Long running work unit

[Ananas]

yes, a bit more than 27 days - but it's just a low power 2.27GHz L5520 running hyperthreaded, not too fast per thread (fairly good total power though).

[Trotador]

My rice plant has eaten another two results today, two more people aborted it - you probably need to insert "WillGiveYouTonsOfCredits" somewhere in the WU name

@Trotador : Mine took 2,366,308.67 seconds on a not too fast machine.

Finally it has finished today in "only" 1,727,029.52 seconds, it's a old quadcore at 2,83 GHz no HT,

[Bikermatt]

cms_GA[e20-30MB_Lin64f]_1_Oryza-sativa-Japonica-roup_AP008215.lin.EMBL_RF00028_Intron_gpI_1307967123_53536_1

The task ID is 12352191 and my host is 9963.


Well this one did not validate. Any ideas why my CPU time was so long? I am wondering if I should keep trying these Intron tasks on that system.

[yoyo]

Your returned cpu time is 400 times more than your runtime. Therefore it was claiming 400 time more than your wingman and validator rejected to grant credits to you.
yoyo

[Ananas]

I haven't checked this in the source ...

The wrapper reports the CPU time to the BOINC client I guess, whereas the runtime is measured by the BOINC client itself (only later core clients do that).

Could the wrapper have had a problem that made it loose the correct timing for some reason? Numeric overflow or overflow of an array that is a direct neighbour to a variable that has to do with the time calculation?

As this is the only result of that host that shows this effect, I highly doubt that it has been intentional but rather suspect a technical problem, so imo. you should try to enforce validation.


@Bikermatt : Switching to only cmsearch S (small) doesn't help, those currently have a really bad validation problem between Linux and Windows - that's why I disabled that WU type just lately.

[yoyo]

The result was valid. It was validated with the wingman. Only credit was not granted because claimed credit was much to high. Now I granted the same credit as your wingman got.
yoyo

[Bikermatt]

Awesome! I was worried that it would not be valid. Thank you for fixing it. I also have one of these work units running on my Win7 2600K machine.

This last one that ran timed out so I had you guys extend the deadline. Is that necessary or will they still report correctly when they are finished even though the web site says "timed out - no response".

[yoyo]

Just tell us the taskID and we extent the deadline.
yoyo

[phoenicis]

Could I have a deadline extension for a couple of Intron units please. Task IDs are 12825584 and 12905790. Hopefully it's not too late for the former as, although it's still running, it timed out whilst the forum was down.

[yoyo]

Both enlarged.
yoyo

[Beyond]

Just tell us the taskID and we extent the deadline.
yoyo

I have 4 WUs that are reporting that they will exceed the deadline. All are on fast machines:

cms_GA-p[e30-50MB_Lin64s]_1_Canis-lupus-familiaris-(dog)_CM000028.lin.EMBL_RF00028_Intron_gpI_1314906424_9632_0
(23.5% done after 149 hours)

cms_GA-p[e30-50MB_Lin64s]_1_Bos-taurus-(cattle)_CM000203.lin.EMBL_RF00028_Intron_gpI_1314906424_4144_2
(15% done after 110 hours)

cms_GA-p[e30-50MB_Lin64s]_1_Bos-taurus-(cattle)_CM000203.lin.EMBL_RF00030_RNase_MRP_1314906424_4146_3
(12.3% done after 67 hours)

cms_GA-p[e30-50MB_Lin64s]_1_Anopheles-gambiae-str.-PEST_CM000356.lin.EMBL_RF00030_RNase_MRP_1315448223_30_1
(9.9% done after 66 hours)


In addition I have one WU that has been sitting at 100% completion for the last few days. It's still using a full core of CPU and is at 179 hours. What to do with it?:

cms_GA[e20-30MB_Lin64f]_1_Oryza-sativa-Japonica-Group_AP008216.lin.EMBL_RF00028_Intron_gpI_1307967123_54908_18

Regards/Beyond

[yoyo]

Hello,
I extendet all deadlines by 30 additional days. The task which stays at 100%, let them run.
yoyo