ALOT of people use the default of a 10 day cache in Boinc and that means it takes a LONG time for them to work thru all the tasks, some projects limit the max number of tasks a user can get because of that but the default is still not just a day or two.
I run in the spare time of a really old I3-based Linux box running the household media server, pumping out maybe 3 or 4 tasks on a good day, so this seemed like a pretty big backlog for me.
But I'm not really fretting. Otherwise, I'd be over in "Crunchers Corner" demanding an explanation of what was going on :-)
Heck, maybe it's always like this; the machine sits in a corner of the basement mostly on autopilot and I try to not look at the statistics too often.
I run in the spare time of a really old I3-based Linux box running the household media server, pumping out maybe 3 or 4 tasks on a good day, so this seemed like a pretty big backlog for me.
But I'm not really fretting. Otherwise, I'd be over in "Crunchers Corner" demanding an explanation of what was going on :-)
Heck, maybe it's always like this; the machine sits in a corner of the basement mostly on autopilot and I try to not look at the statistics too often.
With each workunit being sent out up to 20 times and each of those with a 14 day deadline that's the best way to run Einstein. Normally it only takes 2 computers to crunch a workunit before credits are awarded but there are times when it takes longer.
It's a bit ridiculous the number of jobs that some people configure their computers to download. Perhaps they think they can get more jobs done that way, I don't know...
I have a job that has been waiting for 5 weeks. My PC completed it in just under 2 hours after downloading it but the first wingman's PC failed to even start it because, well it currently has over 1000 jobs in progress! Then the job got assigned to a PC that apparently went unresponsive and after that got assigned to another user with delusions of grandeur with over 100 jobs in progress and typically takes 10 or so days to get around to processing them.
Another job has been waiting for 3 weeks. The first wingman is also sitting on over 1000 jobs and has hundreds that timed out.
Perhaps there need to be incentives for not doing this. For example, work assigned gets reduced if jobs time out or credit is reduced when jobs take longer to process.
It's a bit ridiculous the number of jobs that some people configure their computers to download. Perhaps they think they can get more jobs done that way, I don't know...
I have a job that has been waiting for 5 weeks. My PC completed it in just under 2 hours after downloading it but the first wingman's PC failed to even start it because, well it currently has over 1000 jobs in progress! Then the job got assigned to a PC that apparently went unresponsive and after that got assigned to another user with delusions of grandeur with over 100 jobs in progress and typically takes 10 or so days to get around to processing them.
Another job has been waiting for 3 weeks. The first wingman is also sitting on over 1000 jobs and has hundreds that timed out.
Perhaps there need to be incentives for not doing this. For example, work assigned gets reduced if jobs time out or credit is reduced when jobs take longer to process.
I also like the limiting of tasks for newbies and then extending it as they show they can return the tasks on time, everyone has pc's crash and deadlines get missed but some things ARE avoidable!!!
I also like the limiting of tasks for newbies and then extending it as they show they can return the tasks on time, everyone has pc's crash and deadlines get missed but some things ARE avoidable!!!
I don't know if sitting on over 1000 tasks and having hundreds of them regularly time out is necessarily a newbie mistake. When I was a newbie I would have been horrified to have seen that happen.
I also like the limiting of tasks for newbies and then extending it as they show they can return the tasks on time, everyone has pc's crash and deadlines get missed but some things ARE avoidable!!!
I don't know if sitting on over 1000 tasks and having hundreds of them regularly time out is necessarily a newbie mistake. When I was a newbie I would have been horrified to have seen that happen.
I agree I would have never let that happen either!!
Just be patient and your
)
Just be patient and your wingmen will return their results, most of the 27 are only 4 days old and the deadline for returning a task is 14 days.
I've got 465 pending tasks at the moment and I'm not worried.
Bert Hyman wrote:I now have
)
ALOT of people use the default of a 10 day cache in Boinc and that means it takes a LONG time for them to work thru all the tasks, some projects limit the max number of tasks a user can get because of that but the default is still not just a day or two.
I run in the spare time of a
)
I run in the spare time of a really old I3-based Linux box running the household media server, pumping out maybe 3 or 4 tasks on a good day, so this seemed like a pretty big backlog for me.
But I'm not really fretting. Otherwise, I'd be over in "Crunchers Corner" demanding an explanation of what was going on :-)
Heck, maybe it's always like this; the machine sits in a corner of the basement mostly on autopilot and I try to not look at the statistics too often.
Bert Hyman wrote:I run in the
)
With each workunit being sent out up to 20 times and each of those with a 14 day deadline that's the best way to run Einstein. Normally it only takes 2 computers to crunch a workunit before credits are awarded but there are times when it takes longer.
It's a bit ridiculous the
)
It's a bit ridiculous the number of jobs that some people configure their computers to download. Perhaps they think they can get more jobs done that way, I don't know...
I have a job that has been waiting for 5 weeks. My PC completed it in just under 2 hours after downloading it but the first wingman's PC failed to even start it because, well it currently has over 1000 jobs in progress! Then the job got assigned to a PC that apparently went unresponsive and after that got assigned to another user with delusions of grandeur with over 100 jobs in progress and typically takes 10 or so days to get around to processing them.
Another job has been waiting for 3 weeks. The first wingman is also sitting on over 1000 jobs and has hundreds that timed out.
Perhaps there need to be incentives for not doing this. For example, work assigned gets reduced if jobs time out or credit is reduced when jobs take longer to process.
Mr Anderson wrote: It's a
)
I also like the limiting of tasks for newbies and then extending it as they show they can return the tasks on time, everyone has pc's crash and deadlines get missed but some things ARE avoidable!!!
mikey wrote: I also like the
)
I don't know if sitting on over 1000 tasks and having hundreds of them regularly time out is necessarily a newbie mistake. When I was a newbie I would have been horrified to have seen that happen.
Mr Anderson wrote: mikey
)
I agree I would have never let that happen either!!