Messages

I mean the position you are in for each project.   There's an example of a monitor at the top of my websites, for example I am in position 597 in Moo.

I can't see it as much overhead, and opting in would be fine.  Just a column you could add which would invoke the lookup.

I know.  So you can put all your resources into the ranking then :-)

Well I want the stats.  I'm sure it wouldn't be that difficult or produce much overhead.

Presumably the stats can be gotten from all sorts of sources, you could use the projects themselves (as bam do), or bam (do I have to have a bam account for them to keep stats?), or don't boinc have stats themselves?

Cool!  Thanks!  I must have done that by accident a couple of times, but was never able to replicate it.

I've occasionally noticed that boinctasks will have a ^2 on one of the columns, which seems to show that it's a secondary sort.  How do I make it do this?

Look at this:



I've got two GPUs.  I have a single GPU task and a dual GPU task queued.  Boinc chooses to run the single one on one GPU leaving the other idle.  WHY?!?!?  Why not download more?!?!?

Yes I know, it's BOINC and not BOINC tasks that's causing it (probably).

Damn it, can't tell you if it worked now, I changed graphics card (to a newer one) and this one apparently doesn't do double precision maths?!?  How can a newer one do LESS functions?!?

You can indeed assume the BG SW does report the CPU package temperature, not the core chip temperature.

I think what threw me was my old motherboard had poor software with it, so I used speedfan, which used Tjunction like Tthrottle does.

Interestingly, my old PC would lock up (presumably the CPU switched off) when the i7 920 reached 100C Tjunction.  This one cuts the power to the whole system at 115C Tjunction.  Mind you I have fiddled with the BIOS and switched off 2 of the three safety features :-)  For example i7s have their own throttling, but mine seems to throttle very early on, at a Tjunction of about 80C, so I switched that off.

Oh well, if I get this watercooler to work better I won't be running so hot anyway - I suspect the interface between the cpu  and the waterblock is not conducting heat that well - the waterblock doesn't feel that hot at all - mind you with room temperature water running through it that may be normal.  I've ordered some very high quality heatsink gunk.

Yes, see my post immediately above that one - I made 2.

"TJunction read from CPU: 100  °C, TJunction using: 80  °C"

(Although I then changed it to 100 before I did that screenshot to see what would happen).

So are you saying that the CPU actually cuts the power at 115C junction temperature?  And the motherboard software is just plain wrong?

[Checked with "speedfan"]
Speedfan agrees with TThrottle.  It seems the gigabyte motherboard software is reporting the OUTSIDE temperature of the CPU, how stupid of it!

So.... you won't let me throttle at 110C?  Oh go on.....

Try using V 1.26 http://www.efmer.eu/boinc/boinc_tasks/download_beta.html
I made some changes to avoid misses.

Testing......

Here's a screenshot to show you what I mean - TThrottle is not agreeing with my motherboard software on what temperature the CPU is running at.



It would appear (if I'm understanding the junction thingy correctly), that TThrottle is getting a reading from the tJunction output of the CPU which gives a value from say 0 to 1, 1 being "maximum" or 100C.  But when my motherboard software tells me that the CPU temperature is 90C, the tJunction output must be at about 110 or 1.1.  TThrottle does not accept anything over 1, so reads a lower temperature than it really is, and doesn't throttle when it should.

Check for this line in the logging. TJunction read from CPU: 100  °C, TJunction using: 100  °C

TJunction read from CPU: 100  °C, TJunction using: 80  °C

It's most likely 100C. Some older Cpu's have 80C.
Why do you think it's 80C ?

I don't really understand what the 80 means that I'm entering, but setting it to 80 causes TThrottle to read the same temperature as my motherboard software.  I've confirmed this is right because the CPU will shut the power off at what the motherboard software says is 95C.

Try using V 5.43 beta.

Done, same problem.

90 C is high for a desktop not for a notebook.

I know, but I've never broken a CPU running at that temperature, 24/7/365.

I've had to set Tjunction to 80 to get the correct temperature reading.  This seems to have limited me to throttling at a maximum of 79C.  My CPU is happy at 90C, so I can't get the maximum out of it using Tthrottle.

Yes yes I know maybe it's not recommended, but I've always run i7s at 90C and they've never worn out.  They have autoshutoffs so they won't melt!

It's an Intel i7 940 on a Gigabyte X58A-UD3R motherboard.

This would mean that the task disappeared prior to the scheduler request. I suspect this is not possible.
I can not recall, which cc_config flag causes logging of "Got ack for task XXXXXXXX" message, possibly <task_debug>. The client is discarding a task after displaying this message. So, until this message appears after completing a sched request, a finished task should be still seen and available for history?

How do I provide further information on this?  I've never debugged BOINC or BOINC tasks, or anything else for that matter..

When the MW tasks approach 100% progress (the last 2-3 minutes), does the Progress% update frequently enough, so that the Remaining time nicely counts down to zero minutes? If there are at least 4-5 steps in the last minute, then checking the "Smart mode" in the History prefs should do the job.

They are ATI tasks and take about 5 minutes to complete.  The progress is updated every few seconds.  Smart mode is on.

Take a look into your Event log, where MW tasks finish computation, make uploads, start reporting finished tasks and the scheduler requests are finished. It takes usually at least 5-6 seconds from finishing a task until the subsequent scheduler request is completed, but more common delay times are a couple of tens of seconds. If you set the History's maximum refresh interval value some 1-2 seconds below the usual delay time, you should catch the majority of the tasks in either Uploading or Ready to report state, and get much less Missed MW tasks.

3567   Milkyway@home   10/11/2011 11:27:40 pm   Computation for task ps_separation_13_3s_fix20_2_6216322_0 finished   
3568   Milkyway@home   10/11/2011 11:27:40 pm   Starting task ps_separation_10_3s_fix20_2_6217161_0 using milkyway version 82   
3569   Milkyway@home   10/11/2011 11:27:43 pm   Sending scheduler request: To fetch work.   
3570   Milkyway@home   10/11/2011 11:27:43 pm   Reporting 1 completed tasks, requesting new tasks for ATI GPU   
3571   Milkyway@home   10/11/2011 11:27:45 pm   Scheduler request completed: got 1 new tasks   

It took 5 seconds.  I've set history to 1 second and 1 second.  Still missing some.

Funny, no upload?  If a task only has a simple answer to give maybe there is no upload file and the data is inside the report?

A drawback of low max refresh time is unnecessarily higher CPU or network usage.

Not on this computer :-)  24GB RAM, twin terrabyte Caviar black hard disks, i7 940 @ 5GHz watercooled.