> but without knowing all of the numbers from a single snapshot, it is
> impossible to determine exactly why the project was in EDF.  For example,
> the CPU efficiency might have been 0.2 at that point

On that system, the CPU efficiency hovers around 0.97 - that's why I 
did not bother to mention that specific detail.  My point here is 
that some details "bloat" the description without significantly 
affecting the "big picture".


> The duration correction factor could
> have been higher than reality, increasing the estimated wall times.

What are you saying here ?

My reporting of "four hour" tasks was based upon the 'time to 
completion' shown for those tasks by boincmgr.  [And when they had 
finished, the sum of their runtimes did not appear to exceed the sum 
of the initial 'time to completion' estimates for those same tasks.]

I had always thought the 'time to completion' shown by boincmgr 
__did__ include the effect of the duration correction factor.


Are you saying here that when the duration correction factor is 
higher than reality, then (and only then) the estimated wall times 
could be higher than the 'time to completion' shown by boincmgr ?


mikus

_______________________________________________
boinc_dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.

Reply via email to