Posts by archae86

WARNING: This website is obsolete! Please follow this link to get to the new Albert@Home website!

1) Message boards : Problems and Bug Reports : FGRP #3 feedback (Message 112775) Posted 21 Jan 2014 by archae86 Post: Claggy wrote: it'll finish eventually I turned it back on, and it finished, after spending well over half as long in the terminal phase of no visible progress and no apparent GPU use as it did for the first 97% of reported progress. Thanks for steering me to continue.
2) Message boards : Problems and Bug Reports : FGRP #3 feedback (Message 112773) Posted 21 Jan 2014 by archae86 Post: One of my hosts today received an FGRP3 opencl_nvidia task It progressed from 0 to 97% indicated completion over about a 50 minute period, with very sporadic indicated GPU usage ranging from 0 to perhaps 60%. Subsequently it sat at 97.297% indicated completion for over twenty-five wall-clock minutes, steadily using one core of CPU, no discernible GPU, and no indicated progress. I've suspended it for the time being, and am willing to give it more time if it seems likely to generate some useful information by doing so, but it seems likely it has hung up. The host is a Windows 7 machine with a Xeon E5620 CPU running hyperthreaded. The graphics processor is a GTX660 with 327.23 driver installed.
3) Message boards : Problems and Bug Reports : BRP application v 1.33 feedback thread (Message 112314) Posted 10 Jan 2013 by archae86 Post: I assume 1.33 is the version which employs file compression in order greatly to reduce the download network traffic. I applaud the attempt to obtain this improvement. While Comcast has stopped posting my bandwidth consumption where I can see it, when last I could look just two GTX460 hosts running BRP were using up about half my allowed monthly traffic. So I'm happy to report that both of my two CUDA Windows 7 hosts have returned a stock of v1.33 work. Already 4307 has 2/5 validated, and 4306 other has 5/13 validated. Execution timings look in line with recent Einstein 1.32 work on the same hosts. This report is neither a problem nor a bug report, but this board seemed most nearly suitable.
4) Message boards : Problems and Bug Reports : [New release] BRP app v1.28 feedback thread (Message 112205) Posted 28 Aug 2012 by archae86 Post: I have a possible finding--not even a little bit sure--but am posting in case others might spot such a thing. I've got two different hosts with the same GPU, a GTX 460. Neither has had downclocking problems for some weeks, but I found both downclocked severely today, with the problem persisting through system reboot. It might just barely be possible that running the current Albert BRP1.28 CUDA ap, or on an even less likely note the Albert 0.29 Gamma Ray Pulsar application--or switching back and forth from those to the current Einstein applications was involved. More likely something else in my system's history was the problem, but I thought I'd post the suspicion in case someone else sees something. I'm not even sure what the true downclock frequency was, as different sources reported different numbers, but it was either 405 MHz or less--the reduction in power consumption and GPU temperature, while reporting exceedingly high GPU utilization, but making very slow progress on the WU was persuasive that downclocking was at hand.
5) Message boards : Problems and Bug Reports : Albert and Einstein work request effects (Message 112203) Posted 27 Aug 2012 by archae86 Post: I'm quite new to Albert, though I've been around on Einstein for years. The two hosts on which I've enabled Albert are puzzling me in work-fetch behavior. While I have the Albert resource share set to 2 and the Einstein share set to 149, they seem to be fetching a lot of Albert work and grinding their Einstein queues down to very low levels. For example, one host currently has eleven Albert CUDA WUs and just one Einstein CUDA WU, and the other currently has eight Albert CUDA WUs, and five Einstein (three executing and two in queue). Is there an intended or observed cross-coupling between Einstein and Albert work fetch, or am I more likely just another meddling user puzzled by the vagaries of the scheduler, especially in fresh project startup situations? Both are running the 7.0.28 version of BOINC which I think remains the current fully released version.

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant PHY-0555655 and by the Max Planck Gesellschaft (MPG). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the investigators and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF or the MPG.

Copyright © 2024 Bruce Allen for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration