No New Task

Message boards : Questions and problems : No New Task
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Ricky Moore

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 06
Posts: 36
United States
Message 20554 - Posted: 28 Sep 2008, 17:37:03 UTC
Last modified: 28 Sep 2008, 17:41:06 UTC

This is something I been hoping for for a long time and I guess I thought someone would think of it:

Let's say you have 4 Projects attached, Project 1 -4 (to keep it simple). Your Team is going to have a race with another team on Project #2. So everyone on the team sets Projects 1, 3 & 4 to "No New Task"

It would be nice to be able to tell BOINC to finish all the WU's for Projects 1, 3&4 and then once uploaded it would treat those Projects as if they were Detached (0%) and Project 2 would would be treated as if it was the only Project on the PC. (100%)

Once you go back and set the Projects 1, 3&4 back to "Allow New Task" BOINC would then start downloading new WU's for them plus Project #2 (25%).

This way you could in fact attach as many Projects that you want and you just set the one's you want to get work.

However this may require some additional settings like: "Do you wish BOINC to complete WU's in Project X" This would be a Y/N question.

ID: 20554 · Report as offensive
Pepo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 06
Posts: 547
Slovakia
Message 20558 - Posted: 28 Sep 2008, 20:34:44 UTC - in response to Message 20556.  

If you don't want the tasks from Projects 1, 3 & 4 to get crunched then just abort them. If you have lots of tasks you want to abort...

IMO he was not thinking of aborting anything. He wanted to make today a complex setup to be valid during next few days, without the need to suspend and resume some #2 tasks during the time interval:
- NNT for #1, #3 and #4,
- first crunch and finish all #1, #3 and #4 tasks,
- continue just with #2.
When these days are over, he would just allow new tasks for #1, #3, and #4.

Currently it could be approximately done this way, if no tasks for #2 were cached (because no user-side prioritization is possible). Set #1, #3 and #4 to NNT and set the "Connect every..." preference to say 1 second (the same with "Additional work") - possibly no #2 tasks will be downloaded until all others are crunched.

Using my task priorities concept, you could accomplish exactly this by setting #1, #3 and #4 to NNT and marking all their tasks as having a higher priority.

It's just up to someone (me?) to implement it ;-)

Peter
ID: 20558 · Report as offensive
Ricky Moore

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 06
Posts: 36
United States
Message 20562 - Posted: 28 Sep 2008, 23:16:41 UTC - in response to Message 20558.  

If you don't want the tasks from Projects 1, 3 & 4 to get crunched then just abort them. If you have lots of tasks you want to abort...

IMO he was not thinking of aborting anything. He wanted to make today a complex setup to be valid during next few days, without the need to suspend and resume some #2 tasks during the time interval:
- NNT for #1, #3 and #4,
- first crunch and finish all #1, #3 and #4 tasks,
- continue just with #2.
When these days are over, he would just allow new tasks for #1, #3, and #4.

Currently it could be approximately done this way, if no tasks for #2 were cached (because no user-side prioritization is possible). Set #1, #3 and #4 to NNT and set the "Connect every..." preference to say 1 second (the same with "Additional work") - possibly no #2 tasks will be downloaded until all others are crunched.

Using my task priorities concept, you could accomplish exactly this by setting #1, #3 and #4 to NNT and marking all their tasks as having a higher priority.

It's just up to someone (me?) to implement it ;-)

Peter


Right, I do not want to abort any WU. But the way BOINC is now if you have those 4 projects and each of them is set to 100% that comes up to 25% each. Now if you set 3 of them to "No New Task" the project #4 is still only gets 25% so therefore you can still get a message from a project saying something like :
"No work sent because won't finish in time this PC is on 100% of the time and this project only gets 25% of that".

With my idea when you set a project or projects to "NNT" the other projects % goes up. The ones you set to "NNT" are treated as if they were NOT attached once their WU's are completed and uploaded.

This would allow you to attach as many Projects as you want without the need to attach/detach projects all the time. You could have say any 4 of the "active".

However I may be asking for to much here.

Another idea I had is having a way to asign a project or projects to a CPU Core. If you are using a duel core you could asign 4 projects to each core! You can guess how many Project's a PC could do... A duel core could run 8 projects! It would be like having 2 PC's! The more cores the more project's!


ID: 20562 · Report as offensive
Pepo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 06
Posts: 547
Slovakia
Message 20567 - Posted: 29 Sep 2008, 8:27:38 UTC - in response to Message 20562.  

Now if you set 3 of them to "No New Task" the project #4 is still only gets 25% so therefore you can still get a message from a project saying something like :
"No work sent because won't finish in time this PC is on 100% of the time and this project only gets 25% of that".

Never mind. Later, after running out of work for #1, #2 and #3, (you can also try this by suspending the projects), the effective resource share of the remaining one goes up to 100%. And the remaining allowed #4 would get work regardless of anything - having no idle core is one of the top priorities.

This would allow you to attach as many Projects as you want without the need to attach/detach projects all the time.

You definitely do not need to do that if you do not want to say farewell to a project.

Another idea I had is having a way to asign a project or projects to a CPU Core. If you are using a duel core you could asign 4 projects to each core! You can guess how many Project's a PC could do... A duel core could run 8 projects! It would be like having 2 PC's! The more cores the more project's!

If you wish to play a game with BOINC, you can temporarily raise tne BOINC's feeling "how many cores it has available" using the <max_cpus>8</max_cpus> tag in the global_prefs_override.xml file (see its syntax for reference), but running multiple tasks on one core simultaneously would lower the effectivity of crunching considerably.

Peter
ID: 20567 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove
Volunteer tester
Help desk expert

Send message
Joined: 5 Oct 06
Posts: 5078
United Kingdom
Message 20569 - Posted: 29 Sep 2008, 8:38:04 UTC - in response to Message 20567.  
Last modified: 29 Sep 2008, 8:38:50 UTC

Another idea I had is having a way to asign a project or projects to a CPU Core. If you are using a duel core you could asign 4 projects to each core! You can guess how many Project's a PC could do... A duel core could run 8 projects! It would be like having 2 PC's! The more cores the more project's!

If you wish to play a game with BOINC, you can temporarily raise tne BOINC's feeling "how many cores it has available" using the <max_cpus>8</max_cpus> tag in the global_prefs_override.xml file (see its syntax for reference), but running multiple tasks on one core simultaneously would lower the effectivity of crunching considerably.

Peter

That would be <ncpus> in the cc_config.xml file.
ID: 20569 · Report as offensive
Pepo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 06
Posts: 547
Slovakia
Message 20576 - Posted: 29 Sep 2008, 16:07:31 UTC - in response to Message 20569.  
Last modified: 29 Sep 2008, 16:07:55 UTC

If you wish to play a game with BOINC, you can temporarily raise tne BOINC's feeling "how many cores it has available" using the <max_cpus>8</max_cpus> tag in the global_prefs_override.xml file (see its syntax for reference), but running multiple tasks on one core simultaneously would lower the effectivity of crunching considerably.

That would be <ncpus> in the cc_config.xml file.

Eh! [slap_on_my_head] Sure! Thanks, sorry for the mistake. (I'm occasionally using both, what confused me.)

(If the case you do use also the global_prefs_override.xml's <max_cpus>, I think it will possibly take precedence over cc_config.xml's <ncpus> and will limit it (or is the precedence vice versa?), in such case you should check both.)

Peter
ID: 20576 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Questions and problems : No New Task

Copyright © 2024 University of California.
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.