If user wouldn't participate in his favorite game tournament exactly in that weekend leaving BOINC stopped or in "exclusive application run" mode. One should not forget, BOINC is not the main app on "average participant"'s host ;) day or two deadline for BOINC architecture is "too short", by definition of "piggyback" computations.
Mon, 6 Oct 2014 18:16:16 +0000 от "McLeod, John" <john.mcl...@sap.com>: >Still, a day or two should be workable for always connected machines. > >Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown ( www.nitrodesk.com ) > >-----Original Message----- >From: Eric J Korpela [korp...@ssl.berkeley.edu] >Received: Monday, 06 Oct 2014, 1:56PM >To: McLeod, John [john.mcl...@sap.com] >CC: r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com [r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com]; >elliott...@comcast.net [elliott...@comcast.net]; jacob_w_kl...@msn.com >[jacob_w_kl...@msn.com]; boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >[boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu] >Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. > > > >That may be the goal. The client machines may have other plans. > >On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 10:16 AM, McLeod, John <john.mcl...@sap.com<mailto: >john.mcl...@sap.com >> wrote: >BOINC should be able to handle half to two day deadlines with no real >problems. Dr. Anderson's goal at one point was to have the ability to respond >to deadlines well under an hour. > >In anycase, the deadlines being discussed are 2 day, not 1/2 day. > >Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown ( www.nitrodesk.com < >http://www.nitrodesk.com >) > >-----Original Message----- >From: Eric J Korpela [korp...@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: >korp...@ssl.berkeley.edu >] >Received: Monday, 06 Oct 2014, 1:11PM >To: Richard Haselgrove [r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com<mailto: >r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com >] >CC: Charles Elliott [elliott...@comcast.net<mailto: elliott...@comcast.net >]; >McLeod, John [john.mcl...@sap.com<mailto: john.mcl...@sap.com >]; >jacob_w_kl...@msn.com<mailto: jacob_w_kl...@msn.com > >[jacob_w_kl...@msn.com<mailto: jacob_w_kl...@msn.com >]; >boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >[boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >] >Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. > >If a project really needs half day deadlines, the BOINC architecture may not >be the right choice. If it doesn't really need half day deadlines, it >shouldn't have half day deadlines. > >Not that the client scheduler isn't broken in a number of ways. > >On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:48 AM, Richard Haselgrove ><r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com<mailto: r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com >> wrote: >Just observe. I'm currently running two SIMAP tasks which were issued with a >two-day deadline (additional replications required for validation - they must >be using > ><reliable_reduced_delay_bound>X</reliable_reduced_delay_bound> >When a need-reliable result is sent to a reliable host, multiply the delay >bound by reliable_reduced_delay_bound (typically 0.5 or so). > >Set a two day queue, and BOINC panics. > >Don't judge every BOINC operation by the relaxed timings used at SETI. > > >>________________________________ >> From: Charles Elliott <elliott...@comcast.net<mailto: elliott...@comcast.net >> >> >>To: "'McLeod, John'" <john.mcl...@sap.com<mailto: john.mcl...@sap.com >>; >>jacob_w_kl...@msn.com<mailto: jacob_w_kl...@msn.com >; >>r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com<mailto: r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com >; >>boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >>Sent: Saturday, October 4, 2014 1:37 PM >>Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. >> >> >>> You can still easily get into deadline trouble with either large queues, >>or multiple projects and an occasional tight deadline >> >> >> >>Proof? >> >> >> >>From: McLeod, John [mailto:john.mcl...@sap.com<mailto: john.mcl...@sap.com >] >>Sent: Friday, October 3, 2014 10:54 PM >>To: jacob_w_kl...@msn.com<mailto: jacob_w_kl...@msn.com >; >>r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com<mailto: r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com >; >>boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >; >>elliott...@comcast.net<mailto: elliott...@comcast.net > >>Subject: RE: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. >> >> >> >>You can still easily get into deadline trouble with either large queues, or >>multiple projects and an occasional tight deadline. >> >>Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown ( www.nitrodesk.com < >>http://www.nitrodesk.com >) >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Charles Elliott [elliott...@comcast.net<mailto: elliott...@comcast.net >>>] >>Received: Friday, 03 Oct 2014, 10:10PM >>To: 'Jacob Klein' [jacob_w_kl...@msn.com<mailto: jacob_w_kl...@msn.com >]; >>'Richard Haselgrove' >>[r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com<mailto: r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com >]; >>McLeod, John [john.mcl...@sap.com<mailto: john.mcl...@sap.com >]; >>boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >>[boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >] >>Subject: RE: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. >> >>On my computer, which is allocated about 300 AP WUs at a time, in late >>September Boinc was running AP WUs due in late October. Then when October >>1 came it seemingly panicked and stopped doing anything but processing AP >>WUs >>due October 17. That behavior was useful when we could download thousands >>of WUs, but I think it should be questioned now. >> >>Charles Elliott >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: boinc_dev [mailto:boinc_dev-boun...@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: >>> boinc_dev-boun...@ssl.berkeley.edu >] On Behalf >>> Of Jacob Klein >>> Sent: Friday, October 3, 2014 9:24 AM >>> To: Richard Haselgrove; McLeod, John; boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: >>> boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >>> Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. >>> >>> I'd like to see "Prioritized to meet deadline" in the UI, next to >>> "Running". >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Richard Haselgrove<mailto:r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com<mailto: >>> r.haselgr...@btopenworld.com >> >>> Sent: 10/3/2014 9:19 AM >>> To: McLeod, John<mailto:john.mcl...@sap.com<mailto: john.mcl...@sap.com >>; >>> boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >><mailto:boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >>>%3cmailto:boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: >>3cmailto%3aboinc_...@ssl.berkeley.edu >> >><mailto:boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >> >>> Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. >>> >>> The removal followed a question and answer session at the BOINC >>> workshop in Budapest earlier this week. The OS scheduler mis- >>> interpretation was one that I highlighted, but there was also a problem >>> with users thinking that High Priority was a project-chosen queue- >>> jumping facility. I think we're much better off without those >>> confusions over terminology, but I agree with John that it would be >>> good if the reason for non-FIFO running could be marked in some way - >>> if we can find a less-frightening word. >>> >>> >>> >>> >________________________________ >>> > From: "McLeod, John" <john.mcl...@sap.com<mailto: john.mcl...@sap.com >> >>> >To: "boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >" >>> ><boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >> >>> >Sent: Friday, October 3, 2014 2:01 PM >>> >Subject: [boinc_dev] High priority status message removed. >>> > >>> > >>> >OK, High Priority made it sound like it was running at High OS >>> Scheduler Priority, but some tag that it is not in the normal RR >>> schedule might be good for helping diagnose problems. >>> >_______________________________________________ >>> >boinc_dev mailing list >>> >boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >>> > 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 >>> boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >>> 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 >>> boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >>> 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 >>boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >> 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 >boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu<mailto: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > >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 >boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu >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 boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
