[quote=IronBits;138152]crap, I believe you are correct as I just checked the logs for today and you are no longer coming in :cry:
We did not anticipate having this major performance hit by changing from ext2 to ext3 and at first we thought something was wrong with one of the new raptor drives.
I'm working on a 3rd server for just myself to avoid this problem in the future.
Hey, look on the bright side, I saved you a couple of bucks in electricity this month :smile:[/quote]
Or you could just host the LLRnet servers on one of your Linux PS3's, aren't they pretty stable? :wink:

There is a release for Cell BE computing for llrnet?

[quote=IronBits;138182]There is a release for Cell BE computing for llrnet?[/quote]
Oh, that's right, never mind, I forgot for a moment that even though the server application doesn't actually do any [i]crunching[/i], it still has to be compiled for the target architecture. :rolleyes:

I know that the server can be compiled with a "server only" option, though, which won't compile the part of the client that does the actual work--maybe that would work on the PS3, since there's no x86-only assembly code involved?

[QUOTE=IronBits;138182]There is a release for Cell BE computing for llrnet?[/QUOTE]

LOL.... wow, did that get someone's attention or something? Sure would be nice if there was. Maybe when the double precision ps3's come along. :smile:

[quote=IronBits;138152]crap, I believe you are correct as I just checked the logs for today and you are no longer coming in :cry:
We did not anticipate having this major performance hit by changing from ext2 to ext3 and at first we thought something was wrong with one of the new raptor drives.
I'm working on a 3rd server for just myself to avoid this problem in the future.
Hey, look on the bright side, I saved you a couple of bucks in electricity this month :smile:[/quote]


I've got a phone message into a friend to go to my house and restart the 10 cores but that likely will be several hours yet.

I had arranged things so that 500K-505K on port 400 and 505K-510K on port 300 would complete about the same time so that we could get on to the higher ranges but that has gone amiss now.

With a loss of at least 1.5 days processing on 10 cores against port 400, if people would like to run port 400 for a while instead of port 300, that would be very helpful for a few days.


Thanks,
Gary

I can confirm your hounds are on the job once again on port 400 :smile:
user=gd_barnes
[22/07/2008 05:09:38 PM]
867*2^504046-1 is not prime.

I've just sent Adam an update for the CSV stats import at [url]http://nplb.rieselprime.org[/url]. Thus, the stats there will be up to date for all servers as of the results files for July 22 as soon as Adam imports the data. :smile:

Anything I can do while processing the logs here to convert them from nix to dos dates, to .csv format automatically for you?

[quote=IronBits;138199]I can confirm your hounds are on the job once again on port 400 :smile:
user=gd_barnes
[22/07/2008 05:09:38 PM]
867*2^504046-1 is not prime.[/quote]


My ex, being the sweetie that she is, went over to the house and got 'em all running again. :smile:

The were actually 'stuck' in sleep mode. She couldn't even restart them by double-clicking LLRnet.exe. I had to have her 'kill' the process on the 2 Linux quads and 'end' process on the 2 Windows cores. She was then able to start LLRnet normally on all cores.

With an offer of a few greenbacks :smile:, I now have her on permanent standby for that task. If it happens again, I shouldn't lose more than 16-24 hours processing. But the better thing I need to do is get the remote desktop set up.


Gary

[quote=gd_barnes;138215]... 'end' process on the 2 Windows cores.
[/quote]

For windows I suggest you to install [url=https://secure.logmein.com/products/free/]LogMeIn Free[/url] to remotely control the cores.

[quote=IronBits;138208]Anything I can do while processing the logs here to convert them from nix to dos dates, to .csv format automatically for you?[/quote]
Well, the Perl script that I use is controllable completely from the command line (for just this purpose), and it was written and is used without incident on Linux (though I'm sure it would work for Windows, too, without any modification). So, yeah, I guess it would work. Would you like me to send it to you? I'm sure it could be integrated into your processing bash scripts relatively easily. :smile: