Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : How to write app info for the current application?

Author Message
gravitonian
Send message
Joined: 24 May 13
Posts: 3
Credit: 20,738,042
RAC: 4,704
Level
Pro
Scientific publications
wat
Message 53758 - Posted: 24 Feb 2020 | 21:31:01 UTC

My GPU is loaded at 95% or less in most wu. I would like to write an app info file (or should it be called an app config?) So that the gpu processes two wu simultaneously, but I don’t know how to do it. Maybe someone has a finished file?

Richard Haselgrove
Send message
Joined: 11 Jul 09
Posts: 1003
Credit: 2,522,838,291
RAC: 3,286,983
Level
Phe
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 53759 - Posted: 24 Feb 2020 | 22:32:46 UTC - in response to Message 53758.

My GPU is loaded at 95% or less in most wu. I would like to write an app info file (or should it be called an app config?) So that the gpu processes two wu simultaneously, but I don’t know how to do it. Maybe someone has a finished file?

App_config would be easier. Details are in the User Manual

Azmodes
Send message
Joined: 7 Jan 17
Posts: 21
Credit: 905,332,906
RAC: 2,829,296
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
wat
Message 53760 - Posted: 25 Feb 2020 | 6:28:03 UTC
Last modified: 25 Feb 2020 | 6:28:18 UTC

Does that actually help, though? I haven't seen any obvious improvement, at least not on Windows.

Aurum
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 17
Posts: 252
Credit: 9,791,563,847
RAC: 3,936,285
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
wat
Message 53763 - Posted: 25 Feb 2020 | 16:00:55 UTC - in response to Message 53758.

Maybe someone has a finished file?

<app_config>
<app>
<name>acemd3</name>
<gpu_versions>
<cpu_usage>1.0</cpu_usage>
<gpu_usage>0.5</gpu_usage>
</gpu_versions>
</app>
<app>
<name>acemdlong</name>
<gpu_versions>
<cpu_usage>1.0</cpu_usage>
<gpu_usage>0.5</gpu_usage>
</gpu_versions>
</app>
<app>
<name>acemdshort</name>
<gpu_versions>
<cpu_usage>1.0</cpu_usage>
<gpu_usage>0.5</gpu_usage>
</gpu_versions>
</app>
<app>
<name>QC</name>
<max_concurrent>8</max_concurrent>
</app>
<app_version>
<app_name>QC</app_name>
<plan_class>mt</plan_class>
<avg_ncpus>4</avg_ncpus>
</app_version>
<app>
<name>QC_beta</name>
<max_concurrent>1</max_concurrent>
</app>
<app_version>
<app_name>QC_beta</app_name>
<plan_class>mt</plan_class>
<avg_ncpus>4</avg_ncpus>
</app_version>
<project_max_concurrent>4</project_max_concurrent>
</app_config>

Toni
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 9 Dec 08
Posts: 947
Credit: 4,353,973
RAC: 71
Level
Ala
Scientific publications
watwatwatwat
Message 53765 - Posted: 25 Feb 2020 | 17:10:10 UTC - in response to Message 53763.

I would be surprised if it resulted in higher performance.

Aurum
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 17
Posts: 252
Credit: 9,791,563,847
RAC: 3,936,285
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
wat
Message 53768 - Posted: 25 Feb 2020 | 18:03:33 UTC

My gut says at most it might increase 5% from filling small gaps.
I was thinking of testing it but the problem is the RAC is a 10-day average. Therefore I need to run without changes for over 10 days to establish a baseline. Double up and then run over 10 days to see if it changed. And, hope that you didn't increase your protein length in the mean time.

Toni
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 9 Dec 08
Posts: 947
Credit: 4,353,973
RAC: 71
Level
Ala
Scientific publications
watwatwatwat
Message 53769 - Posted: 25 Feb 2020 | 18:16:03 UTC - in response to Message 53768.

All systems have different sizes and therefore efficiencies already.

Aurum
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 17
Posts: 252
Credit: 9,791,563,847
RAC: 3,936,285
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
wat
Message 53770 - Posted: 25 Feb 2020 | 19:17:03 UTC
Last modified: 25 Feb 2020 | 19:17:49 UTC

What's a "system" to you?
You know we're all very curious what you're up to.
I opened one of your files trying to double click app_config and saw a very long epitope or a very short protein. The amazing thing was it had a dozen prolines in a row. I've been trying to imagine what conformation that would have and concluded a pig tail.

Bedrich Hajek
Send message
Joined: 28 Mar 09
Posts: 397
Credit: 5,232,462,915
RAC: 2,475,911
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 53772 - Posted: 26 Feb 2020 | 1:02:48 UTC - in response to Message 53768.

My gut says at most it might increase 5% from filling small gaps.
I was thinking of testing it but the problem is the RAC is a 10-day average. Therefore I need to run without changes for over 10 days to establish a baseline. Double up and then run over 10 days to see if it changed. And, hope that you didn't increase your protein length in the mean time.



I ran that experiment, a while back when the new app came out, and running 2 WUs at once reduced productivity. See link:


http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=4989&nowrap=true#52749


You don't need 10 days to see the results. Just run 2 WUs simultaneously for a few minutes on one machine. In Boinc Manager, under task bar, highlight the tasks and click properties, and see the progress rate. Then you can suspend one of the tasks, and see the change in the progress rate, in the task still running after a few minutes. You can also compare that to your base line of running one unit at a time. It is not an exact science, especially since the unit vary in length. but it will give you a good idea of what the difference is.



Aurum
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 17
Posts: 252
Credit: 9,791,563,847
RAC: 3,936,285
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
wat
Message 53775 - Posted: 26 Feb 2020 | 17:52:14 UTC

Your test is too short. The biggest gain when running 2 WUs per GPU is the gap when a WU finishes. I think one needs to test for a few WUs.Be nice if one used the same pair of WUs.

I thought of an easier way to test it. The Statistics graph in BOINC Manager. I'll run for a few days with singletons and then double up and see if the slope changes.

Bedrich Hajek
Send message
Joined: 28 Mar 09
Posts: 397
Credit: 5,232,462,915
RAC: 2,475,911
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 53776 - Posted: 26 Feb 2020 | 22:38:13 UTC - in response to Message 53775.

Your test is too short. The biggest gain when running 2 WUs per GPU is the gap when a WU finishes. I think one needs to test for a few WUs.Be nice if one used the same pair of WUs.

I thought of an easier way to test it. The Statistics graph in BOINC Manager. I'll run for a few days with singletons and then double up and see if the slope changes.



Good, test it. Maybe results for this batch will be different than the previous batch. Let's know what you find.




Aurum
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 17
Posts: 252
Credit: 9,791,563,847
RAC: 3,936,285
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
wat
Message 53782 - Posted: 27 Feb 2020 | 9:06:10 UTC
Last modified: 27 Feb 2020 | 9:06:38 UTC

There's a problem that prevents a good test. With only 2 WUs per GPU I will constantly have several GPUs running one or none.

If Toni sees fit to increase the limit to 3 WUs per GPU a test would work.

Post to thread

Message boards : Number crunching : How to write app info for the current application?