mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > No Prime Left Behind

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-09-07, 17:07   #56
Brucifer
 
Brucifer's Avatar
 
Dec 2005

313 Posts
Default

@Gary/Max -- I fired off a couple of systems on the small primes last night. It looked to run normal on one machine on 3 of 4 cores. On the 4th core the count-up display was looking all screwed up, and running like a rocket ship. The time per itteration was like .02ms on the other 3 cores, so those things were running fast. So I tried it on a second system to see what it was like, and that one acted like the 4th core on the first system. So I shut the stuff off. I don't have a slow system to run the stuff on to see if it's going normal or not. But anyway you need to check your last night's results from "bruce".
Brucifer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-07, 18:00   #57
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3×2,083 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucifer View Post
@Gary/Max -- I fired off a couple of systems on the small primes last night. It looked to run normal on one machine on 3 of 4 cores. On the 4th core the count-up display was looking all screwed up, and running like a rocket ship. The time per itteration was like .02ms on the other 3 cores, so those things were running fast. So I tried it on a second system to see what it was like, and that one acted like the 4th core on the first system. So I shut the stuff off. I don't have a slow system to run the stuff on to see if it's going normal or not. But anyway you need to check your last night's results from "bruce".
What exactly do you mean by the count-up display "running like a rocket ship" on the 4th core? If the machines are Core 2 Quads, then the 4th core can be expected to have a little bit slower iteration time than the other three due to memory bottlenecking inherent in the design of the C2Q. Of course, if you meant something different, then that doesn't apply.
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-07, 23:11   #58
Brucifer
 
Brucifer's Avatar
 
Dec 2005

313 Posts
Default

you could watch the first three cores counting up through the .00 section of the count, but the 4th core didn't show the .00 count, it just counted up li 10.00%, 20.00%, 30.00% etc. Just accelerating through the tests way too fast compared to the first three cores.
Brucifer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-07, 23:18   #59
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3×2,083 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucifer View Post
you could watch the first three cores counting up through the .00 section of the count, but the 4th core didn't show the .00 count, it just counted up li 10.00%, 20.00%, 30.00% etc. Just accelerating through the tests way too fast compared to the first three cores.
Hmm...strange, indeed. However, I just thought of something: it might simply be that the first three cores were still doing work from the latter end of one k (near n=425K, where tests would take a while), whereas the last one was doing stuff near the beginning of the next k, near n=50K, which would be very small tests. For tests that small, I can easily see how things would be going so fast that the client doesn't even try to keep up with each and every 1% increment but rather updates in 10% increments.
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-08, 06:09   #60
kar_bon
 
kar_bon's Avatar
 
Mar 2006
Germany

53548 Posts
Default

LLR(net) doing a test in 10000 iterations per screen output by default.

so for port GB8000 (where n~1M) every 10000 it. will display in about 1% steps.

at n~100k this would be 10% per step.

check the n-range for every core (see lresults.txt).
kar_bon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-08, 09:33   #61
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

34×53 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdettweiler View Post
Hmm...strange, indeed. However, I just thought of something: it might simply be that the first three cores were still doing work from the latter end of one k (near n=425K, where tests would take a while), whereas the last one was doing stuff near the beginning of the next k, near n=50K, which would be very small tests. For tests that small, I can easily see how things would be going so fast that the client doesn't even try to keep up with each and every 1% increment but rather updates in 10% increments.
It would be near n=250K not n=425K.
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-08, 09:36   #62
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

34×53 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucifer View Post
you could watch the first three cores counting up through the .00 section of the count, but the 4th core didn't show the .00 count, it just counted up li 10.00%, 20.00%, 30.00% etc. Just accelerating through the tests way too fast compared to the first three cores.
As Max implied, I'm sure this is OK. The timing difference between the smallest and largest exponent for the 12th drive (port G7000) is fairly extreme. A test at the high end of the range should take about 25 times as long as a test at the low end of the range. I'm fairly certain that you just happened to encounter a change in k-value amongst the cores.

Give it another shot. If the same thing happens, wait about half an hour and check it again. All cores should have about the same timings at that point.


Gary

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-09-08 at 09:37
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-12, 03:11   #63
vaughan
 
vaughan's Avatar
 
Jan 2005
Sydney, Australia

5×67 Posts
Default

Can anyone explain what happened to the stats yesterday?

Over the last few days bok's stats have shown my results:
Oct 11. . . .Oct 10. . . .Oct 9. . . . .Oct 8. . . . .Oct 7. . . . .Oct 6. . . .Oct 5
21,470. . . .12,276. . . .16,889. . . .16,001. . . .16,464. . . .16,809. . . .17,454

Why was Oct 10 so low and Oct 11 hasn't even finished yet?

Last fiddled with by vaughan on 2009-10-12 at 03:15 Reason: spacing
vaughan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-12, 04:12   #64
kar_bon
 
kar_bon's Avatar
 
Mar 2006
Germany

22×3×233 Posts
Default

those stats from FreeDC project NPLB will not updated constantly every full hour and the timezone is different to the NPLB-stats page.

so when that page updates at say 03:00 AM but not for the last 5 hours, the points from 2 hours will be shown at the new day!

Last fiddled with by kar_bon on 2009-10-12 at 04:13
kar_bon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-14, 11:52   #65
AMDave
 
AMDave's Avatar
 
Jan 2006
deep in a while-loop

29216 Posts
Default

Because sometimes another errant non-BOINC project causes the non-BOINC updater to get stuck and Bok has to kick it hard in butt with a steel capped boot.

So, you are seeing several updates during the day on Oct 10, then the errant project hangs the updater ... until it feels the pain of the size 12 1/2 steel capped boot in the butt. In the mean time, the stats roll-over occurred so any new updates are recorded against the next day, 11 Oct. So the next time the stats updater picks up you NPLB stats, it doesn't play a game of catch-up but goes straight for the win and grabs your latest total (as it does for every observation). The increase gets recorded against the date of 11 Oct and so do the rest of your updates for 11 Oct which results in a higher than average score, but is the exact offset of the increases that were missed on the previous day.

so...it is a time based observation with a frequency greater than once per 24 hours. Hence the drop and the spike when the updater gets stuck and 'punted' either side of the rollover.

Hope that helps.

Last fiddled with by AMDave on 2009-10-14 at 11:54
AMDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-10-29, 08:24   #66
MyDogBuster
 
MyDogBuster's Avatar
 
May 2008
Wilmington, DE

54248 Posts
Default

Anyone happen to know where Geoff Reynolds and SR2Sieve are hanging out now?

This link is no longer valid.

http://www.geocities.com/g_w_reynolds/sr2sieve/
MyDogBuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some old stuff Batalov Miscellaneous Math 1 2017-01-27 04:56
Stuff for sale fivemack Lounge 12 2011-06-12 11:28
useful stuff paulunderwood Linux 3 2005-12-05 22:18
Free stuff... Xyzzy Software 6 2004-10-06 13:35
Extra Stuff... Xyzzy Lounge 11 2003-09-15 23:22

All times are UTC. The time now is 15:31.

Thu May 28 15:31:21 UTC 2020 up 64 days, 13:04, 0 users, load averages: 1.50, 1.61, 1.68

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.