Message boards : Number crunching : 2x72-SDOERR_OPMamber6-0-1-RND1929 - Deadline Warning ?!
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Sutaru TsurekuSend message Joined: 1 May 09 Posts: 13 Credit: 3,655,193 RAC: 0 Level  Scientific publications    | |
|
2x72-SDOERR_OPMamber6-0-1-RND1929 | |
ID: 45625 | Rating: 0 | rate:
 /   Reply
Quote
| |
Beyond Send message Joined: 23 Nov 08 Posts: 1112 Credit: 6,162,416,256 RAC: 0 Level  Scientific publications   | |
Is there something wrong with this WU? Yes, it's huge. Abort it. With a GT730 I'd recommend running the short WUs or the shorter variety long WUs. Aborting a WU harms nothing. In fact in this case it helps, as it will then be assigned to another host (hopefully one fast enough to complete it). We've asked many times that a "super Long WU" queue be added, but so far admin ears are deaf to our pleas. | |
| ID: 45627 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
PappaLitto  Send message Joined: 21 Mar 16 Posts: 511 Credit: 4,672,242,755 RAC: 0 Level  Scientific publications | |
2x72-SDOERR_OPMamber6-0-1-RND1929 People with slow gpus can still help, just go into project settings on the GPUGrid website under account and deselect long WU and only have short ones. | |
| ID: 45639 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
koschi Send message Joined: 14 Aug 08 Posts: 124 Credit: 792,979,198 RAC: 799 Level  Scientific publications  | |
We've asked many times that a "super Long WU" queue be added, but so far admin ears are deaf to our pleas. I'd also love to get just these huge ones. Just completed a 24h WU on my GTX 1060 3GB, it yielded 903k credits, wow! | |
| ID: 45645 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Bedrich Hajek Send message Joined: 28 Mar 09 Posts: 486 Credit: 11,386,073,179 RAC: 9,005,340 Level  Scientific publications | |
We've asked many times that a "super Long WU" queue be added, but so far admin ears are deaf to our pleas. And, so do I !! Name 4nef-SDOERR_OPMamber6-0-1-RND6739_2 Workunit 12185716 Created 9 Dec 2016 | 9:15:02 UTC Sent 9 Dec 2016 | 9:15:11 UTC Received 10 Dec 2016 | 5:02:31 UTC Server state Over Outcome Success Client state Done Exit status 0 (0x0) Computer ID 263612 Report deadline 14 Dec 2016 | 9:15:11 UTC Run time 70,428.08 CPU time 70,218.94 Validate state Valid Credit 1,089,669.00 Application version Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.48 (cuda65) http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=15822755 And on my other computer, I ran these two simultaneously: 15818621 12185601 8 Dec 2016 | 8:31:08 UTC 9 Dec 2016 | 17:18:24 UTC Completed and validated 111,374.20 108,406.50 914,707.50 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.48 (cuda65) 15818608 12185595 8 Dec 2016 | 8:31:08 UTC 9 Dec 2016 | 16:37:21 UTC Completed and validated 107,217.12 103,787.30 373,065.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.48 (cuda65) http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=15818621 http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=15818608 They are a lot more challenging and fun to run, then the short units pretending that they are long units! | |
| ID: 45649 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Stefan Project administrator Project developer Project tester Project scientist Send message Joined: 5 Mar 13 Posts: 348 Credit: 0 RAC: 0 Level  Scientific publications  | |
|
I was a tad bit worried because I ran the tests for these WUs on a 1080 so the projected runtime was a bit optimistic compared to the previous ones :P But it's a one-off deal again so don't worry, they'll be over in a few days | |
| ID: 45650 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
koschi Send message Joined: 14 Aug 08 Posts: 124 Credit: 792,979,198 RAC: 799 Level Scientific publications | |
|
We want more, not less :-D | |
| ID: 45653 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Bedrich Hajek Send message Joined: 28 Mar 09 Posts: 486 Credit: 11,386,073,179 RAC: 9,005,340 Level Scientific publications | |
We want more, not less :-D I agree! | |
| ID: 45655 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Beyond Send message Joined: 23 Nov 08 Posts: 1112 Credit: 6,162,416,256 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications | |
We want more, not less :-D I'd agree only if they're put in a 3rd queue so that people with fast GPUs can choose to run them. It's not good at all if slower GPUs are assigned these super long WUs. It's a waste of resources for both the project and user. Maybe if creating a 3rd queue is too difficult, they could at least be assigned to cuda80 GPUs only? | |
| ID: 45659 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Betting Slip Send message Joined: 5 Jan 09 Posts: 670 Credit: 2,498,095,550 RAC: 0 Level  Scientific publications  | |
Maybe if creating a 3rd queue is too difficult, they could at least be assigned to cuda80 GPUs only? Hold on 980ti, 980 and 970 are nearly just as capable at running these WU's as a 1080 and better than some Pascal cards so stop being elitist. :-) | |
| ID: 45665 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Beyond Send message Joined: 23 Nov 08 Posts: 1112 Credit: 6,162,416,256 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications | |
Maybe if creating a 3rd queue is too difficult, they could at least be assigned to cuda80 GPUs only? Yes, I realize that. Sure I'm being elitist. I run mostly old 750Ti GPUs as you know. Calm down. Trying to give them an alternative that they actually may be able to do. Right now the super long WUs are being given to all kinds of super slow GPUs that have no hope of completing them in 5 days. It may be easier for them to assign them to cuda80 only. So far all the 10xx GPUs are at least fast enough to run them. A MUCH BETTER solution would be a 3rd queue but I don't think they know how to set one up. As you just mentioned in the other thread, there must be some IT students that would be willing to give them a hand with server configuration. A 3rd queue would allow the 980Ti, 980, 1080, 1070 and 970 crowd to efficiently run the super long WUs if they choose to add the super long queue in project preferences. | |
| ID: 45677 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
PappaLitto Send message Joined: 21 Mar 16 Posts: 511 Credit: 4,672,242,755 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications | |
A 3rd queue would allow the 980Ti, 980, 1080, 1070 and 970 crowd to efficiently run the super long WUs if they choose to add the super long queue in project preferences. +1 | |
| ID: 45680 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
koschi Send message Joined: 14 Aug 08 Posts: 124 Credit: 792,979,198 RAC: 799 Level Scientific publications | |
[quote][quote]A 3rd queue would allow the 980Ti, 980, 1080, 1070 and 970 crowd to efficiently run the super long WUs if they choose to add the super long queue in project preferences. Hey, now don't exclude the 1060s please :-D Its in between GTX 970 and 980 performance wise... | |
| ID: 45694 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Erich56 Send message Joined: 1 Jan 15 Posts: 1142 Credit: 10,908,930,840 RAC: 22,075,475 Level Scientific publications | |
A 3rd queue would allow the 980Ti, 980, 1080, 1070 and 970 crowd to efficiently run the super long WUs if they choose to add the super long queue in project preferences. +1 | |
| ID: 45697 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
|
Beyond Send message Joined: 23 Nov 08 Posts: 1112 Credit: 6,162,416,256 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications | |
[quote][quote]A 3rd queue would allow the 980Ti, 980, 1080, 1070 and 970 crowd to efficiently run the super long WUs if they choose to add the super long queue in project preferences. The above list is just examples. Nothing is excluded. It would simply allow you to choose to run WUs from the "super long" queue if you so desire. | |
| ID: 45710 | Rating: 0 | rate:
/ Reply
Quote
| |
Message boards : Number crunching : 2x72-SDOERR_OPMamber6-0-1-RND1929 - Deadline Warning ?!
