| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: FightAIDS@Home
Thread: Are there serious Work-Units errors ? |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 13
|
|
| Author |
|
|
herflick
Senior Cruncher Joined: Nov 11, 2009 Post Count: 176 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I noticed that work unit batches are going through really fast, which is highly unusual.
9 hours ago I received a WU from Batch 26,180 and now it is up to Batch 26,214 . This is 44 batches in 9 hours, an extremly high number. Lately on a normal day we would go through 20 batches in 24 hours, and when other projects were down we would get more computing power and go through 30 batches or so. Is is possible that results are coming back as "Errors" and that is why we are going through these WU batches so fast ??? Anyone have any ideas ? |
||
|
|
martin64
Senior Cruncher Germany Joined: May 11, 2009 Post Count: 445 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Have a look at the full name of the WU you had in batch 26,180. I would bet that the number at the end is not 0, but at least 1, so you probably have got a "repair" WU. Nothing unusual, nothing to worry about.
----------------------------------------Regards, Martin  |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Midday stats give no indication that things are failing. Of course, if your own tasks are not faultering and turn valid, then I'd not worry.
------------------------------------------//-- P.S. If these were of the new experiment 38, I'd anbticipate a pre-load short beta to be sure the builds would not go up the famous creek, for as Dr. Perryman wrote, 38 is going to be a really big one. [Edit 2 times, last edit by Former Member at Nov 25, 2011 4:10:40 PM] |
||
|
|
herflick
Senior Cruncher Joined: Nov 11, 2009 Post Count: 176 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
All of the WUs end in _0 and not _1 , so I know they are not repair jobs.
They do seem to be calculating much quicker, in about 4 hours, compared to 6 or 7 for the previous ones. Anyone else seeing a quicker completion time on their computer for thise new work units ?? |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
If there were changes in run times or stability, you'd be seeing it in the chart shown in this thread: http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewthread_thread,18765 . This morning the average run time was 7.6 hours and with the vastest amount of work being zero redundant, you'd be seeing changes with little delay.
--//-- |
||
|
|
herflick
Senior Cruncher Joined: Nov 11, 2009 Post Count: 176 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
You make a good point, but it takes 24 hours for the information to update. The last update was performed at midnight yesterday before the new work units were being sent out.
I will be monitoring to see if the next update will show anything. |
||
|
|
herflick
Senior Cruncher Joined: Nov 11, 2009 Post Count: 176 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Maybe it is also possible that these new WU batches have significantly less units per batch than the last project......
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
You make a good point, but it takes 24 hours for the information to update. The last update was performed at midnight yesterday before the new work units were being sent out. I will be monitoring to see if the next update will show anything. Stats, except for team, are updated every 12 hours. --//-- |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
herflick, welcome to the WCG forum!
------------------------------------------ I noticed that work unit batches are going through really fast, which is highly unusual. I see two(2) parts in your queries:-- Is it possible that results are coming back as "Errors" and that is why we are going through these WU batches so fast ??? -- Anyone else seeing a quicker completion time on their computer for thise new work units ?? -- Maybe it is also possible that these new WU batches have significantly less units per batch than the last project...... <snippets from posts of herflick: Nov 25, 2011 3:39:49 PM through Nov 25, 2011 7:48:02 PM> 1] What is the batch structure of the project? 2] What is the range/profile of actual-vs-expected performance of the batches when the batches are crunched by crunchers using varied mix of machines on a normal WCG day. Part#2 above is a dynamic situation where there is imperfect and incomplete information else evolving or changing -- the "fog of crunching" part. But there should be no likes of a fog for part#1 above. To the extent that part#2 is influenced by the nature and how part#1 is fashioned, see this thread for some discussion of part#1. Good day. ; [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Nov 26, 2011 9:58:15 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
To make it a bit less speculative and a bit more factual, pulled one and let it run on a Q6600 with Linux 64 Bit acting as file- and media server:
----------------------------------------- Task: 6.40 faah faah26205_ZINC01563473_x3NF6b_00_2 04:45:47 (04:43:16) 26-11-2011 15:19 26-11-2011 15:19 Reported OK - 99 Docking runs. - Progress jumped from 99.25% to 100% at end, since the calculations a non-deterministic and progress is an approximation. - Ran in 4:43 CPU hours, Wingman ran 9.73 hours - 99.2% efficiency - Valid. Project hours mean this morning 7.04 hours. faah26205_ ZINC01563473_ x3NF6b_ 00_ 2-- 640 Valid 11/26/11 09:32:08 11/26/11 14:19:34 4.73 131.0 / 68.1 < moi faah26205_ ZINC01563473_ x3NF6b_ 00_ 1-- 640 Valid 11/25/11 13:23:00 11/26/11 07:05:45 9.73 68.1 / 68.1 --//-- [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Nov 26, 2011 2:41:56 PM] |
||
|
|
|