Stop getting so annoyed.

Start paying attention.

Why do we need two applications?

Once again, you ask a question that i have repeatedly answered.

There are none so deaf and blind as those that refuse to listen or look.

If the server can see you have a compatible GPU, and the client asks for GPU work, it gives it what we're currently getting and marks it as 1GPU and 1CPU. If the client asks for CPU work only, you're given THE SAME APPLICATION marked as needing 8 CPUs. Very simple, stop overthinking things and complicating matters. All we need and nothing else whatsoever

And here you are suggesting what i had already suggested as part of my list of things that need fixing, right at the very end as number 8. "This will probably be the single biggest issue, as history has shown us that without separate tracking of actual processing times for separate initial estimated completion times, honouring Resource shares becomes near impossible, and systems download more work than they can finish, as well as download less work than they can handle, all depending on how much work is done on what compute resource."

Yet you forgot the most important part of that- the time taken to do a given Task by the slowest of CPUs must be the same as the time taken to do that very same Task by the most powerful of GPUs.
If not, all Scheduling is screwed & deadlines will be missed, Resource Share balancing will take forever, if it were to occur at all.

Jesus Christ this is absurd.

It's gone well beyond that.

As to your other post, who cares what applications are used?

If you had read any of my previous posts and understood them, you would have your answer already.

All we need is Boinc to be told, this will require x GPUs and y CPUs.

For a given application. Not for a given Task, for a given application.
Is this starting to sink in? At all?

In LHC the same application runs ATLAS tasks on anything from 1 to 8 CPU threads. You don't need a different application just to change the requirements!!

You really don't have the slightest clue do you?
Are you even paying attention to what you are typing? Or do you just not have the slightest idea of what it is you are discussing, as you continually keep conflating things.

The Atlas CPU application is for doing work on the CPU, and the CPU only. it may use one or 50 threads, but it's all done on the CPU. Comprende?
If there were a GPU application for ATLAS, then the work would be done on the GPU, most likely requiring CPU support, but the work world be done on the GPU.
Notice how i am taking bout 2 different applications, to process the same type of Task?

Just because the Einstein application needs the CPU to do some work for it, that doesn't make it a CPU application. It's a GPU application, for doing work on the GPU. No GPU- no work.
If there was a CPU application, then it could do the same work, without the need for the GPU.
Notice how i am talking about two different applications, that can process the same Tasks?

Look at the Einstein GPU tasks, they use BOTH the cpu and gpu. Just like Ralph, precisely no difference.

That shows just how confused you are. The GPU processes the Task, the CPU supports the GPU by keeping it fed. The CPU doesn't actually do any processing, the GPU does that. Depending on the Task, with a very well written application, CPU support can be next to nothing.
And none of that has any relevance to the post i made & you misread & mis-quoted. Repeatedly, over and over again.

No, this is precisely the same as say Einstein GPU tasks which need a CPU thread or a part of one. The task is given to me as 1GPU + 0.7 CPU threads.

You need to read what i am posting, not what you think i am posting.

What do you believe is different between Ralph tasks and Einstein GPU tasks?

For the third time and final time-
Here there is one single application that does both CPU & GPU work for a given type of Task.
On all other projects they have two different applications when doing work for the same type of Task on the CPU and GPU.

I updated Boinc manually at 11:32:10 to get new Wus but the result was that Ralph@home wont send me Wus for the rest of the day. Curios!

It can't send you any work if there is no work to send.

From the Server Status page

Tasks ready to send  0

But it also says in his log he posted "This computer has finished a daily quota of 1 tasks"

And all the request before that, it didn't send out any work because there wasn't any to send.

No, this is precisely the same as say Einstein GPU tasks which need a CPU thread or a part of one. The task is given to me as 1GPU + 0.7 CPU threads.

You need to read what i am posting, not what you think i am posting.

on my machines with small nvidia GPU, this app pushed it's way onto the GPU which was already running something from another project - not good for what looks like a CPU app to the boinc-client. this needs to behave like other BOINC apps with separate CPU and GPU app versions. if not, this is the end of me running this app on such machines

I updated Boinc manually at 11:32:10 to get new Wus but the result was that Ralph@home wont send me Wus for the rest of the day. Curios!

It can't send you any work if there is no work to send.

From the Server Status page

Tasks ready to send  0

A single application that can do work on both devices is good. It's also going to massively screw up work scheduling, deadlines & resource share balancing.

Why? Folding@Home allocates 1 thread per GPU task. I can do the same (and do) with some Boinc projects, manually in app config, this can also be preset at the server end, look at any GPU task from other projects, you'll see things like "0.7C + 1GPU", and the number of threads could be more than one if necessary.

What you are talking about is completely different to what i was talking about.

What you are talking about is where there are different applications for CPU work and GPU work. The GPU work requires the support of a CPU thread, but the application it uses is not the same as the one used for the CPU work.
Here the CPU & GPU application are one & the same.

A single application that can do work on both devices is good. It's also going to massively screw up work scheduling, deadlines & resource share balancing.

I have gotten a couple of completions with credit on this system which is not a power system. Appears that they ran about 8 hours or so

GenuineIntel
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4590 CPU @ 3.30GHz [Family 6 Model 60 Stepping 3]
(4 processors) INTEL Intel(R) HD Graphics 4600 (1629MB) OpenCL: 1.2 Microsoft Windows 10
Professional x64 Edition, (10.00.19045.00)

Note: One can also limit the number of cores in Windows 11 by setting "number of processors" in Advanced Boot options (run msconfig).

I've opted to use max_concurrent to limit the number of cores/threads avalable to the TTAFold Tasks, leaving the others available for other processes.
As i have found, they are pigs. 1 Task = 8 threads.

I am an idiot! All we have to do is set the percentage of CPUs in our account preferences. I set my 10 cores hyperthreaded (20) to 10% and run 2 tasks.

Report deadline 14 Jun 2024, 1:08:41 UTC
Received 14 Jun 2024, 4:04:05 UTC

I'm wondering if all these file transfer issues are due to the Ralph server not cancelling Tasks on the computer once they've been cancelled on the sever?
You complete the task, but it can't be returned because it's been cancelled for missing the deadline on the server?

My failed upload Task details.

Report deadline  14 Jun 2024, 8:49:48 UTC
Received         14 Jun 2024, 9:51:17 UTC

P Hucker

Report deadline  14 Jun 2024, 8:25:06 UTC
Received         14 Jun 2024, 9:46:38 UTC

Anyone noticing a pattern here with the failed file transfers?


And every single Ralph Task on my system is past the deadline, and even the ones not yet started aren't being removed by the server.
If i can't return the result, there's not much point keeping them...

Different video drivers.

Uh, are we in such shape that a different driver can cause the failure of a wu?
This would be a nightmare!

Is this app only supposed to be given to PCs with a Nvidia?

Not according to the home page

We are initially targeting only Windows machines with or without Nvidia GPUs for this test.

Which is really odd wording- it's the same as saying "We are initially targeting only Windows machines with or without AMD GPUs for this test." or "We are initially targeting only Windows machines with or without Intel GPUs for this test." or "We are initially targeting only Windows machines with or without Apple GPUs for this test."
ie what they are saying is "We are initially targeting only Windows machines for this test."

Seems that some computers can run correctly the new app, for example:

AuthenticAMD AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-Core Processor
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (24575MB) driver: 546.01

So, we need a little monster pc to crunch?

They use 10 threads each

On my system i have limited them to only one TTAFold Task at a time.
It's using a maximum of 62% of my CPU time which works out at just under 8 threads. So it's effectively using 8.
Yet the processing rate is the same as when 12 of them were fighting over 12 threads in total, so they really only need 1.

They use 10 threads each

On my system i have limited them to only one TTAFold Task at a time.
It's using a maximum of 62% of my CPU time which works out at just under 8 threads. So it's effectively using 8.
Yet the processing rate is the same as when 12 of them were fighting over 12 threads in total, so they really only need 1.