Seti@Home optimized science apps and information
Optimized Seti@Home apps => Optimized Applications Release News => Topic started by: William on 26 Mar 2012, 09:38:24 am
-
Updated Installers, v0.40 for Windows
Available now in the Downloads section (http://lunatics.kwsn.net/index.php?module=Downloads;catd=9)[/url]
Changes since last release (v0.39) are:
-Update of all Astropulse applications to support AP 6.01
Please see this thread (http://lunatics.kwsn.net/2-windows/installer-v0-40-release-notes.msg47299.html#msg47299) for full release notes. READ THEM before you install.
Use at your own risk - 'your mileage may vary'
While we take great care to find issues while alpha and beta testing, our testing systems comprise only a limited sample of what is out there and can't account for Murphy's Law.
-
Since upgrading to from 0.39 to 0.40 I am getting loads of Cuda 6.09 downloading where as before i was getting Cuda 6.10. Is this just a coincidence or something starting to fester on my setup ??
-
Since upgrading to from 0.39 to 0.40 I am getting loads of Cuda 6.09 downloading where as before i was getting Cuda 6.10. Is this just a coincidence or something starting to fester on my setup ??
Shouldn't be anything on your setup. Did you use the 32-bit of the 64-bit installer - I'll check them (well, the one you used :P)
Could you post your HostID number, or a link to your host at SETI, so I can check there too, please?
-
It was the 64bit option that I selected.
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=5405224
Thanks for your help.
-
It was the 64bit option that I selected.
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=5405224
Thanks for your help.
Well, first the good news. That host is returning good work, which is validating properly, using the correct application - by that, I mean it will already be using the applications from this installer, even though it's still working through old tasks issued before you used the new installer.
I can't see anything that would explain the Cuda 6.09 - in fact, I was more surprised to see how many tasks were being assigned to the CPU, even for a 12-core i7. It takes a lot of searching to find the Cuda stuff in those 2695 tasks. When you see 'Cuda 6.09', what words do you see, exactly? (cuda), (cuda23), (cuda_fermi) - or something different?
It might be helpful if you could zip up the app_info.xml that the installer has made in your project directory and attach it here. Do it as a zip (or 7z), please, rather than pasting the text, so we can see the exact internal structure.
-
setiathome_enhanced 6.09 (cuda23) is the exact description that appears, hopefully the .zip file app_info will appear below.
Thanks again for your help.
Well, first the good news. That host is returning good work, which is validating properly, using the correct application - by that, I mean it will already be using the applications from this installer, even though it's still working through old tasks issued before you used the new installer.
I can't see anything that would explain the Cuda 6.09 - in fact, I was more surprised to see how many tasks were being assigned to the CPU, even for a 12-core i7. It takes a lot of searching to find the Cuda stuff in those 2695 tasks. When you see 'Cuda 6.09', what words do you see, exactly? (cuda), (cuda23), (cuda_fermi) - or something different?
It might be helpful if you could zip up the app_info.xml that the installer has made in your project directory and attach it here. Do it as a zip (or 7z), please, rather than pasting the text, so we can see the exact internal structure.
-
setiathome_enhanced 6.09 (cuda23) is the exact description that appears, hopefully the .zip file app_info will appear below.
Thanks again for your help.
Well, that turns out to be a fascinating little experiment you've carried out there.
Some background: there are two ways to run BOINC projects - using the stock applications sent out automatically by a project, or - what we do here - use an app_info.xml file to pick and choose our own applications.
What we've grown to expect over the years is that:
For stock apps, BOINC will try to pick the fastest
For app_info.xml, BOINC will use the first entry it comes across in the file.
But you've proved that we were wrong. The key lines in your app_info are:
<version_num>610</version_num>
<count>0.3</count>
<version_num>609</version_num>
<count>0.5</count>
Tasks processed two at a time (count=0.5) will, each individually, complete faster than tasks processed three at a time (count=0.3). The overall throughput for the machine may be better with three at a time, but BOINC is probably too dumb to work that out: I'm guessing that two at a time 'looks faster' to BOINC, and that is the reason it's choosing 609 as the 'best' application.
Something else for you to check, perhaps. If you have any old tasks labelled 610 (cuda_fermi) on the machine, are they running 3 per card (6 at a time for the dual-GPU machine as a whole? And when you get to the 609 (cuda23) tasks, do they run 2 per card (4 at a time overall)?
Once you've finished that, I guess you'll want to get back to normal with whatever <count> value you feel suits you best. If you put that value consistently in all six <app_version> sections, I think you'll find things go back to normal.
-
I only have 6.09 Cuda work at the moment and they are running at 2 per card.
I have adjusted all Cuda counts to 0.3 and I will let you know what develops in the next few days and thanks again for your assistance.
Well, that turns out to be a fascinating little experiment you've carried out there.
Some background: there are two ways to run BOINC projects - using the stock applications sent out automatically by a project, or - what we do here - use an app_info.xml file to pick and choose our own applications.
What we've grown to expect over the years is that:
For stock apps, BOINC will try to pick the fastest
For app_info.xml, BOINC will use the first entry it comes across in the file.
But you've proved that we were wrong. The key lines in your app_info are:
<version_num>610</version_num>
<count>0.3</count>
<version_num>609</version_num>
<count>0.5</count>
Tasks processed two at a time (count=0.5) will, each individually, complete faster than tasks processed three at a time (count=0.3). The overall throughput for the machine may be better with three at a time, but BOINC is probably too dumb to work that out: I'm guessing that two at a time 'looks faster' to BOINC, and that is the reason it's choosing 609 as the 'best' application.
Something else for you to check, perhaps. If you have any old tasks labelled 610 (cuda_fermi) on the machine, are they running 3 per card (6 at a time for the dual-GPU machine as a whole? And when you get to the 609 (cuda23) tasks, do they run 2 per card (4 at a time overall)?
Once you've finished that, I guess you'll want to get back to normal with whatever <count> value you feel suits you best. If you put that value consistently in all six <app_version> sections, I think you'll find things go back to normal.
-
Wow, did I say few days - I should have said few minutes. I already have eleven 6.10 Cuda's in my download que. Thankyou again
I only have 6.09 Cuda work at the moment and they are running at 2 per card.
I have adjusted all Cuda counts to 0.3 and I will let you know what develops in the next few days and thanks again for your assistance.
-
Has anybody actually seen an Astropulse workunit since 0.40 went on general release ?
-
Has anybody actually seen an Astropulse workunit since 0.40 went on general release ?
Yes, somewhere near 200 AP v6 tasks,
Application details for host 5427475 (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/host_app_versions.php?hostid=5427475)
Have you set your setiathome preferences (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/prefs.php?subset=project) to allow them?
Claggy
-
Have also finnished more than 20 already.
-
Yep, all setting are good - I guess I will just have to be patient !!!!
yes, somewhere near 200 AP v6 tasks,
Application details for host 5427475 (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/host_app_versions.php?hostid=5427475)
Have you set your setiathome preferences (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/prefs.php?subset=project) to allow them?
Claggy
-
If i'm out of line for asking or should post in a different area
i request one of the mods to delete or move this post
to the appropriate place .
Is there any indication if or when the licensing issues
will be resolved regarding optimized release installers ?
-
I guess the answer to that question goes along the lines of "How longs a piece of string ?".................
If i'm out of line for asking or should post in a different area
i request one of the mods to delete or move this post
to the appropriate place .
Is there any indication if or when the licensing issues
will be resolved regarding optimized release installers ?
-
Looks like if anyone knows, they cannot
talk about it for some reason.
-
Looks like if anyone knows, they cannot
talk about it for some reason.
...
Is there any indication if or when the licensing issues
will be resolved regarding optimized release installers ?
We certainly expect they will be resolved, but cannot predict when.
Joe
-
What is the problem - why is the opt. app installer offline?
It's because of the opt. apps, or the installer software?
If there are license problems with the installer software, why not publish like in past only the opt. apps?
In past I explained the installation of the opt. apps, also app_info.xml entries a lot times in the forum of S@h .. ;)
-
It's not the installer.
Joe