Zero credit.. Why?

Alles zum Projekt yoyo@home
Everything about the project yoyo@home
Nachricht
Autor
PecosRiverM
Idle-Sammler
Idle-Sammler
Beiträge: 3
Registriert: 22.08.2018 23:08

Zero credit.. Why?

#1 Ungelesener Beitrag von PecosRiverM » 09.01.2023 18:37

I was wondering if there was a reason why I have lots of wu's that are granted zero credit. My wingman gets credit.

Benutzeravatar
yoyo
Vereinsvorstand
Vereinsvorstand
Beiträge: 8041
Registriert: 17.12.2002 14:09
Wohnort: Berlin
Kontaktdaten:

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#2 Ungelesener Beitrag von yoyo » 10.01.2023 21:31

Please provide a link to such an workunit.
HILF mit im Rechenkraft-WiKi, dies gibts zu tun.
Wiki - FAQ - Verein - Chat

Bild Bild

orpy
Mikrocruncher
Mikrocruncher
Beiträge: 26
Registriert: 12.09.2020 10:11

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#3 Ungelesener Beitrag von orpy » 11.01.2023 14:19

yoyo has made changes to the credit system which meant that some Linux hosts have been getting zero credits for work units that take a long time to crunch.

If you claimed more than 2000 credits for a wu over the Christmas holidays you got zero credit for the CPU time :(

I think the limit has been raised since then -- but there's no documentation...

This issue is caused by the BOINC client incorrectly calculating the measured integer speed for Linux hosts and yoyo using these incorrect values to calculate credit.
Bild


Benutzeravatar
yoyo
Vereinsvorstand
Vereinsvorstand
Beiträge: 8041
Registriert: 17.12.2002 14:09
Wohnort: Berlin
Kontaktdaten:

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#5 Ungelesener Beitrag von yoyo » 12.01.2023 07:50

Your system claimed 5,386 credits and your wingman 223 credits. You claimed 24 times more than your wingman. The used CPU time of both results is nearly identical. This is not honoured by the system.
HILF mit im Rechenkraft-WiKi, dies gibts zu tun.
Wiki - FAQ - Verein - Chat

Bild Bild

PecosRiverM
Idle-Sammler
Idle-Sammler
Beiträge: 3
Registriert: 22.08.2018 23:08

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#6 Ungelesener Beitrag von PecosRiverM » 12.01.2023 10:34

Okay shouldn't I also get the same as wingman? I have no idea why mine claimed so much.

Benutzeravatar
zombie67
Prozessor-Polier
Prozessor-Polier
Beiträge: 119
Registriert: 26.07.2007 21:58
Wohnort: Reno, NV

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#7 Ungelesener Beitrag von zombie67 » 20.11.2023 18:36

This is still a problem. Example:

https://www.rechenkraft.net/yoyo/result ... =102289292

The run time for the task is correct, almost exactly a day in length. The claimed credit reasonable for a task that long. The wingman under claimed, in my opinion. In any case, awarding zero credits is clearly the wrong answer.

Edit: Until this gets resolved, the linux app(s) should be disabled. It is unfair to volunteers to get zero credits for valid results. It is just wasting their time and energy/money.
Team: SETI.USA

Benutzeravatar
joe carnivore
Task-Killer
Task-Killer
Beiträge: 731
Registriert: 04.05.2013 06:01
Wohnort: Goslar, NI / Lower Saxony ,Germany

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#8 Ungelesener Beitrag von joe carnivore » 20.11.2023 20:07

The wingman did not perform a benchmark.
This means the difference to your result is too big.

This is how I understood the previous answers.
Bild
Bild

Benutzeravatar
zombie67
Prozessor-Polier
Prozessor-Polier
Beiträge: 119
Registriert: 26.07.2007 21:58
Wohnort: Reno, NV

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#9 Ungelesener Beitrag von zombie67 » 20.11.2023 22:28

I ran 44 tasks (44-core machine). All tasks that have validated so far resulted in zero credits.
Team: SETI.USA

JagDoc
Vereinsmitglied
Vereinsmitglied
Beiträge: 292
Registriert: 03.12.2011 12:05

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#10 Ungelesener Beitrag von JagDoc » 21.11.2023 17:39

Now i have also the problem with valid wus and zero credit.
https://www.rechenkraft.net/yoyo/result ... tid=508315

The limit for claimed credit makes no sense because the max granted credit is 1000.

The only thing we can do is:
disable Siever WUs if there are wus with long runtime,

or edit in the client_state.xml the fpops and iops to a lower value and disable the automatic benchmark in the cc_config.xml

Both are no good solutions.
Bild

Benutzeravatar
gemini8
Vereinsvorstand
Vereinsvorstand
Beiträge: 5832
Registriert: 31.05.2011 10:30
Wohnort: Hannover

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#11 Ungelesener Beitrag von gemini8 » 21.11.2023 18:20

JagDoc hat geschrieben:
21.11.2023 17:39
disable Siever WUs if there are wus with long runtime,
or edit in the client_state.xml the fpops and iops to a lower value and disable the automatic benchmark in the cc_config.xml
..., or change to a different crediting system.
The fixed amount of credit that e.g. Einstein uses is working quite ok, I think.
Well, it's a bit on the low side for CPU, but it works.
And it definately doesn't just send out zero credit for work that has been positively validated.

Well, finding out what isn't ok and fix it is a fourth possibility.
Might be the best one.
Gruß, Jens
- - - - - -
Lowend-User und Teilzeit-Cruncher

Bild Bild Bild
Bild

Benutzeravatar
zombie67
Prozessor-Polier
Prozessor-Polier
Beiträge: 119
Registriert: 26.07.2007 21:58
Wohnort: Reno, NV

Re: Zero credit.. Why?

#12 Ungelesener Beitrag von zombie67 » 23.11.2023 07:30

So we are just going to leave the linux app active, even though it awards no credits? That is not nice to the volunteers.
Team: SETI.USA

Antworten

Zurück zu „Number crunching“