Nqueens Push

[Bok]

Sounds like your problems are more with the OS than Boinc anyway right ?

I never use the packages for BOINC anyway, I just wget the tarball and untar it and then

./boinc --allow_gui_remote_rpc via screen (to let me utilize boincview)

Longtime since I used FC, I prefer CentOS these days for crunchers personally, mainly because I use it for my work stuff as my comany only supports Suse or RHEL (but CentOs works fine )

If you are getting 'no route to host' messages, well that's a different kettle of fish... I'd switch of ipv6 first then start checking the routing..

Bok

[Chuck]

Bok,
There is no 6.2.19 or 6.2.21 left anymore in the x86_64 side at boincdl.

I would much rather download the sources and compile my own. that way I get an AMD64 scheduled version anyway.... meaning the benchmarks come out correctly, etc.

I do have my client connection value == 0. It likes that.... Now, I found something, possibly related and please verify that if you specify 100.00 (make sure to put in the .00) for your cpu utilization and loading parameters (bottom two) of the processors tab that all is still ok for you; that you don't get a stderr report from the project attached to your results. It reports errors for me... and then 'ignores' the invalid XML value of 100.00 It also ignores the invalid date.... I presume the completion date deadline (in unix time format) because it's also a float (.00000) and not an integer (which time and cpu% should be..... as in eg.100%).

I will continue to look at results and see what I can find... and perhaps we can figure out if it is my machine/client or the project ??? It has not impacted my results validity OTHER than lowering the claimed credits and artificallly raising the CPU time used. ~10,000 seconds???? these things are done in approx 2 hrs except for the P4, which does have some issues and takes about 9,000 seconds

If this is 6.2.15 related, then I understand..... and will have to find a way to get something better... even if 32 bit mode only.


As for the NFS issue.... I know that is the 'NetworkManager' package..... I have a work around by putting in manual routing statements into the table for host->host NFS connections and all is fine. Yet if you look at 'netstat -r' everything is fine there.... Again, another FC-9 error that has NEVER existed before in FC-8. I never had this problem until FC-9 came out. Perhaps it's time to switch / try something else in spite of my long standing familiarity to Suse and Redhat Linux.
(More personal + professional with Redhat, but experience with Suse at the personal level as well in the early days)....

Is is perhaps time to drop BACK to a 32 bit install for running boinc? I know that's why my benchmarks are messed up.... it was a perfect piece of algebra to compute the correct value that BOINC reported.

It does make sense for 32 bit boinc..... if this project is 32 bit based (even if 64 bit wrapped)....

Things like OGR really do benefit from 64 bit mode. Personal projects (video, audio, math, etc) and true boinc 64 bit math are fantastic in 64 bit mode. aka... anything moving data or doing real 64 bit final or interim result math, benefits. (more work / clock... plain and simple).

Advice? A 32 bit and a 64 bit install of Fedora or Suse or ????? (just not Gentoo or Ubuntu please.... <grin>)


FWIW: BOINC is the ONLY application I have trouble with in 64 bit mode other than the OS NFS glitch in the routing table


C.




here is what I got....

<core_client_version>6.2.15</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
Unrecognized XML in parse_init_data_file: computation_deadline
Skipping: 1231497971.000000
Skipping: /computation_deadline
Unrecognized XML in GLOBAL_PREFS::parse_override: mod_time
Skipping: /mod_time
Unrecognized XML in GLOBAL_PREFS::parse_override: max_ncpus_pct
Skipping: 100.000000
Skipping: /max_ncpus_pct
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (6.667 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (13.333 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (20.000 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (26.667 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (33.333 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (40.000 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (46.667 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (53.333 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (60.000 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (66.667 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (73.333 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (80.000 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (86.667 %)
APP: NQueen checkpoint done (93.333 %)

</stderr_txt>
]]>

[Chuck]

Sounds like your problems are more with the OS than Boinc anyway right ? ........ If you are getting 'no route to host' messages, well that's a different kettle of fish... I'd switch of ipv6 first then start checking the routing..

Bok

I found it...... combo of a) firewall/ iptables and b) SELINUX...... i know the game now..Fedora's "permissive" is not as permissive as it claims, neither is the firewall. Ports are open, 'no route to host magically disappeared, proper ports are open / specified and all is


sorry for off-topic, but now I can control it all from one machine AND have the proper ports open..... DAMN, it's tighter than a ........... censored..............

C.

[Bok]

I switch off permissive mode most of the time anyway. I run an OpenBSD firewall on an old P2-333 that has been running for 10 years and has never been breached, so don't worry about the machines behind it too much.

Forget about benchmarks in boinc, they are mostly not used anyway. They can be easily artificially inflated so most projects, long ago, gave up using whatever the client claims for credits..

IOW you gain nothing by compiling your own..

Bok

[Chuck]

Bok,
That's what I did.... I turned up the firewall a notch on my fileserver.... which has never been breached... (no have I for that matter)... disabled SELINUX (the main cause), and found, since last post that putting a *(rw) instead of the older format +(rw) or just (rw) made it a) stop complaining / warning and b) start working in IPV4 or V6. Please tell me if this sounds like things are in tune: I can use tar, cpio, or just plain cp -r from a local to a NFS dir and simultaneously watch a 2 hr movie (1.7GB .mp4) in vlc using the default caching of 300 ms both on the 100Mbit side of the lan FROM the NFS'd directory. The Gb side is obviously no problem with performance. So no special tuning was required of anything.

Sorry to have taken up post time.... and given nobody cares about the credits then why run the points race for position #1? Is it because any particular project will be statistically equally fair / unfair in credit granting and therefore even out in the end anyway? Granted some of these 'non-science' ones are fun..... a nice break from the heavy stuff.

Thanks for taking a look at things and letting me know all is ok.... I am at 6.2.15 with 0.05 reporting interval. It runs like a champ as my stats will show .... and that is on 14.4 Ghz of cpu power 4x2.4 (partitioned into 2 VMs) and 1x 2.2 'X2' and 1x2.4, running stock + 3% speeds after having re-heatsinked all the machines this PM.

If I do compile my own code, I will put in an affinity option (which I haven't net found in the client) so that slot 0 set affinity -> core 0, etc.... I will minimally write it up if it's not already on the boards for the next revision.... it would help overall client performance and stop the cpu/core thrashing. Also would like to set a 'minimum client priority' feature as well or just map it into some range like : (using Windows as a ref: 100% == normal, 80% ->50% = below normal, and 50%->idle == low.)

Also got a nice little graphics card.... nice and cheap. They are clearing the shelves of anything possible given the holiday shopping was bad here. I will be leaving to go back to work next week and look forward to the warm weather. It was about 70 today and decent from what i read. Look forward to it... (sure beats 16-20F with the occasional 40F day).

Thanks again.... exhausted here.... just rewired the lan too for dual DSLs. It's all partitioned now by IP address and the routers do the work. I'll fire up the new toy when i get home. I have some work to do yet....and then the 'burn in' testing. Once online, I will VPN to Pa from whereever I am and let it report as part of the network in Pa. It will also save me having to lug around all the HD's and big stuff. One line for normal/current open use, one for me.


Night all...
Thanks again Bok & IB for looking at that data.


Cheers,
Chuck

I switch off permissive mode most of the time anyway. I run an OpenBSD firewall on an old P2-333 that has been running for 10 years and has never been breached, so don't worry about the machines behind it too much.

Forget about benchmarks in boinc, they are mostly not used anyway. They can be easily artificially inflated so most projects, long ago, gave up using whatever the client claims for credits..

IOW you gain nothing by compiling your own..

Bok

[outlnder]

Nice production, Lauren.

And great job on passing Team Norway. Ars can use all the help we can get with lowering their overall scores.

Simap has work flowing if you want to hit that project. Most of my machines are doing it 3 to 1 over Nqueens.

[LAURENU2]

Nice production, Lauren.

And great job on passing Team Norway. Ars can use all the help we can get with lowering their overall scores.

Simap has work flowing if you want to hit that project. Most of my machines are doing it 3 to 1 over Nqueens.

Oh Oh now that we have our 4th member joining the fight the Ars may get added to our Hit list
So you might have to bring your focuse back here to keep us from you

[gopher_yarrowzoo]

Gunnery Sargent Gopher is ready for the fight...
now or up to you..