Have just finished downloading all but my ATI GPU cache now, and not only have I received a full 4 day cache on the cuda gpu but also on the cpu:
20/08/2010 19:39:04 | | [work_fetch] ------- start work fetch state ------- 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | | [work_fetch] target work buffer: 0.86 + 345600.00 sec 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | | [work_fetch] CPU: shortfall 0.00 nidle 0.00 saturated 356020.18 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 200.00 runnable 200.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] CPU: fetch share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 (comm deferred) (blocked by prefs) 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home | [work_fetch] CPU: fetch share 0.00 LTD -67814.29 backoff dt 339.89 int 1920.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] CPU: fetch share 1.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: shortfall 0.00 nidle 0.00 saturated 353259.33 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 300.00 runnable 300.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: fetch share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 (comm deferred) (blocked by prefs) 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: fetch share 0.33 LTD -162919.20 backoff dt 0.00 int 60.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: fetch share 0.67 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: shortfall 342948.31 nidle 0.00 saturated 2652.55 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 0.00 runnable 0.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: fetch share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 (comm deferred) 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: fetch share 0.00 LTD -127895.09 backoff dt 254.42 int 3840.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: fetch share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 3365.00 int 3840.00 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] overall LTD -10587.52 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home | [work_fetch] overall LTD -2868745.90 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] overall LTD -2124023.34 20/08/2010 19:39:04 | | [work_fetch] ------- end work fetch state ------- It definately looks like either Boinc is ignoring the <time_stats> logic when requesting work, or it is broken in some other way Having different time_stats for CPU against GPU would improve the logic and increase overall control of the work fetches, but this wouldn't stop Boinc from over requesting work on a part time crunching computer Regards Ghost > Subject: RE: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request Logic > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected]; [email protected] > From: [email protected] > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:53:47 -0700 > > Looking at the <time_stats>, I notice a glaring deficiency. <active_frac> > is the same for CPU and for GPU, however, there are different settings for > the CPU and the GPU that control whether these are in use. We probably > need one for each device type. > > jm7 > > > > Jamie Tiller > <ghost0...@hotmai > l.co.uk> To > <[email protected]> > 08/20/2010 01:46 cc > PM <[email protected]>, > <[email protected] > > > Subject > RE: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request > Logic > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > So I've done some more prolonged testing regarding this, currently on build > 6.11.4, Windows 7 64bit. > Have my cache set to 4 days (86400 * 4 = 345600 seconds) > > From my client_state: > <time_stats> > <on_frac>0.501165</on_frac> > <connected_frac>0.702491</connected_frac> > <active_frac>0.999492</active_frac> > <last_update>1282324678.690800</last_update> > </time_stats> > > So if the work fetch logic is requesting the correct amount of work, then > Boinc should request > <on_frac>0.501165</on_frac> * <active_frac>0.999492</active_frac> * > shortage of work. > > If we use my nvidia GPU (GTX465) just as the example: > 20/08/2010 18:25:59 | | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: shortfall 294010.03 nidle > 0.00 saturated 51298.65 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 200.00 runnable 300.00 > > Then Boinc should do the following math: > 0.501165 * 0.999492 * 293767.52 = 147151.2083532263 seconds, worth of work > to fetch > > Quick log of Boinc work fetches (no user interaction): > 20/08/2010 18:26:12 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] request: > 1895886.13 sec CPU (1895886.13 sec, 0.00) NVIDIA GPU (283333.40 sec, 0.00) > ATI GPU (344547.08 sec, 1.00) > 20/08/2010 18:28:31 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] request: > 1887455.83 sec CPU (1887455.83 sec, 0.00) NVIDIA GPU (173336.53 sec, 0.00) > ATI GPU (344829.56 sec, 1.00) > 20/08/2010 18:29:44 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] request: > 1887781.69 sec CPU (1887781.69 sec, 0.00) NVIDIA GPU (173469.36 sec, 0.00) > ATI GPU (229984.88 sec, 0.67) > 20/08/2010 18:32:17 | s...@home | [work_fetch] request: 1879445.95 sec CPU > (1879445.95 sec, 5.96) NVIDIA GPU (62556.33 sec, 0.50) ATI GPU (0.00 sec, > 0.00) > 20/08/2010 18:32:55 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] request: > 1818909.15 sec CPU (1818909.15 sec, 0.00) NVIDIA GPU (8101.11 sec, 0.00) > ATI GPU (345355.78 sec, 1.00) > 20/08/2010 18:33:37 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] request: > 1633914.20 sec CPU (1633914.20 sec, 0.00) NVIDIA GPU (2852.89 sec, 0.00) > ATI GPU (345439.49 sec, 1.00) > > Here are the shortfalls for my Cuda card: > > 20/08/2010 18:29:54 | | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: shortfall 128562.27 nidle > 0.00 saturated 216287.76 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 0.00 runnable 300.00 > 20/08/2010 18:31:28 | | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: shortfall 106284.59 nidle > 0.00 saturated 238987.38 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 0.00 runnable 300.00 > 20/08/2010 18:33:17 | | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: shortfall 2812.53 nidle > 0.00 saturated 342086.84 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 0.00 runnable 300.00 > 20/08/2010 18:34:13 | | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: shortfall 2940.19 nidle > 0.00 saturated 341959.77 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 0.00 runnable 300.00 > > And here is the final work fetch log before sending this email: > > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | | [work_fetch] ------- start work fetch state > ------- > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | | [work_fetch] target work buffer: 0.86 + 345600.00 > sec > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | | [work_fetch] CPU: shortfall 1597484.03 nidle 0.00 > saturated 72026.74 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 200.00 runnable 200.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] CPU: fetch share > 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 (comm deferred) (blocked by prefs) > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home | [work_fetch] CPU: fetch share 0.00 LTD > -67965.61 backoff dt 564.45 int 960.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] CPU: fetch share > 1.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 240.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: shortfall 3571.10 nidle > 0.00 saturated 341324.09 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 100.00 runnable 300.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: fetch > share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 (comm deferred) (blocked by > prefs) > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: fetch share 1.00 > LTD -165336.84 backoff dt 0.00 int 480.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] NVIDIA GPU: fetch > share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 317.94 int 480.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: shortfall 343582.67 nidle > 0.00 saturated 2018.20 busy 0.00 RS fetchable 0.00 runnable 0.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: fetch > share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 0.00 int 0.00 (comm deferred) > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: fetch share 0.00 > LTD -128509.35 backoff dt 457.58 int 960.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] ATI GPU: fetch > share 0.00 LTD 0.00 backoff dt 264.53 int 480.00 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | Collatz Conjecture | [work_fetch] overall LTD > -8022.47 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home | [work_fetch] overall LTD -2900183.21 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | s...@home Beta Test | [work_fetch] overall LTD > -1906833.34 > 20/08/2010 18:38:27 | | [work_fetch] ------- end work fetch state ------- > > > I've also attached a copy of the log for you, but as you can see from > above, Boinc has requested and received far more work for the Cuda card > than the 147151.2083532263 seconds that it should have done using the math > above? > > Am I getting confused about the math here, are the messages wrong or is > Boinc still requesting the full 4 day cache? > > Regards > > Ghost > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Jamie Tiller [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 11 August 2010 21:31 > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [boinc_dev] Work Fetch Request Logic > > 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.(See attached file: Work > Fetch Log.txt) _______________________________________________ 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.
