Question About The Ranges Tested Multiple Times

Message boards : Number crunching : Question About The Ranges Tested Multiple Times

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Kellen

Send message
Joined: 14 Nov 17
Posts: 70
Credit: 1,000,005,236
RAC: 0
   
Message 1170 - Posted: 19 Jun 2019, 10:59:06 UTC
Last modified: 19 Jun 2019, 10:59:26 UTC

Hi Sergei,

I've noticed that workunits are usually generated in groups of 1000, with the last digits of the workunit name indicating which workunit of that particular batch it is. A while ago I also noticed that there are groups of ranges tested twice, where the last digits in the workunit name are not in numerical order and the workunits not generated in batches of 1000. Just curious what the additional workunits are for, as it appears to test the same range as the sequentially generated workunits.

Here is an example of some workunits with the same range tested;
Normal, sequentially-generated workunit: https://sech.me/boinc/Amicable/workunit.php?wuid=10971671
Workunit generated out of sequence that tests the same range: https://sech.me/boinc/Amicable/workunit.php?wuid=10971468
Another workunit generated out of sequence that tests the same range: https://sech.me/boinc/Amicable/workunit.php?wuid=10971256

I have also noticed that the workunits generated out of sequence are not all generated at the same time like the sequential workunits, but instead they are gradually generated between the batches of 1000 sequential workunits.

Thank you,
Kellen
ID: 1170 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Sergei Chernykh
Project administrator
Project developer

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 17
Posts: 459
Credit: 72,451,573
RAC: 0
   
Message 1171 - Posted: 19 Jun 2019, 11:16:31 UTC - in response to Message 1170.  
Last modified: 19 Jun 2019, 11:19:26 UTC

Yes, it sends smaller batches to CharityEngine's computers because they're mostly unstable/unreliable. But it shouldn't send repeating tasks, I'll look into it.

Edit: yes, there was a bug in the code. I forgot to move the batch from "unsent" to "sent" folder in this case. Thanks for noticing! But anyway, it didn't go completely to waste because it provided some more redundancy in the search up to this point.
ID: 1171 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Kellen

Send message
Joined: 14 Nov 17
Posts: 70
Credit: 1,000,005,236
RAC: 0
   
Message 1172 - Posted: 19 Jun 2019, 11:19:58 UTC - in response to Message 1171.  

Great! Thanks for the quick reply! I was wondering why all of the computers crunching those tasks were owned by "Anonymous". I just took a bit of a closer look and it seems as though batches of 100 workunits are generated, starting from where the large sequential batch of 1000 workunits ended, and repeated small batches are generated over that same range. Then, the next sequential batch of 1000 is generated from the end range of the previous one. Something else to note is that the /task_size parameter is different even when the same range is tested.

Regards,
Kellen
ID: 1172 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Kellen

Send message
Joined: 14 Nov 17
Posts: 70
Credit: 1,000,005,236
RAC: 0
   
Message 1173 - Posted: 19 Jun 2019, 11:21:18 UTC - in response to Message 1171.  

Nice! Glad to see it was an easy fix! That should more than double the speed of the rest of the search to 1.0E20.

Thanks again for the very fast replies!

Regards,
Kellen
ID: 1173 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Sergei Chernykh
Project administrator
Project developer

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 17
Posts: 459
Credit: 72,451,573
RAC: 0
   
Message 1174 - Posted: 19 Jun 2019, 11:23:33 UTC - in response to Message 1173.  

Yes, it should move faster now, maybe 1020 will even finish before the end of this summer.
ID: 1174 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote

Message boards : Number crunching : Question About The Ranges Tested Multiple Times


©2022 Sergei Chernykh