I think there is an edit problem here. Mainly, I can\'t, so I\'ve reposted it.

The original posts are over a year old.
There have been several versions of BOINC since then, and the newest work a bit differently.
Berkeley has a page on scheduling <a href=\"http://boinc.berkeley.edu/sched.php\"> here.</a>

We have quite a bit more in the Wiki.

You can also look up the messages there too ...

---

Are the estimated time to completion predictions for AMD based Windows machines close to reality for the sulfer cycle WUs?

One of my machines is working a slab WU (1.75% complete) with 9 hours crunched and an estimated remaining of about 334 hours. Since CPDN gets 25% of the machines time, that\'s 6 hours per day or about 55 days to complete. Well before the 9/2006 deadline. However, 55 days from now will put us into early December. Still no problem... but... I have a sulfer cycle 4.19 WU sitting in que behind it with a deadline of 2/28/2006 that has not started and has an estimated remaining of about 1543! If I did the math right, 1543 at 6 per day is around 257 days. And this thing will not start till December 1st! Unless someone tells me that the estimated completion time will run down way faster than the actual time crunched... I need to abort this WU before it starts.

For some reason when I upgraded from 4.45 to 4.72 I downloaded both of these WUs.

---

- da shu @ HeliOS,
"Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer"

The time to completion of the SC Wu is correct (perhaps on your machine, it would be 1200-1300 h but not less: SC is a long job: 60-70% slower than slab and 5 phases instead of 3)
BOinc should enter in EDF Mode to crunch the SC wu in priority, as the deadline is very short.
If you don\'t want to crunch it because it\'s too long, abort it.
HTH

---

Arnaud

If this answer looks complex, you may want to know that I don\'t think it unreasonable because I know Skip knows a lot about Long Term Debt.

If you suspended the slab unit now and set no new work for CP. I would estimate that around 1400 of 3600 hours to 28 Feb would be taken completing the sulphur model. That\'s about 39% of your time rather than the set 25%. It will then catch up on work on other projects before giving CP more time to do the slab before its deadline.

If you continue doing the slab, CP will end up taking much more of the time available than 39%. So if you want to avoid this, and keep resource usage more in line with what you have set, it could be sensible to suspend the slab model for 5 months. Since you are only 9 hours into the slab, this is what I would recommend.

A couple of further possibilities:
If you want to avoid having CP taking up 80% of that machine\'s time for a couple of months, you could set CP\'s resource share to 39% for 5 months then set it to 11% for 5 months to compensate then return it to 25%. This will affect all your other machines that are attached to CP. There may be other ways of balancing the resource share such as detatching one or more computers from CP.

Alternatively, you may think the hindcast sounds much more interesting than the sulphur cycle. In this case, you could abort the unstarted sulphur model. (Also you could save up some resource share time to run it at more than 25%.)

---

Visit BOINC WIKI for help

And join BOINC Synergy for all the news in one place.

... text deleted...
If you suspended the slab unit now and set no new work for CP. I would estimate that around 1400 of 3600 hours to 28 Feb would be taken completing the sulphur model. That\'s about 39% of your time rather than the set 25%. It will then catch up on work on other projects before giving CP more time to do the slab before its deadline.

If you continue doing the slab, CP will end up taking much more of the time available than 39%. So if you want to avoid this, and keep resource usage more in line with what you have set, it could be sensible to suspend the slab model for 5 months. Since you are only 9 hours into the slab, this is what I would recommend.
... text deleted

Good clear thinking! I\'m now upset with myself that I didn\'t think of suspending the slab and running the other one 1st. Duh. Thanx much Crandles.

It is easy to forget. We have not had this capability that long ...

But, this is again one of the reasons I cannot understand those that insist that SETI@Home Classic was so much better. I can \"see\" what BOINC is doing by using tools like BOINC View, I can run, as i do now, 7 different projects doing vastly different science (heck I can even do many more if I don\'t mind do in Alpha/Beta class projects - though I don\'t usuall do that ...)

Ah well ... problem solved anyway ...

---