User \"tatik\" from Czech National Team found strange credit values for some WUs:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242889
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242905
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5244074
...
Computer i.d. 22040 have a lot of results like these. Can someone explain this problem?
____________
/ 
User \"tatik\" from Czech National Team found strange credit values for some WUs:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242889
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242905
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5244074
...
Computer i.d. 22040 have a lot of results like these. Can someone explain this problem?
I can say why they are getting the points they are getting but not why they are reporting a unit complete but with zero points. After 3 results are returned the middle of the 3 requests is granted to everyone. That way the low and the high are thrown out and the middle one is considered more correct. Now why a computer would report a unit as complete but not request any credits is beyond my knowledge base.
One thing I did notice was that on a normal unit if you click you can see a long line of info about the results of crunching. On that computers list though it is mostly blank, nothing there. Not even the blank info, just nothing. I wonder if that is an issue with the version of the client they are using. They are still using 5.8.15, I am using 5.10.20 or 5.10.28. It isn\'t really THAT old but is not the most current version either.
____________
/
...Why a computer would report a unit as complete and VALID , but not request any credits ...
differences between CPU time is huge - 0,02sec vs xxxx sec ? This is the problem. Is it an error or Is it an attribute of this aplication?
____________
/
...Why a computer would report a unit as complete and VALID , but not request any credits ...
differences between CPU time is huge - 0,02sec vs xxxx sec ? This is the problem. Is it an error or Is it an attribute of this aplication?
PM one of the Admins and pose this to them. They should be able to figure it out. It could be the way it is being seen by we users and not what is being reported to the Project. But it doesn\'t SEEM correct with what we can see.
Here is one of them, Michael:
https://malariacontrol.net/show_user.php?userid=501
Here is another, Alain Studer:
https://malariacontrol.net/show_user.php?userid=2758
Here is one more, Maire:
https://malariacontrol.net/show_user.php?userid=4
____________
/
Krunchin-Keith [USA]Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: Nov 10 05
Posts: 3221
Credit: 5,501,644
RAC: 3,642
...Why a computer would report a unit as complete and VALID , but not request any credits ...
I experienced this on Windows98 with the Optimizer application, the hosts reports zero time but the result is valid. I believe it is do to the fact it is a wrapper application, the time usually shown is a function of boinc core client, when using wrapper applications there is no way to modify the application to report back to boinc core client the time at each tick. I figured if they were getting marked as valid they were ok, I brought that up in another thread somewhere. I stopped running it just because I did not know how long they were taking to run.
It would be best to bring this question up in the science forum under the optimizer application sticky thread.
/
I JUST checked one of my machines and foudn this unit:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5228383
My pc is just one of several requesting zero credits but COMPLETING the unit. Mine actually took 0.13 minutes to complete the unit.
____________
/
I JUST checked one of my machines and foudn this unit:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5228383
My pc is just one of several requesting zero credits but COMPLETING the unit. Mine actually took 0.13 minutes to complete the unit.
Not true. The WU page only shows two decimal places. Look more closely at the result here:
https://malariacontrol.net/result.php?resultid=16308889
Claimed credit: 0.000341799207171382
Granted credit: 0.001
You were actually awarded more than claimed. Be happy. =;^)
____________
Dublin, CA
Team SETI.USA
/
Don´t forget that the main problem is, why the first comp has CPU time 0,02 sec, second 2500 sec , third 2900 sec on the same WU like these:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5244074 or
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242889
...
____________
/
Don´t forget that the main problem is, why the first comp has CPU time 0,02 sec, second 2500 sec , third 2900 sec on the same WU like these:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5244074 or
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242889
...
BOTH of those have weird things going on when one clicks on the different computers results. One front page says a computer requested 0.00 credits but inside it says it requested 6.? credits. The other link says the computer requested 0.00 credits on the front page, but inside when you check out the details it requested zero credits, not zero.zero zero etc, just zero.
____________
/
Don´t forget that the main problem is, why the first comp has CPU time 0,02 sec, second 2500 sec , third 2900 sec on the same WU like these:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5244074 or
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242889
...
The time spent is the actual cpu time spent crunching the unit. So if you and I have the exact same cpu but I am checking my email all the time, my cpu crunch time will be longer. My cpu has less time to devote to crunching, so it takes longer. MOST of my pc\'s are dedicated crunchers, meaning they do little to nothing else.
____________
/
One front page says a computer requested 0.00 credits but inside it says it requested 6.? credits.
No, it requests 6.91959501976088e-05 credits. See the e-05 at the end? This means it\'s requesting 0.00069195901976088 credit. 6.91959501976088e-05 * 10 = 0.000691959502
____________
Jord.
BOINC FAQ Service
/
Krunchin-Keith [USA]Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: Nov 10 05
Posts: 3221
Credit: 5,501,644
RAC: 3,642
Don´t forget that the main problem is, why the first comp has CPU time 0,02 sec, second 2500 sec , third 2900 sec on the same WU like these:
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5244074 or
https://malariacontrol.net/workunit.php?wuid=5242889
...
The time is in CPU seconds, not wall clock seconds. A CPU may only spend part of a wall clock second doiung BOINC work and part doing something else. CPU\'s of differnet speed take different times to execute the same set of instrcutions. Look at the host details and see what processor speed they are, all different, hence different processing times.
The zero time is another problem.
[EDIT]
I posted a comment into the Third science application thread asking about this issue.
/