Well, for those of us whose ISP has a bad habit of dropping off-line at times, 
a queue is needful ...

And this change I find interesting that you propose it because you do not think 
it will be a problem for your configurations, with out much consideration of 
other configurations.

On Feb 3, 2010, at 8:10 AM, [email protected] wrote:

> Maybe in some cases.  What I see on my computers is that the tasks with a
> high STD are the tasks from projects with a high resource share, and all
> other tasks eventually end up running in EDF with the exception of my i7
> where projects with just about any STD get to run as it does not tend to
> keep many non started tasks around (always on, and about 60 projects
> attached so no need for much of a queue).
> 
> jm7
> 
> 
> 
>             "Paul D. Buck"                                                
>             <p.d.b...@comcast                                             
>             .net>                                                      To 
>                                       [email protected]              
>             02/03/2010 11:00                                           cc 
>             AM                        David Anderson                      
>                                       <[email protected]>,           
>                                       [email protected]          
>                                                                   Subject 
>                                       Re: [boinc_dev] Thoughts on STD.    
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 3)  The "neutral" position changes from 0 to + 1 day of STD.  This means
>> that new work would be preferred by rr_sim over work that has been on the
>> system for a while.
> 
> Would this not perpetuate some of the issues we are having now?  With work
> being put off until it is in deadline peril and then have to be run in HP
> mode?
> 
> A project that issues work in fits and starts would be constantly "jumping
> the queue" as the queue was purged and then work was obtained.
> 
> On multi-core systems this might not be that big of a deal unless we start
> to see task preemtion again as the new tasks bump already executing tasks
> off the list...
> 
> On Feb 3, 2010, at 7:27 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I have a proposal that may fix all of the STD problems.
>> 
>> 1)  Clip the DCF at +/- 1 Day (as is done currently).
>> 2)  Use the overall resource fraction to determine the rate of change.
>> 3)  Do not shift so that the mean is kept at 0.
>> 4)  Tasks with no work on the system have the STD increase at the same
> rate
>> as they would if they had work on the system.
>> 
>> Consequences:
>> 
>> 1)  No penalty or gain for being out of work on the system for a few
>> seconds.
>> 2)  A project is not penalized forever for using extra CPU time in the
>> past.  If the project does not have work on the system for long enough,
> it
>> starts from a "neutral" position.
>> 3)  The "neutral" position changes from 0 to + 1 day of STD.  This means
>> that new work would be preferred by rr_sim over work that has been on the
>> system for a while.
>> 
>> jm7
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> boinc_dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
>> To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
>> (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
> 
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
boinc_dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.

Reply via email to