Join PrimeGrid
Returning Participants
Community
Leader Boards
Results
Other
drummers-lowrise
|
Message boards :
Seventeen or Bust :
New at this
| Author |
Message |
|---|
|
|
|
My computer errored...these only took 30 seconds:
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=737128808
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=737131506
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=737316852
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=738123432
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=738123433
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=738178591
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=738252917
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=738253784
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=738254816
I have 8 invalids and 33 errors
Eh, I thought I'd give the long ones a try. Hypothesis, my processor overheated? I had the cpu set to use 100% of the time, it worked on the TRP seive without a problem. Hyperthreading is not disabled in the bios, do I need to? I do have good cooling, processor normally gets to 45-47 max running at 100 across the board
I was away from the computer out to lunch when these downloaded and took place. I did not have Htop or psensor graphing.
<core_client_version>7.6.31</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
app_version download error: couldn't get input files:
<file_xfer_error>
<file_name>primegrid_llr_wrapper_7.06_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu</file_name>
<error_code>-120 (RSA key check failed for file)</error_code>
<error_message>signature verification failed</error_message>
</file_xfer_error>
</message>
]]>
<core_client_version>7.6.31</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
process exited with code 139 (0x8b, -117)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
BOINC llr wrapper (version 7.05)
Using Jean Penne's llr (64 bit)
LLR Program - Version 3.8.17, using Gwnum Library Version 28.8
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 2880K, Pass1=384, Pass2=7680, a = 3
12:54:45 (30985): called boinc_finish
</stderr_txt>
]]>
llrSOB_243725771_1
Workunit 494937047
Created 29 Aug 2016 | 1:57:53 UTC
Sent 2 Sep 2016 | 19:53:32 UTC
Received 2 Sep 2016 | 20:05:35 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Validate error
Client state Done
Exit status 139 (0x8b)
Computer ID 522591
Report deadline 18 Oct 2016 | 20:53:32 UTC
Run time 14.26
CPU time 10.68
Validate state Invalid
Credit 0.00
Application version Seventeen or Bust v7.06
Stderr output
| |
|
 Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
                               
|
|
Either your system is overclocked a LOT too much, or the memory is faulty, or something else very severe is wrong. Here's the output from the first task you listed:
Iter: 1/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Starting Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 2880K, Pass1=384, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 4/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 2 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 2880K, Pass1=384, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 6/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 5 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 2880K, Pass1=384, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 6/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.4972430437) > 0.4
Unrecoverable error, Restarting with next larger FFT length...
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 6 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3M, Pass1=512, Pass2=6K, a = 3
Iter: 10/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 7 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3M, Pass1=512, Pass2=6K, a = 3
Iter: 7/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.4997558594) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 7 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3M, Pass1=512, Pass2=6K, a = 3
Iter: 10/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 8 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3M, Pass1=512, Pass2=6K, a = 3
Iter: 8/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 8 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3M, Pass1=512, Pass2=6K, a = 3
Iter: 8/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Unrecoverable error, Restarting with next larger FFT length...
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 8 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3200K, Pass1=1280, Pass2=2560, a = 3
Iter: 16/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 9 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3200K, Pass1=1280, Pass2=2560, a = 3
Iter: 18/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Starting Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3200K, Pass1=1280, Pass2=2560, a = 3
Iter: 1/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.4997810412) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Starting Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3200K, Pass1=1280, Pass2=2560, a = 3
Iter: 1/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Unrecoverable error, Restarting with next larger FFT length...
Continuing from last save file.
Starting Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1
Using zero-padded FMA3 FFT length 3360K, Pass1=448, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 2/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 2 [0.00%]
Using zero-padded FMA3 FFT length 3360K, Pass1=448, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 5/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 3 [0.00%]
Using zero-padded FMA3 FFT length 3360K, Pass1=448, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 4/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 3 [0.00%]
Using zero-padded FMA3 FFT length 3360K, Pass1=448, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 3/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 3 [0.00%]
Using zero-padded FMA3 FFT length 3360K, Pass1=448, Pass2=7680, a = 3
Iter: 3/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.4994206116) > 0.4
Unrecoverable error, Restarting with next larger FFT length...
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 3 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3456K, Pass1=768, Pass2=4608, a = 3
Iter: 3/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 3 [0.00%]
Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 3456K, Pass1=768, Pass2=4608, a = 3
Iter: 3/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Unrecoverable error, Restarting with next larger FFT length...
Continuing from last save file.
Resuming Proth prime test of 21181*2^31165004+1 at bit 3 [0.00%]
Using zero-padded FMA3 FFT length 3584K, Pass1=448, Pass2=8K, a = 3
Iter: 3/31165018, ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.5) > 0.4
Fatal Error, Check Number = 6, test of 21181*2^31165004+1 aborted
It's failing immediately as soon as it starts the calculation.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
|
|
|
It might be worth trying a genefer cpu unit or two to see if that is problematic as well. GFN20 should still use avx/fma, so I would expect it to stress memory (and the cpu) pretty well.
| |
|
|
|
|
A 1620 can not be overclocked, so it is not that. I tried to remove a memory modules heat sink and I have mixed ram. I have G-skill (1dimm) and crucial (standard) (2dimms 2133 cas15). I have the crucial interlaced and the G-skill (2400 cas 15) in the other set of 4 dimms on the very outside where it won't touch the heatsink. The Xeon never ran the G-skill at 2400, so I figured both would run nicely at 2133 since both were cas 15 anyway. Gskill being 15-15-15-35, Crucial is Cas 15, I don't know if it is extended, probably 15-15-15-36? So I think the memory is the problem. | |
|
|
|
|
17hours 39 minutes into a PSP and the screen had no activity. Crucial standard desktop memory cannot handle Boinc or I got a batch of faulty ram. C2K8G4DFD8213 is not ideal. RMA time. I'm back to using 1 stick of 8GB G-Skill. I ran GFN 17-lows and megas (cpu) for 20 hours straight and it did fine with dual channel. I ran 24 hours+ and it was slower with single channel, but solid. I wish I had gone with quad channel 16GB now instead of dual channel. This is my first build in over 15 years, I wanted to try my hand at it again and have some learning experierences. I mean tri/quad channel was only in theory for standard user, I don't know if any power pc/AIX/Sparc platforms had implemented it yet. I feel like a dinosaur, the last computer I screwed with from scratch was a cyrix. I got this G-skill on sale, it was the cheapest. | |
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
|
17hours 39 minutes into a PSP and the screen had no activity. Crucial standard desktop memory cannot handle Boinc or I got a batch of faulty ram. C2K8G4DFD8213 is not ideal. RMA time. I'm back to using 1 stick of 8GB G-Skill. I ran GFN 17-lows and megas (cpu) for 20 hours straight and it did fine with dual channel. I ran 24 hours+ and it was slower with single channel, but solid. I wish I had gone with quad channel 16GB now instead of dual channel. This is my first build in over 15 years, I wanted to try my hand at it again and have some learning experierences. I mean tri/quad channel was only in theory for standard user, I don't know if any power pc/AIX/Sparc platforms had implemented it yet. I feel like a dinosaur, the last computer I screwed with from scratch was a cyrix. I got this G-skill on sale, it was the cheapest.
CPU tasks for GFNs 19 and lower run a much less efficient FFT than does LLR or GFNs 20 and above. With the less efficient FFT, fewer calculations are performed each second, resulting in fewer memory accesses, less power consumption, and less heat. Taken together, it puts much less stress on the system. That's why you're having trouble with LLR but not with GFN17.
If your motherboard supports quad channel memory, that's what you should get. There's not much point in getting the more expensive Xeon motherboards unless you are going to take advantage of the quad-channel memory support. I'd go so far as saying that this is the only reason to go with the server Xeon's as opposed to one of the consumer i7 or i5 chips. (Another reason to go with a Xeon CPU is to run two CPUs on one motherboard, but the CPU you have can't do that.)
For our LLR tasks (and CPU GFN20, GFN21, and GFN22 tasks), if you have a modern (Sandy Bridge or later) Intel CPU, it will be the memory that is going to be the processing bottleneck. Using all the memory channels supported by your CPU and motherboard is critical to getting the best performance out of the CPU.
Also be aware that the stock CPU coolers are marginal (at best) with this kind of computation. Once you're running the CPU at its full potential, you'll need a decent aftermarket cooler. It's not necessary to go crazy and spend hundreds on a water cooling system, but you do want something better than stock.
One other thing to look out for: Many people have had trouble with reliability with the consumer Skylake CPUs, especially when running overclocked memory. In some situations, a BIOS update was needed before the system would work correctly. I'm not sure if that applies to you, but you might want to see if there's any BIOS updates available for your motherboard.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
|
|
|
Holy Schniekes! It just occurred to me, none of you running Seventeen or bust or any of these LLR's use 100% of the CPU's time eh? I have 20+ hrs on 1 stick of Ripjaws 5 8GB and running at 75% of the cpu's time and it hasn't failed. However the Crucial 2x 8GB sticks failed after 17:39:00 running 100%. I fail, I'm the newb, I don't need to RMA yet? I don't know if this is good, but it is currently doing the PSP @1.08%/hr and it was .704 while I was active on it.
Also, I will update my bios.
So am I supposed to be able to run my computer 24/7 with cpu using 100% of time for weeks on end? Quad channel would definitely help. In running SOB's is 75%, 80%, 85% the average time?
On cooling, I live in the hottest and coolest room in the house, Cryorig H7 + 5 fans in an IN WIN case.
| |
|
|
|
|
I don't know about others but I have always run 100% cpu usage for any work units I run on BOINC.
Mine run 24/7 year and have done so for years.
I have run many SoBs in the past and also some GFN20 recently (took over 400 hours) but did not have a problem.
I mostly run the LLR jobs from both here at Primegrid and also at SRBase.
I am currently running some PPS LLR, TRP LLR and the AP27 work units.
My computers are older and slower than any recent ones (a number of years now) and are AMD as well, but that does not stop a CPU being stressed out with these calculations.
I would say that matched RAM is a far better bet than mis-matched, I tried that once due to price and had to get rid of the cheaper RAM as it would not work with the other RAM stick, so I bargin ended up not a bargin.
Building computers can be fun and frustreating at the same time.
At least you got yours running first time so that is a plus.
My last build lasted 8 months then went up in smoke, not a nice smell either (it is still sitting on the floor).
Conan
____________
 | |
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
|
Holy Schniekes! It just occurred to me, none of you running Seventeen or bust or any of these LLR's use 100% of the CPU's time eh?
No.
We run 100% 24/7. If you can't, something is not working correctly.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
|
|
|
Will SOB use 2x 4 channels of ram or is that processor dependent? I watched his video on the amount of ram a computer needs and he said SOB might be able to take advantage of 32GB/64BG in 8GB config. | |
|
|
|
|
..Linus tech tips (his) | |
|
|
|
|
also, 64bit fp should be disabled and 128bit enabled I presume? If I have both enabled could this cause problems? I'm wondering if my bios ram config is off... | |
|
|
|
|
Memtest 86 v4.3.7
memory config a
error confidence 109
Lowest error address: 00290006200-10496mb
Highest error address: 003dfef6ff0
bits in error mask: 200
Bits in error: 1
max continuous errors: 1
9k+ errors
memory config b (switch memory places)
error confidence 109
Lowest error address: 00290006200-10496mb
Higest error address: 003dfef5c50-15870.9
bits in error: 1
max continuous errors 1
9k+errors
Conclusion:
Crucial CT2K8G4DFD8213 is not to blame
*Lesson learned: Always run memtest86 before even installing an operating system.
I think I'm going to do other things for a bit...read some more, do more research. | |
|
|
|
|
bah, now I'm reading about memory errors on mem test page...may be dual channel problems, got to check each one individually. These are reported to be supported by my motherboard vendor on my motherboard vendors site and crucials.
OK folks, that's all for me
--out, sorry for being so loud and scaring away the primes | |
|
|
|
|
Running SOB's now.
18 days l8tr after testing GFN 20's and 4 PSP's and I'm an hour in 5 at .36%/hr 1@ .72%/hr. I am running 6 threads (75% of CPU's) instead of turning hyper threading off. I am not doing anything with my graphics card simultaneously. Quad Channel ram+ latest bios updates seem to have done the trick. The big test is the 17 hour mark.
The dos based memtest86 bypasses bios updates, for my PSP's and GFN20's are error less. memtest86 is a tool for hardware manufacturers, not something to freak out about by the average computer user.
I may take a gander @ turning hyper threading off after my 17hr mark. I'll update in a day or two. | |
|
|
|
|
It might be hard to attribute an increase to HT on vs. off. Assuming you have a quad core cpu (which I gather from 6 threads being 75% of ht cores), you'll only have 4 threads running with HT off which will almost certainly speed up work unit completion.
If you wanted to do a straight up test to see if HT being on impacts anything, you could try 4 threads HT on vs 4 threads HT off. | |
|
|
|
|
OK, I didn't wait 17 hours. I'm sure my cpu is fine now.
HT off resulted in .72%/hr for all 4 threads.
Increase at this point, I don't know if this calculation will go up in an hour or .72 will remain steady:
5(.36)+.72=2.52
4(.72)=2.88 | |
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
|
Running SOB's now.
18 days l8tr after testing GFN 20's and 4 PSP's and I'm an hour in 5 at .36%/hr 1@ .72%/hr. I am running 6 threads (75% of CPU's) instead of turning hyper threading off. I am not doing anything with my graphics card simultaneously. Quad Channel ram+ latest bios updates seem to have done the trick. The big test is the 17 hour mark.
The dos based memtest86 bypasses bios updates, for my PSP's and GFN20's are error less. memtest86 is a tool for hardware manufacturers, not something to freak out about by the average computer user.
I may take a gander @ turning hyper threading off after my 17hr mark. I'll update in a day or two.
Look in the stderr.txt files in the BOINC slot directories. If there's still errors it's possible (not certain) that you'll see them in there. If you're unsure what the contents mean, post them here.
If you're still getting errors, it's better to know now and abort them rather than wasting many hours of computer time on calculations that are already broken.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
|
|
|
/ect/boinc-client (ubuntu) no error file, so I'm assuming I'm alright. 1.07%/hr, .720 is not accurate. | |
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
|
/ect/boinc-client (ubuntu) no error file, so I'm assuming I'm alright. 1.07%/hr, .720 is not accurate.
Wrong directory.
"slot" isn't some archaic term I used -- you're looking for one of the directories in a directory literally called "slots". And there will ALWAYS be a file called stderr.txt in there if a BOINC task is running in that slot. If you don't see it, you're looking in the wrong place.
So where is it? In the BOINC manager window, hit CTRL-SHIFT-E. This will open up the log window. Scroll to the top. Look for a line that says where your data directory is located. That's where BOINC stores everything. Inside that directory you'll find another directory called "slots". Inside "slots" you'll find one or more directories, named "0", "1", "2", etc. Each of those numbered directories is where a single BOINC task is running. (Not all of them may be in use at any instant in time, however. Some may be empty.) Find the numbered directory where your SoB task is running. That's where the stderr.txt file is located. You can determine which of the slot directories a particular task is using by selecting a task in the BOINC manager main window and clicking on the "Properties" button.
(Instructions above assume you are running the BOINC manager in "advanced" mode.)
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
|
|
|
I tried ctrl+shift+E...I scrolled up and didn't see anything. Which ctrl+shift+F flag will reveal where the data is stored. I turned on slot_debug to log it, but it does not reveal the location of where on my hard disk is stored. I read my local preferences and realized I allotted 100GB of disk space to be used by boinc but also had use at most 0% of disk space checked. Conflicting values of disk space to be used wouldn't result in slot being stored completely in memory would it? Even though I unchecked use at most 0% disk space, the file location will not be revealed till after a new project is downloaded and started?
The location of slot files were not found. I'll trust everything will go alright. | |
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
|
I tried ctrl+shift+E...I scrolled up and didn't see anything. Which ctrl+shift+F flag will reveal where the data is stored. I turned on slot_debug to log it, but it does not reveal the location of where on my hard disk is stored. I read my local preferences and realized I allotted 100GB of disk space to be used by boinc but also had use at most 0% of disk space checked. Conflicting values of disk space to be used wouldn't result in slot being stored completely in memory would it? Even though I unchecked use at most 0% disk space, the file location will not be revealed till after a new project is downloaded and started?
The location of slot files were not found. I'll trust everything will go alright.
Shut down BOINC and restart BOINC. The data directory is listed in the log when BOINC starts.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
ArtistVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 08
Posts: 88
ID: 29825
Credit: 394,915,406
RAC: 258,557
                 
|
The location of slot files were not found.
Try /var/lib/boinc-client with Ubuntu.
You need root (or boinc) privileges to see the content of the slots directory.
____________
144052 *5^2018290+1 is Prime! | |
|
|
|
|
Recommendation: View -Stderr
There is probably a way to do this in Ubuntu, but I'm not linux savy enough. I tried changing the accessibility of /var/lib/boinc-client/slots so I could view the files but not change them.....permission denied. An option to enter the root password to change the permission did not even appear. Boinc owns and determines the permission.
Core 2/slot 2 ran at a faster rate than the other cores/slots. I also noticed when running cpu sensor that core 2 always ran hotter by 1c or 2c. Core 2 has priority I'm guessing and perhaps is closer to the fm3+ space on the processor. It finished averaging .86% an hour last calculation...currently uploaded and the boinc client says the others will finish in a day. About 417600 total runtime, it just loaded, I don't have the actual. | |
|
|
|
|
Finally, success!!!!!
https://www.primegrid.com/result.php?resultid=743414135
My first completed SOB | |
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
|
|
Congratulations!
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
Dave
Send message
Joined: 13 Feb 12
Posts: 3207
ID: 130544
Credit: 2,285,392,938
RAC: 790,773
              
|
|
SoB is the best example of patience paying off ;). Now you just need a handful for gold. | |
|
|
|
|
I would like to have at least 2 SOB projects in que at all times. To do this, how many days of extra work do I need to allow? Is this calculated via how long it takes my computer to run them or the allotted time for the project? So since my computer takes roughly 6 days to do one, will selecting maintain an extra 6 days of work do the trick? | |
|
|
|
|
Out of curiousity, do you have a specific reason for wanting them queued up? Perodic connectivity, or something along those lines? | |
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 14011
ID: 53948
Credit: 433,172,407
RAC: 1,010,059
|
I would like to have at least 2 SOB projects in que at all times. To do this, how many days of extra work do I need to allow? Is this calculated via how long it takes my computer to run them or the allotted time for the project? So since my computer takes roughly 6 days to do one, will selecting maintain an extra 6 days of work do the trick?
Do you mean 2 total, or 2 per core? The rest of this assumes you mean 2 per core. If you meant 2 total, and you have more 2 cores, BOINC isn't really going to do that. BOINC lets you specify how much work to keep in the queue based on time, not the number of tasks.
BOINC calculates how many tasks to download based on the amount of time you specify, how long past tasks have taken to run on that computer, and the number of cores you're running.
Please understand that BOINC doesn't do a good job about estimating run times, so it's likely to get those calculations very wrong and download fewer or more likely more (or LOTS more) than you want. It's common for BOINC to download more tasks than you can possibly finish by the deadline. If you're ONLY running SoB tasks, it should do an okay job of estimating tasks after it's completed a few of them, but if you're running (or recently have run) and other type of PrimeGrid tasks it's going to get messed up.
The bottom line is you should be able to just put 12 in there (i.e., 12 days), and it should do what you want. Assuming you meant 2 tasks per core. And assuming BOINC gets it right, which it probably won't.
Also understand that should you be lucky enough to find the next SoB prime (which would be a VERY big deal), if you're queueing up 12 days worth of tasks, you're literally giving your wingman a 12 day head start and it's likely he'll be the discoverer of that prime and you'll be relegated to double checker.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 | |
|
|
|
|
I don't care about finding a prime, just doing my bit to drop in the bucket. I don't ever want to be known for finding a prime number, wouldn't want the attention. I simply love prime numbers. Let the wingman have the perks. Besides, I wonder if I'll still be doing this by the time an SOB is found, just here to pave the way for someone else to find it in 6-8? years. | |
|
Crun-chiVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 09
Posts: 3233
ID: 50683
Credit: 151,443,349
RAC: 99,549
                  
|
I don't care about finding a prime, just doing my bit to drop in the bucket. I don't ever want to be known for finding a prime number, wouldn't want the attention. I simply love prime numbers. Let the wingman have the perks. Besides, I wonder if I'll still be doing this by the time an SOB is found, just here to pave the way for someone else to find it in 6-8? years.
If you as you say "simply love prime numbers" but dont care about glory, about finding the prime, then what is your "prime" love- to help others?
Every job that man do, has goal. In this case you wont to have goal, just to help others.
In any way you are , and man like you , very very rare type of humans :)
____________
92*10^1585996-1 NEAR-REPDIGIT PRIME :) :) :)
4 * 650^498101-1 CRUS PRIME
2022202116^131072+1 GENERALIZED FERMAT
Proud member of team Aggie The Pew. Go Aggie! | |
|
Message boards :
Seventeen or Bust :
New at this |
