65 - 27.1 days in his four hosts...

Somebody with connections to staff of Seti@Home Beta staff, please give them my worries... This has to be bad for Beta test...


BUMP.

Claggy
ID: 46595 · Report as offensive
Grumpy Swede
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Mar 12
Posts: 1700
Credit: 13,216,373
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 46597 - Posted: 8 Aug 2013, 15:00:59 UTC - in response to Message 46595.  
Last modified: 8 Aug 2013, 15:06:17 UTC

Additionally beta testers tend to run quite small caches, to improve turnover.


Well, not all of them. One user has 12945 workunits in progress. That is about 36% of all Beta workunits in progress. Turnover is from 4 to 19 days...

Just found it out when one of my workunits is still pending, it was completed 19th May.

That can't be good for Beta testing...


Well, this user, CElliot, does have now 37.8% "In Progress" of all workunits in Beta. I did use on my calculations SSP of beta, don't know how accurate that is...

Turnover is 22.47 - 16.6 - 12.65 - 27.1 days in his four hosts...

Somebody with connections to staff of Seti@Home Beta staff, please give them my worries... This has to be bad for Beta test...


BUMP.

Claggy


Yes, it would be nice if other beta testers could have a fair chance to get some WUs to test, and not only CElliot. The more different computers and setups that can test the different apps, the better and more accurate the Beta testings would be. If one user holds 38% of all workunits in his cache, it goes without saying that it can't be good for Beta testing.

Put a limit like on main on how many WU's you can have onboard at the same time, and say thank you to CElliot that it had to be done here on Beta too.
WARNING!! "THIS IS A SIGNATURE", of the "IT MAY CHANGE AT ANY MOMENT" type. It may, or may not be considered insulting, all depending upon HOW SENSITIVE THE VIEWER IS, to certain inputs to/from the nervous system.
ID: 46597 · Report as offensive
Profile Steve Hawker*
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Oct 12
Posts: 8
Credit: 1,055,466
RAC: 0
United States
Message 46607 - Posted: 9 Aug 2013, 15:58:27 UTC - in response to Message 46597.  

Yes, it would be nice if other beta testers could have a fair chance to get some WUs to test, and not only CElliot. The more different computers and setups that can test the different apps, the better and more accurate the Beta testings would be. If one user holds 38% of all workunits in his cache, it goes without saying that it can't be good for Beta testing.

Put a limit like on main on how many WU's you can have onboard at the same time, and say thank you to CElliot that it had to be done here on Beta too.


It would be quite cool if CElliot voluntarily aborted say, 50% of his/her tasks. Then I might get ONE. That would be sweet.
ID: 46607 · Report as offensive
Claggy
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 29 May 06
Posts: 1037
Credit: 8,440,339
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 46608 - Posted: 9 Aug 2013, 18:15:46 UTC - in response to Message 46607.  

Yes, it would be nice if other beta testers could have a fair chance to get some WUs to test, and not only CElliot. The more different computers and setups that can test the different apps, the better and more accurate the Beta testings would be. If one user holds 38% of all workunits in his cache, it goes without saying that it can't be good for Beta testing.

Put a limit like on main on how many WU's you can have onboard at the same time, and say thank you to CElliot that it had to be done here on Beta too.


It would be quite cool if CElliot voluntarily aborted say, 50% of his/her tasks. Then I might get ONE. That would be sweet.

and set his cache to a reasonable level, no more than a day or two, otherwise his hosts would hoover up those Wu's again, but on different hosts,

Claggy
ID: 46608 · Report as offensive

Message boards : SETI@home Enhanced : Ironically, this project doesn't have "tasks in progress" limit....


 
©2021 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.