Why a daily quota of 1 WU?
23 Mar 2005 18:41:49 UTC
Topic 188691
(moderation:
Yesterday it was 3 WU, today 1. We'll never get anywhere this way.
Requesting 8640.00 seconds of work
Sending request to scheduler: http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/EinsteinAtHome_cgi/cgi
Scheduler RPC to http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/EinsteinAtHome_cgi/cgi succeeded
Message from server: No work sent
Message from server: (daily quota of 1 WU reached)
No work from project
Deferring communication with project for 1 hours, 0 minutes, and 0 seconds
Why a daily quota of 1 WU?
)
Your host with id 88713 returned the last days WU's all with an error. Due to this, the number of possible WU's to download is getting lower and lower each day.
See this FAQ last paragraph.
Unfortunately somebody else will have to help you with that error as I don't know what could be the reason for it.
Greetings from Belgium
Thierry
> Unfortunately somebody else
)
> Unfortunately somebody else will have to help you with that error as I don't
> know what could be the reason for it.
I've noticed something that might be related.
The "good" machine is listed as a P4 3.0G which has FP speed=1312.86 million ops/sec and integer speed=1117.18 million ops/sec.
The "bad" machine is listed as a P4 2.8G which has FP speed=1430.04 million ops/sec and integer speed=2822.4 million ops/sec
Something is seriously "wrong" with the lower rated cpu turning in higher benchmarks. Perhaps the lower rated cpu is running overclocked?? It's also interesting to see that each WU racks up some time (around 15 mins) before failing as if the cpu was perhaps progressively overheating under the load??
I've also just compared one of my own hosts which is a P4 2.66G which has FP speed=1390 million ops/sec and integer speed=4044 million ops/sec. My cpu is stock standard with no overclocking so BillC's integer results look woeful by comparison. I'm guessing that his boxes must be celerons.
BillC, if you are listening, tell us about your hardware and its configuration.
Cheers,
Gary.
> I've noticed something that
)
> I've noticed something that might be related.
>
> The "good" machine is listed as a P4 3.0G which has FP speed=1312.86 million
> ops/sec and integer speed=1117.18 million ops/sec.
>
> The "bad" machine is listed as a P4 2.8G which has FP speed=1430.04 million
> ops/sec and integer speed=2822.4 million ops/sec
>
> Something is seriously "wrong" with the lower rated cpu turning in higher
> benchmarks. Perhaps the lower rated cpu is running overclocked?? It's also
> interesting to see that each WU racks up some time (around 15 mins) before
> failing as if the cpu was perhaps progressively overheating under the load??
@blerton,
The difference between the 3.0GHZ and the 2.8GHz is due to the fact the 3.0GHz is a HT CPU. This difference is therefore completely normal.
I use a and have MFP of 1282.57 million ops/sec and MIS of 1084.14 million ops/sec.
The error "exit code -164" is coming from something different.
Greetings from Belgium
Thierry
> The difference between the
)
> The difference between the 3.0GHZ and the 2.8GHz is due to the fact the 3.0GHz
> is a HT CPU. This difference is therefore completely normal.
Ahhh... thanks for that. I hadn't noticed the two cpus. I have all AMD boxes apart from that lone P4 2.66G non-HT so I'm not familiar with HT performance issues. Still, why does my 2.66G have so much better integer performance than his 2.8G?
> I use a and have MFP of 1282.57 million ops/sec and MIS of 1084.14
> million ops/sec.
> The error "exit code -164" is coming from something different.
Yes, I see what you mean. All his work is dying with that exit code. As you say, hopefully someone a bit more knowledgeable about exit codes may be able to give him some advice.
Cheers,
Gary.
> Still, why does my 2.66G
)
> Still, why does my 2.66G have so much better integer performance than his 2.8G?
Cache size of CPU and quantity or RAM are playing a big role in the MFP and MIS. Also, the processes running during the benchmark influences the results.
> Yes, I see what you mean. All his work is dying with that exit code. As you
> say, hopefully someone a bit more knowledgeable about exit codes may be able
> to give him some advice.
The only thing I know is that the error is related to
NESTED_UNHANDLED_EXCEPTION_DETECTED
but what it means I don't know. Not that familiar enough with programming ;(
Greetings from Belgium
Thierry