There are more UK Met Office HadCM3 shorts available.
I will leave them for the Windows users.

Well that didn't last, I just told 6 machines to grab some, and none are left.

... I'm not sure there were any, as there haven't been any additions to the work unit list.

I will check in the morning UK time) when one of my sources for information will have updated but I suspect these must have been resends, possibly from a computer that has just been turned on after a while that crashed them all due to missing libraries. Another of my sources tells of some HADAM3 that were due to go out, based on batch 888 restarts. Because some of the ancillary files were wrong they didn't go out about a fortnight ago. I will be able to tell if it was these when I look tomorrow morning. If it was, when they complete they should generate some more of the same.

---

Please do not private message myself or other moderators for help. This limits the number of people who are able to help and deprives others who may benefit from the answer.

It's additions to batch 837, hadcm3s and there are still lots in the queue. Unfortunately, the application is only available for Linux and Mac at this time.

It's additions to batch 837, hadcm3s and there are still lots in the queue. Unfortunately, the application is only available for Linux and Mac at this time.

[Sulks] When I read "I will leave them for the Windows users" I had a crisis.

It's additions to batch 837, hadcm3s and there are still lots in the queue. Unfortunately, the application is only available for Linux and Mac at this time.

Thanks for the clarification. I will have to do some myself.

PS - That would be easier if we could select work units, in which case I could add another machine for them. As it is, I have to wait until the N216s complete to get the right machine with the right memory, etc.

Yes, make the workunits selectable please.

Perhaps it's time to repeat this:

In the past when people could pick and choose, a lot of work got ignored because it didn't suit users.
So now there is NO choice - the server sends what ever is next.

Was going to post what the position is but Les has beaten me to it. Please note that this is not at the whim of the moderators. There are arguments on both sides but even as a moderator, unless I have missed something, I don't have access to the figures from the time when we could select task types to judge. As with other projects where decisions are made that (some) crunchers disagree with I have to accept that they know best. I also know that putting the data out there to show the justification would be a lot of work and not a priority for the project. It isn't like most of the information we can all look at which is handled by the BOINC server code.

---

Please do not private message myself or other moderators for help. This limits the number of people who are able to help and deprives others who may benefit from the answer.

Well I tried, and they aren't sending me any, even with six cores free on a Ryzen 3600 (Ubuntu 20.04.1).
Maybe the hadcm3s are too short to mix well with the four hadam4h that I already have running. It could be a BOINC scheduler problem.

But between BOINC and the Oxford researchers who think they know better how to run my machine than I do, I think I can safely say I won't be doing any.
I hope the vaccine works better.

Well I tried, and they aren't sending me any, even with six cores free on a Ryzen 3600 (Ubuntu 20.04.1).
Maybe the hadcm3s are too short to mix well with the four hadam4h that I already have running. It could be a BOINC scheduler problem.

I think it is just the way the scheduler works. Statistically I expect to get some before they all go unless an army of Mac users turns up soon. If they do, good luck to them. They have had a long dry period so I don't really mind if I just get the Hadam4h tasks for now. There are still lots of them in the hopper which is probably why you didn't get any hadcm3s ones.

---

Please do not private message myself or other moderators for help. This limits the number of people who are able to help and deprives others who may benefit from the answer.

Does anyone have a work unit number for one of these additional HADCM3S models? Because I can't see them!

(I can see on an internal system that the number of work units in batch #837 has been bumped, but don't understand how that can be if the work units aren't visible, and if they aren't visible then how do users get them?)

But I get the point that you could be doing more work with a mix because the hadcm3s don't hammer the cache memory like the others. Nor do they require as much RAM. I don't need to be running much else on top of 5 tasks to use up all of my 32GB. - Will be buying another 32 some time to make things a bit more reasonable.

---

Please do not private message myself or other moderators for help. This limits the number of people who are able to help and deprives others who may benefit from the answer.

Does anyone have a work unit number for one of these additional HADCM3S models? Because I can't see them!

(I can see on an internal system that the number of work units in batch #837 has been bumped, but don't understand how that can be if the work units aren't visible, and if they aren't visible then how do users get them?)

This one Went to batch statistics and looked for running tasks for batch.

Edit: And another one so they are going out to both Mac and Linux hosts. I don't know if there are enough Mac hosts out there for it to be worth deprecating the Linux ones so all the Apple fans can get some?

---

Please do not private message myself or other moderators for help. This limits the number of people who are able to help and deprives others who may benefit from the answer.

Yes, it's a long list now.

I suspect that the answer is something like:
These will get done when all of those in more recent batches are finished.
Which is going to be a loooooong time from now.

Ok: I'll fire up my steam-powered Mac and try to get one.

Reissuing an existing WU makes sense but I still don't understand the increase in the total number of WUs in a batch without those additional WUs being visible unless, as I think Les is suggesting, the increase is being done in chunks: there were 5555 in the original batch #837, which now claims to be 7470 (likewise batch #835, which was previously 1689 WUs).

I am building another Ryzen 3600 in a few days, and was hoping to put them solely on the UK Met Office HadCM3 short. But since I can't select, I will get whatever they choose to send me, and could end up in the same soup with an unusable mix. It will be a while before they can get them done.

It will be a while before they can get them done.

Unless we get an influx of Mac users. Most of whom I suspect have gone elsewhere due to the long drought.

---

Please do not private message myself or other moderators for help. This limits the number of people who are able to help and deprives others who may benefit from the answer.

My Ryzen 3600X picked one up last night to run along with 4 N216 models. The new tasks in batch 837 appear to be 360 month tasks and are taking 0.6 sec/TS on the Ryzen in that configuration. Randomly saw that a couple of these 360 tasks were taken up by Macs, so they are being sent out.

Well I tried, and they aren't sending me any, even with six cores free on a Ryzen 3600 (Ubuntu 20.04.1).
Maybe the hadcm3s are too short to mix well with the four hadam4h that I already have running. It could be a BOINC scheduler problem.

Everything's a Boinc scheduler problem. I see it doing something stupid on one of my 7 machines almost every day. There's meant to be a new version in the pipeline, but I bet they just introduce even more bugs. It took me ages to convince them that it can't tell the difference between time taken on 24 cores and time taken per core.

Everything's a Boinc scheduler problem. I see it doing something stupid on one of my 7 machines almost every day. There's meant to be a new version in the pipeline, but I bet they just introduce even more bugs. It took me ages to convince them that it can't tell the difference between time taken on 24 cores and time taken per core.

I don't see this as a problem except for those who would like to choose which tasks to run and that is a project issue not a scheduler one.

It will be a while before they can get them done.

They seem to be flying off the shelves at quite a decent rate according to the server status page

Edit: #897 that has been poured into the hopper will throw a spanner in the works and slow down the rate they go out to Linux machines though I don't know enough to work out by how much.

---

Please do not private message myself or other moderators for help. This limits the number of people who are able to help and deprives others who may benefit from the answer.

I don't see this as a problem except for those who would like to choose which tasks to run and that is a project issue not a scheduler one.

It will be a while before they can get them done.

They seem to be flying off the shelves at quite a decent rate according to the server status page

I am inclined to agree with Peter. If the BOINC scheduler simply assigned them in order to available cores, you would get them. It is because it is trying to juggle the miserable resource share (and whatever else it manages to think up) that it gets itself into a dead-end situation. They could do better by getting rid of it entirely.

That is not to say the project should not allow you to choose, but that is a different matter.
I am glad they are flying off to somewhere.