Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Redundent Result
Author | Message |
---|---|
Why do I have a bunch of "Redundent Result"? | |
ID: 8041 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
The most common cause is that these tasks are flawed and were canceled because someone else already ran them into the wall. So, they got canceled to save you the trouble ... | |
ID: 8043 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
That's interesting: these tasks have initial replication 2 or 3. And as soon as the 1st result is in the others are canceled. | |
ID: 8044 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I am new to GPUGRID, just joined on March 9th with a GTX 260. Did I do anything wrong. It looks like I only had three successes today where I have been averaging 4 a day before. | |
ID: 8045 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I am new to GPUGRID, just joined on March 9th with a GTX 260. Did I do anything wrong. It looks like I only had three successes today where I have been averaging 4 a day before. Which of your two systems do you want to discuss? The one has not returned errors, but, through no fault of its own had a lot of tasks canceled. The other system is having errors and missed deadlines. One looks to me like it is working and the other isn't. As to the 260, you can, based on *MY* personal experience can see between 2 and 4 tasks per day downloaded and processed. Depending on the time reported you can see your daily number varying between 1 and 7 ... While I am up and in the computer room I do a force to push my work up and am slowly moving to 6.6.20 and as I do adding the "report results immediately" flag to do this more auto-magically ... Anyway, I am confused ... | |
ID: 8049 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
That's interesting: these tasks have initial replication 2 or 3. And as soon as the 1st result is in the others are canceled. That's right. It improves a little bit WU turnaround times for us, although we are going to try different things to improve this as this "redundant result" thing causes too much confusion to the users. thanks, ignasi | |
ID: 8056 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
The one the question is about is the one that is working. FOX-AMD-X4-940. The one that is not working is becasue I tried to connect a 8600 GTS to GPUGRID and did not relaize it was not supported. | |
ID: 8061 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
The one that is not working is becasue I tried to connect a 8600 GTS to GPUGRID and did not relaize it was not supported. The 8600GTS is a supported card. It is not recommended due to its speed, but 32 shader cards will easily meet the new 5-day deadline in a single core machine, and unless shader clocked very slow (I'd say under 1000) should also have no problems in a dual-core. In an i7 such as yours, it will not be able to consistently meet deadlines as a single card due to the 4+ workunits downloaded, but if paired with another card should have no problems. | |
ID: 8066 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
When I tried the 8600 GTS I only got an error for clinet detached. I had no successes over two days so I disconnected it and attached it to SETI instead. I have 2 8600 GTS, 1 8500 GT, and 8400 GS on SETI. I have the 260 GTX on GPUGRID and it was working fine until yesterday and today where I started to get a lot of "Redundant Result" messages mixed in with successes. | |
ID: 8080 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
OK, to point it out more clearly: the redundant results are intentional, they're nothing to worry about. | |
ID: 8086 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I understand they are intentional. I was only curious becasue all of a sudden I seemed to get a lot of them. Is a WU marked Redundent result before you ever start processing the WU, during the processing of a workunit, or after you have completed processing the WU? | |
ID: 8124 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I understand they are intentional. I was only curious becasue all of a sudden I seemed to get a lot of them. Is a WU marked Redundent result before you ever start processing the WU, during the processing of a workunit, or after you have completed processing the WU? Before. | |
ID: 8125 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Then I really dont care :) | |
ID: 8143 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Ignasi & GDF, | |
ID: 8144 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
We have done a couple of weeks of tests with redundant results and I did not like much. It provides a better return time but it generates confusion. We are implementing a better and clever way to do it which does not waste so many resources and guarantees better balancing between WUs belonging to the same batch. | |
ID: 8223 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I forgot. | |
ID: 8224 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
OK.. thanks for the answer! | |
ID: 8227 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Redundent Result