log in |
Message boards : Number crunching : gene_pcim v1.02
Previous · 1 · 2
Author | Message |
---|---|
So is the new application going to be optimized for AVX or FMA instructions? | |
ID: 981 · Reply Quote | |
I see gene@home PC-IM v1.03.... | |
ID: 982 · Reply Quote | |
I see gene@home PC-IM v1.03.... It's the same application as v1.02 (just one library has been made static) | |
ID: 983 · Reply Quote | |
So is the new application going to be optimized for AVX or FMA instructions? They are ready. I just want to wait a little bit before making them available (just to see if there are problems with the base one) | |
ID: 984 · Reply Quote | |
thanks for the updates and glad new app works. i dont have a clue why people are complaining as u adopted the new boinc credit system and as for all the gridcoin users itll all balance out within 30 days anyway. im not doing solo atm but end of this month i will be. I have multiplied by 1.5 the time estimation, let's see what happens (it may take some time to have some feedback) | |
ID: 985 · Reply Quote | |
If you look for strange things.... | |
ID: 986 · Reply Quote | |
If you look for strange things.... Yes, I know, I really don't know why, it seems that the some system component deletes the input file when there is no need to do it. I hope to find a solution soon....... [edit] we built a multi-threaded version of our work-generator. Sometimes, because of the same timestamps, it generates different input files but with the same file name. This makes boinc crazy. We have a solution for this. I hope that fixing this will also fix the problem you noticed [edit, again] we fixed the 'same name, different content' problem. Let'see.... | |
ID: 987 · Reply Quote | |
Do you guys have the system down on purpose? If so do you have an et when it will be back? | |
ID: 988 · Reply Quote | |
Do you guys have the system down on purpose? If so do you have an et when it will be back? We still have a problem with our work-generator (the previous fix didn't work). The effect is that some workunits error out (with the download failure error), many of them. We think we have solved this problem. We will apply the fix tomorrow in the morning. In the meantime I will distribute just a few hundreds workunits. | |
ID: 989 · Reply Quote | |
The new work generator seems to do his job the right way. We started again to distribute work. Thank you all for your understanding. | |
ID: 991 · Reply Quote | |
Hi, good job on the new App - I have had lots of them validated in the last three days. | |
ID: 994 · Reply Quote | |
Hi, good job on the new App - I have had lots of them validated in the last three days. We don't have any target credit. Since the very beginning we used the default boinc server CreditNew system, so you should expect to get more or less the same credits as other CreditNew projects (like seti@home). During February this year (before we started having problems) for some (at least for me) unknown reasons the system started to grant a lot more credits than usual (and no one complained... ;) This behavior was probably related to a completely wrong workunit's time estimate. To this end if I had to re-evaluate old (February) workunits I should probably decrease their assigned credit. We discussed about this and decide to do nothing. You may simple say that you were lucky to be here in February. | |
ID: 995 · Reply Quote | |
Was the system back in February granting more points all over sudden, or were there more users? | |
ID: 999 · Reply Quote | |
I looked back and yeah some strange things happened in February. | |
ID: 1003 · Reply Quote | |
Was the system back in February granting more points all over sudden, or were there more users? A lot of things happened since December * Public invitation code + badges + challenges etc. -> a lot more users * Two rounds of app optimization * Other organisms (Ec, Vv, d5-Ec, etc.) The time estimate, at the beginning, was a polynomial interpolator based on the Ec dataset and the various algorithm parameters. It wasn't perfect but it worked. With version 0.11 (probably also because of the mixing of different organisms/parameters) the time estimates were completely wrong so we had to find another way to compute them. Now the expected FLOPS are more accurate. | |
ID: 1004 · Reply Quote | |
Message boards :
Number crunching :
gene_pcim v1.02