Time to complete result

dan
dan
Joined: 11 Mar 05
Posts: 1
Credit: 91
RAC: 0
Topic 189413

Hi
I really want to help with my spare pc time but the amount of work set with just a week's deadline is too much. Is there any way of altering this, 'coz I always miss the deadlines!
Cheers

Sharky T
Sharky T
Joined: 19 Feb 05
Posts: 159
Credit: 1187722
RAC: 0

Time to complete result

Nope,that's entirely up to the project folks to decide how long the deadline is.
The only way is to adapt to it,or choose another project with longer deadlines.


Shaktai
Shaktai
Joined: 8 Nov 04
Posts: 183
Credit: 426451
RAC: 0

Or you can reduce your cache

Or you can reduce your cache size. My simple rule of thumb is to take the project(s) with the shortest deadlines and to divide the deadline by the number of projects I am running on that computer.

"Deadline Days" / "# of projects". The resulting number is the "largest cache you should use. Also use a later client.

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5842
Credit: 109404141307
RAC: 35484044

RE: Hi I really want to

Quote:
Hi
I really want to help with my spare pc time but the amount of work set with just a week's deadline is too much. Is there any way of altering this, 'coz I always miss the deadlines!
Cheers

Are you running only E@H or do you have other projects as well? From your benchmark scores published for your computer, I would guess that a work unit would take around 54,000 seconds (15 hours) to complete. In other words your computer needs to be able to donate around 3 hours per day to safely finish a work unit well within the deadline. We can't see because all your previous work has expired from the online database.

Perhaps you would like to tell us how much time you do give to E@H? There is no real reason why your machine can't easily make the deadline if you want it to. Please tell us how you are running it and what preferences you selected on the web page. In particular, what "connect to network" interval did you set?

Cheers,
Gary.

gravywavy
gravywavy
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 392
Credit: 68962
RAC: 0

RE: From your benchmark

Message 13357 in response to message 13356

Quote:
From your benchmark scores published for your computer, I would guess that a work unit would take around 54,000 seconds (15 hours) to complete. In other words your computer needs to be able to donate around 3 hours per day to safely finish a work unit well within the deadline. We can't see because all your previous work has expired from the online database.

hi,

My machines are closer in speed and spec to his machines: I'd say from experience it will be more like 1 wu per day running only E@H and leaving the machine on 24/7.

The following advice is based on my experience with my 700MHz machines.

If your machine is on ~ 24/7

Settings that work for me are to have just E@H on board, and a cache = 0.7 day. This keeps one WU in hand at all times, and for me it swaps the returned one for a new one a few hours after the start of the next. If you find it swapping wu just before the next one finishes, reduce the number in steps of 0.2 till it gets it right. I'd suggest, from my own experience, don't go above 0.7.

If you have a cache setting much bigger (over about 2.5) the scheduler can get be too optimist and take on too much work. I lost about a dozen wu over my two machines in my second week! (Gary will remember helping me sort it out)

Certainly with a machine in this speed range you do not want more than 3 wu held locally at any time (including completed ones) preferably only 2.

I ran both machines on these settings 24/7 till I stopped leaving them on all he time (ie once summer arrived).

if your machine is regularly turned off, but runs >40hr / week

This advice also applies if you have the machine on 24/7 and more than one project, if E@H has a resource share from 30% to 90%.

Please use a cache setting of 0.1. Before turning off, please check if a wu is complete. If so, then click on 'update now' before power down, to let the returned wu be registered.

This is especially important at weekends: the client will try to return a wu automatically when it is within 24hours of deadline, but if you have a wu that expires sunday and you turn off the machione on friday it will not have been returned automatically; then on monday it will be too late.

Again I write from experience: one of my machines is running this sort of pattern now, and without losing wu.

If the machine is on less than about 40 hours / week

Then I'd really advise against running E@H, much as we appreciate the intention. Other porjects have different needs, predictor@h for example will run very nicely with the machine going on and off - again I write with experience, both my machines have crunched Predictor@H when they've been on less than 40h /wk:

By the way, if you are wondering how to look at other people's computers, click on my name by the posting, then click on the appropriate 'view' link. This works unless the person has chosen to hide them. You will notice when you look at mine that the info other people see is much less than the info you'd see about your own machines.

~~gravywavy

gravywavy
gravywavy
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 392
Credit: 68962
RAC: 0

RE: "Deadline Days" / "# of

Message 13358 in response to message 13355

Quote:
"Deadline Days" / "# of projects". The resulting number is the "largest cache you should use.

That does not leave you any slack, and is particularly dodgy on a slow machine in my experience, due to the way the E@H runtime estimates are overly ambitious.

From experience on machines in this speed range, I'd repeat: Don't let that rule of thumb tempt you over a cache of 1.0 and I'd stick with 0.7 or less, at least if you go on running E@H. In practice with a setting of 0.7 E@H connects around every 24hrs!

~~gravywavy

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5842
Credit: 109404141307
RAC: 35484044

RE: My machines are closer

Message 13359 in response to message 13357

Quote:


My machines are closer in speed and spec to his machines: I'd say from experience it will be more like 1 wu per day running only E@H and leaving the machine on 24/7.

The following advice is based on my experience with my 700MHz machines....

(excellent advice trimmed for brevity)

You are perfectly correct. I looked at his benchmarks and took a bit of a guess based on the numbers I found - 747/1511. My guess was overly optimistic and I have since checked one of my machines, a P3 600mHz which benchmarks at 520/1300 and does work units in around 24 hours. His machine is probably 700-800mHz and very comparable with yours.

I must congratulate you on a superbly written and well thought out plan for how users with slower machines and less than 24/7 running time should approach the problem. Your advice should be somewhere, very visible, where people with slower machines can go for help. I hope Paul Buck is reading this and decides to incorporate it in the Wiki. If you don't mind, I might go find him and give him a nudge :).

Cheers,
Gary.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.