Print Checkpoint Write to Log

If you think it might be a driver problem, see viewforum.php?f=79

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Post Reply
alancabler
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:45 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by alancabler »

Noting checkpoint writes in the log (after delay for write to disk) would assist many donors who try to minimize lost work from client shutdowns and would help minimize checkpoint corruption.
Adding the text at -verb 3 might yield an increase of processing power to the project and negates the need to find similar info in the work directory.
Such a change would come under the heading of "donor friendliness".



___________________________
Please do not mistake my brevity as an indication that I am 7im's sockpuppet.
Last edited by alancabler on Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Facts are not truth. Facts are merely facets of the shining diamond of truth.
Jesse_V
Site Moderator
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:44 am
Hardware configuration: OS: Windows 10, Kubuntu 19.04
CPU: i7-6700k
GPU: GTX 970, GTX 1080 TI
RAM: 24 GB DDR4
Location: Western Washington

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by Jesse_V »

That would be interesting. Isn't that the core's responsibility? They are the ones that write the checkpoints. I'm not entirely certain, but I thought that most cores write checkpoints every frame (1%) or in the interval specified by the checkpoint frequency, whichever comes first. Some cores may follow this behavior, others may not. Some cores are developed by other research groups outside of Stanford.
F@h is now the top computing platform on the planet and nothing unites people like a dedicated fight against a common enemy. This virus affects all of us. Lets end it together.
Joe_H
Site Admin
Posts: 7870
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
Hardware configuration: Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp4
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp2
Location: W. MA

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by Joe_H »

Jesse_V wrote:I'm not entirely certain, but I thought that most cores write checkpoints every frame (1%) or in the interval specified by the checkpoint frequency, whichever comes first. Some cores may follow this behavior, others may not.
Some cores follow both methods in my experience, write a checkpoint at each frame and also at the checkpoint frequency. Not sure if some of the ones I have seen do that are still in use currently.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by bruce »

Joe_H wrote:
Jesse_V wrote:I'm not entirely certain, but I thought that most cores write checkpoints every frame (1%) or in the interval specified by the checkpoint frequency, whichever comes first. Some cores may follow this behavior, others may not.
Some cores follow both methods in my experience, write a checkpoint at each frame and also at the checkpoint frequency. Not sure if some of the ones I have seen do that are still in use currently.
The GPU cores currently write checkpoints at every frame (1%) and ignore the checkpoint interval. That was fine when frames times were a few minutes long but some of the new projects have much longer run times (depending on your GPU, of course) and checkpoints also become much longer. I've been trying to get this changed in a future version of a GPU core but it hasn't happened yet.
7im
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by 7im »

Yes, sorry, not a V7 client issue, but a fahcore issue as described. Maybe a mod can move this discussion to an appropriate section.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
P5-133XL
Posts: 2948
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:36 am
Hardware configuration: Machine #1:

Intel Q9450; 2x2GB=8GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460; Windows Server 2008 X64 (SP1).

Machine #2:

Intel Q6600; 2x2GB=4GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460 video card; Windows 7 X64.

Machine 3:

Dell Dimension 8400, 3.2GHz P4 4x512GB Ram, Video card GTX 460, Windows 7 X32

I am currently folding just on the 5x GTX 460's for aprox. 70K PPD
Location: Salem. OR USA

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by P5-133XL »

I'm not sure that it doesn't belong here -- The logs are created by the clients not the cores. Look at a v6 log and look at a v7 log: They really don't look the same and don't include the same info but use the same cores. He's not requesting a change in the behavior of the checkpoints but rather an addition to what gets written to the log at a high verbose level.

PS. I think verbose 3 is too low because there would potentially be lots of checkpoint entries. Something better for verbose 5.
Image
7im
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by 7im »

Checkpoint functionality is controlled by the fahcore. If the fahcore doesn't produce the data alancabler wants to be written to the log, updating the client/verbosity won't help, so not a client issue.

But since this change would also involve a minor update on the client just to write the new data to the log, it can live here instead of moving to General FAH, IMO. ;)
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
alancabler
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:45 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by alancabler »

Fahcore issue- right! Should have realized that, since the issue isn't client specific.
Thanks for clarification.
Facts are not truth. Facts are merely facets of the shining diamond of truth.
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Print Checkpoint Write to Log

Post by bruce »

Setting 'extra-core-args' to '-verbose' does add that information to the log on some cores. (I have not experimented with every core.)
Post Reply