Thanks jm7,

Like I say I'll need to test this and see if this actually happens on this 
build (6.11.4) over a prolonged period
Maybe the event log message "11/08/2010 21:27:01 |  | [work_fetch] target work 
buffer: 0.86 + 388800.00 sec" should be changed to reflect what the real target 
work buffer is? As the calculation below is forcing Boinc to request a lower 
buffer than it is stating. This is going to mislead/confuse users about exactly 
how much work Boinc is trying to request

Ghost



> To: [email protected]
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 08:04:04 -0400
> CC: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request Logic
> 
>     <on_frac>0.404988</on_frac>
> 
> This should be cutting the requests by 60% all by itself.
> 
> The calculation should be:  0.404988 * 0.999558 * shortfall for the work
> request.
> 
> jm7
> 
> 
>                                                                            
>              Jamie Tiller                                                  
>              <ghost0...@hotmai                                             
>              l.co.uk>                                                   To 
>                                        <[email protected]>            
>              08/09/2010 04:54                                           cc 
>              PM                        <[email protected]>,       
>                                        <[email protected] 
>                                        >                                   
>                                                                    Subject 
>                                        RE: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request  
>                                        Logic                               
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
>                                                                            
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Included both time_stats and net_stats
> 
> <time_stats>
>     <on_frac>0.404988</on_frac>
>     <connected_frac>0.811280</connected_frac>
>     <active_frac>0.999558</active_frac>
>     <last_update>1281386658.730200</last_update>
> </time_stats>
> <net_stats>
>     <bwup>11983.721332</bwup>
>     <avg_up>8510916.840124</avg_up>
>     <avg_time_up>1281386662.966200</avg_time_up>
>     <bwdown>23045.015106</bwdown>
>     <avg_down>82112700.670026</avg_down>
>     <avg_time_down>1281378942.015200</avg_time_down>
> </net_stats>
> 
> > To: [email protected]
> > From: [email protected]
> > Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 16:18:24 -0400
> > CC: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request Logic
> >
> > >From your client_state.xml file, what are the time_stats?
> >
> > jm7
> >
> >
> >
> > Jamie Tiller
> > <ghost0...@hotmai
> > l.co.uk> To
> > <[email protected]>,
> > 08/09/2010 04:08 <[email protected]>
> > PM cc
> > <[email protected]
> > >
> > Subject
> > RE: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request
> > Logic
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ok,
> >
> > I'm not seeing this at the moment, although I've not been monitoring the
> > work fetch requests.
> > Everytime that Boinc does a work fetch I see the default 4.5 days being
> > requested from the cache settings.
> > I'll run Boinc with the current settings for a couple of weeks and see if
> > it starts to adapt better to the actual uptime per day and adjusts the
> work
> > fetch's accordingly
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > From: [email protected]
> > > Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 08:25:35 -0400
> > > CC: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request Logic
> > >
> > > The client also tracks this, and should reduce the work fetch requests
> > > after a couple of weeks of running part time. The information should
> > > already be incorporated into the work fetch request.
> > >
> > > Yes, new clients can fetch more work than makes sense for clients that
> > are
> > > off most of the time, but they should reduce the requests after enough
> > > information is gathered.
> > >
> > > jm7
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Jamie Tiller
> > > <ghost0...@hotmai
> > > l.co.uk> To
> > > Sent by: <[email protected]>
> > > <boinc_dev-bounce cc
> > > [email protected]
> > > u> Subject
> > > [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request
> > > Logic
> > > 08/07/2010 07:29
> > > AM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Is it possible that the work fetch request system can be subtly
> changed?
> > > At
> > > the moment, the user set's a cache by days in the client or the project
> > > web site, this cache is then converted into seconds and the work fetch
> > > logic will try to fill this cache.
> > > For computers that are on and
> > > crunching 24/7 this logic is fine, but for computers that only crunch
> > > for a % of the day then this leads to them overfilling their cache and
> > > possibly having work units time out or go to High Priority mode as they
> > > will not finish in time.
> > >
> > > For example, I currently have a cache
> > > set to 4.5 days but only crunch for about 8 hours per day. The work
> > > fetch request logic is currently asking for 0.86 + 388800.00 seconds of
> > > work so potentially giving me 108 hours of work. Given the fact that in
> > > reality I will only crunch for 36 hours (129600 seconds) of that 108
> > > hours this is a massive overfill of the cache.
> > > >From the project
> > > websites we already track various statistics about how Boinc runs and
> is
> > > connected to the network etc, could we not utilise these figures to be
> > > able to give a realistic figure on that hosts up time and then use that
> > > figure in the work fetch request logic?
> > >
> > > Ghost
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
                                          
_______________________________________________
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