| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: Discovering Dengue Drugs - Together - Phase 2 Forum
Thread: DDDT-2 Work Unit distribution updated |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 121
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Ingleside
Veteran Cruncher Norway Joined: Nov 19, 2005 Post Count: 974 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Our config.xml settings that are relevant to the reliable feature are: <reliable_max_error_rate>0.002</reliable_max_error_rate> <reliable_max_avg_turnaround>172800</reliable_max_avg_turnaround> Ah, it's a huge difference between a turnaround-time of 2 days and the 7 days uplinger mentioned in the 1st. post in this thread...  "I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might." |
||
|
|
uplinger
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: May 23, 2005 Post Count: 3952 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Ingleside, the avg turnaround for the host is 2 days...but the work units will be given 8 (updated originally it was 7) days to return the work. Let me know if that is what you are curious about?
-Uplinger |
||
|
|
Ingleside
Veteran Cruncher Norway Joined: Nov 19, 2005 Post Count: 974 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Ingleside, the avg turnaround for the host is 2 days...but the work units will be given 8 (updated originally it was 7) days to return the work. Let me know if that is what you are curious about? -Uplinger I interpreted this "1. New type A work units will be sent to reliable hosts only with a 7 day turnaround." to mean "the A-type is sent to hosts with 7-days average turnaround (or less)", something that obviously isn't the case when the cut-off is 2 days. I didn't interpret this to mean the work had a 7-day deadline... Now, I should have remembered there aren't separate settings for each sub-project, so the 7-days couldn't be real, since this wouldn't work alongside the other WCG-sub-projects that gets a 4-days re-issue.  "I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might." |
||
|
|
GIBA
Ace Cruncher Joined: Apr 25, 2005 Post Count: 5374 Status: Offline |
Well, I read about the difficults at this time of project, mainly with A types, due the process and methodoly adopted by scientits to do it.
----------------------------------------But, I guess that if the WU's distribution could be started again soon, and in a regular flow, so many of these discussions and doubts will be automatically solved, once crunchers will start the fact crunch a lot this project and will turn your attention to do it... 
Cheers ! GIB@
 Join BRASIL - BRAZIL@GRID team and be very happy ! http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/team/viewTeamInfo.do?teamId=DF99KT5DN1 |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3715 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I interpreted this "1. New type A work units will be sent to reliable hosts only with a 7 day turnaround." to mean "the A-type is sent to hosts with 7-days average turnaround (or less)", something that obviously isn't the case when the cut-off is 2 days. I didn't interpret this to mean the work had a 7-day deadline... What is obvious is that the purpose of these particular distribution rules is to speed up the process for those WUs which condition the creation of the bulk of type C WUs.Here at WCG we use to not consider hosts with an average turnaroud time of 7 days as fast returners.  I even wonder how many hosts would have been eliminated by such a limit (i.e. with a TAT > 7). Probably so few that such a rule would not change much. ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by JmBoullier at Mar 8, 2010 11:23:40 PM] |
||
|
|
knreed
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: Nov 8, 2004 Post Count: 4504 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Days = Average turnaround is less than this # of days %Hosts = % of active hosts having this average turnaround %Power = % of computing power from hosts having this average turnaround |
||
|
|
knreed
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: Nov 8, 2004 Post Count: 4504 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
We have released some new work for DDDT2A. Unfortunately, I ran the scripts manually and forgot to set the priority to have the workunits sent to only reliable hosts (and correspondingly have the deadline reduced). As a result, 2 copies for each workunit went out with 20 day deadlines.
Since that will greatly impede the start of the B and C's, we have issued 2 additional copies for those workunits at higher priority and being sent to reliable hosts and therefore will have the reduced deadline of 8 days. I apologize for the error. |
||
|
|
Ingleside
Veteran Cruncher Norway Joined: Nov 19, 2005 Post Count: 974 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks for the info.  Doing a quick-and-dirty calculation, if roughly 50% of BoincStats roughly 200k "active" computers for WCG has selected DDDT2, and roughly 33% of these again is "reliable", this means roughly 30k "reliable" computers is waiting on the A-tasks. With only 4k tasks issued, this means there's been 1 task for every 7.5 "reliable" computer.. And, total amount of A-tasks would be 2.4 tasks per "reliable" computer. So, for anyone waiting on getting a badge in DDDT2, I would be really surprised to get a bronze-badge based only on the A-type, and more realistic is to wait on the C-type becoming available. "I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might." |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Well those numbers do take into account turn-around-time but do they also take into account the huge requirements for the project. Many computers simply didn't seem to have the memory/pagefile requirements.
Faldor |
||
|
|
petehardy
Senior Cruncher USA Joined: May 4, 2007 Post Count: 318 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Hi,
----------------------------------------Got these:- ts02_ a229_ ps0000_ 0--In Progress 3/9/10 17:03:11 3/29/10 17:03:11 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 ts02_ a207_ ps0000_ 0--In Progress 3/9/10 17:01:30 3/29/10 17:01:30 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 ts02_ a201_ ps0000_ 1--In Progress 3/9/10 17:01:11 3/29/10 17:01:11 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 ts02_ a202_ ps0000_ 1--In Progress 3/9/10 17:01:09 3/29/10 17:01:09 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 ts02_ a196_ ps0000_ 1--In Progress 3/9/10 17:00:48 3/29/10 17:00:48 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 ts02_ a195_ ps0000_ 0--In Progress 3/9/10 17:00:28 3/29/10 17:00:28 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 ts02_ a194_ ps0000_ 0--In Progress 3/9/10 17:00:26 3/29/10 17:00:26 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 ts02_ a099_ ps0000_ 0--In Progress 3/9/10 16:49:52 3/29/10 16:49:52 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 Should be interesting to to see if the reliable machines can return their results before mine. Pete  "Patience is a virtue", I can't wait to learn it! |
||
|
|
|