Message boards :
Number crunching :
Daily Quota?
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 The OxSend message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 16 Credit: 65,275 RAC: 0 |
> Me too ... > > The willingness of some of the development groups to accept external input is, > um, unenthusiastic, to say the least. Which is a shame ... one of the whole > points to being "open" source is to get critical input from the outside. I agree with you. I'm afraid that the original concept of multi-project development has gotten lost in the specifics. Without trying to slap down Berkeley, I think that BOINC was designed with SETI in mind and perhaps not enough thought was given to the flexibility issues we're dealing with, like quotas and heterogeneous workunit sizes. It's my hope that some of the significant variations in BOINC deployment and the subsequent growing pains for LHC, Einstein, and Predictor will finally open their eyes. If these types of issues aren't worked out, BOINC isn't going to expand to include more projects... You know the sad part is that I've become a staunch BOINC supporter to the exclusion of other projects/platforms available because I love the concept and the projects, but I worry that a narrow vision will diminish its future. Regards, Clint  www.clintcollins.org - spouting off at the speed of site |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 545 Credit: 148,912 RAC: 0 |
> I agree with you. I'm afraid that the original concept of multi-project > development has gotten lost in the specifics. Without trying to slap down > Berkeley, I think that BOINC was designed with SETI in mind and perhaps not > enough thought was given to the flexibility issues we're dealing with, like > quotas and heterogeneous workunit sizes. It's my hope that some of the > significant variations in BOINC deployment and the subsequent growing pains > for LHC, Einstein, and Predictor will finally open their eyes. If these types > of issues aren't worked out, BOINC isn't going to expand to include more > projects... Watching the developers mailing list give some insight to this, but what I am inferring from watching there does not encourage me. > You know the sad part is that I've become a staunch BOINC supporter to the > exclusion of other projects/platforms available because I love the concept and > the projects, but I worry that a narrow vision will diminish its future. Well, there are at least 10-12 projects that have been entertaining thoughts of BOINC, with 3 new ones going into a "public" alpha/beta state, so it is going to be expanding ... Anyway, time will tell ... |
|
Send message Joined: 17 Sep 04 Posts: 190 Credit: 649,637 RAC: 0 |
P200 ==== first was thinking, it was a joke. Pentium 200 and multi Project attachements! Wondering what would be the slowest installation available, still doing at least one project. from *my* slower (p500/450 AMD) I remember the time for seti classic, it would take about 44-48 Hours to complete a WU (one). After reading above lines, I decided to try it out. There is sill a compac laptop here, an advaced one, who was the seti queue of earlier days (*sniff*). Yesterday evening I started on this laptop the boinc (4.16-gui) and now it's crunching a seti WU. after now 12 hours, it has progressed 26.39% and the estimated says 33 Hours left. Perhaps it will be able to run an addidional project.. the whetstones counts 97, the dhrystones 138 It's a pentium 2 120 MHz with 48 MB of ram. Windows2000. ( not sure if the demand of free continuous memory can be provided with 48 MB ram but when I can get a LHC WU, I will try with LHC too) It will be the new crunching rocket. 200 MHz, thats the speed of *my* IPAC 3850 pocket PC, 3 year old now... unfortunately there isn't a compiled client available. (but bad IO time) In the cupboard there are several 486 dx2 and dx4, 200, 233 450 Chips of earlier day, but the are no longer active and dissassemled. They are "ready" for the museum. If we all would use only CPUs below 500 MHz, then I guess, we would still crunching down the hill of last year WUs happy eastern! |
|
Alex Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 378 Credit: 10,765 RAC: 0 |
> If we all would use only CPUs below 500 MHz, then I guess, we would still > crunching down the hill of last year WUs > > happy eastern! > > Well, someone has to test out the low end to rule out processors. Here's a pc I got from Value Village for 20 bucks. http://lhcathome.cern.ch/show_host_detail.php?hostid=2210 Measured floating point speed 222.52 million ops/sec Measured integer speed 269.96 million ops/sec It was never able to process a work unit in time for the deadline. I did use it for a day and had it work on a work unit while running knoppix and boinc running under wine. I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here. |
FalconFly Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 121 Credit: 592,214 RAC: 0 |
> But basically I like to see your 38 GHz number, because the number itself is > impressive, not much of us will have this (theoretical) power. *g* Yes, the number may be impressive, but everything has it's second side of the Medal. My electricity bill (~4000 Euro) and yearly power consumtion (~24 MWh) are just as *cough* "impressive", and I don't know yet how to make this Network survive the upcoming Summer  (they generate a large amount of heat, which makes for warm Winters, but insane Summers) But I'm working these Problems, hope to get them solved before the end of the year. Scientific Network : 45000 MHz - 77824 MB - 1970 GB 
|
 Send message Joined: 28 Sep 04 Posts: 27 Credit: 17,091 RAC: 0 |
> Well, there are at least 10-12 projects that have been entertaining thoughts > of BOINC, with 3 new ones going into a "public" alpha/beta state, so it is > going to be expanding ... > > Anyway, time will tell ... Please, tell me more about those 3 alpha/beta projects, as I allways love to try new things (and later rant about them :D). 
|
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 545 Credit: 148,912 RAC: 0 |
> Please, tell me more about those 3 alpha/beta projects, as I allways love to > try new things (and later rant about them :D). "The Lattice Project" and BURP are now in early Alpha and I have just started to add information about them to the "books", but, I am not sure if it is appropriate for me to comment further ... The other project I was thinking of was the "PlanetQuest.org" project which is in even earlier stages ... FightAids@Home and Folding@Home have been rumored to have a BOINC interest also, but I know nothing of what they are really doing. In a certain sense I think that it is almost inevitable that there is a migration to BOINC, or BOINC-Like frameworks will occur. Any DC project that does not offer this is very likely to lose out on a HUGE audience ... |
|
Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 352 Credit: 1,748,908 RAC: 64  
|
Did somebody BURP ... hehe |
|
Send message Joined: 28 Sep 04 Posts: 27 Credit: 17,091 RAC: 0 |
> "The Lattice Project" and BURP are now in early Alpha and I have just started > to add information about them to the "books", but, I am not sure if it is > appropriate for me to comment further ... > > The other project I was thinking of was the "PlanetQuest.org" project which is > in even earlier stages ... > > FightAids@Home and Folding@Home have been rumored to have a BOINC interest > also, but I know nothing of what they are really doing. In a certain sense I > think that it is almost inevitable that there is a migration to BOINC, or > BOINC-Like frameworks will occur. Any DC project that does not offer this is > very likely to lose out on a HUGE audience ... Thanks for that info... I joined BURP a while ago, still waiting for first WUs. Have also herd/read about the other projects you mentioned, therefore I was hoping you would list a project I haven't heard of. Happy crunching
|
|
ahleong Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 1 Credit: 7,649 RAC: 0 |
> Did somebody BURP ... hehe > > i did <img src="http://www.boincstats.com/stats/banner.php?cpid=50d4d2e798b49546158c8ef1bbdb43b8"><img src="http://boinc.mundayweb.com/one/stats.php?userID=50&trans=off"> |
littleBouncer Send message Joined: 23 Oct 04 Posts: 358 Credit: 1,439,205 RAC: 0 |
And there is CPDN in Alpha-State too! (WU's are twice as long and have 5 turns!) (not the 'public-one') seems the '0 CPU-time-credit-problem' is solved. reported over 30 success WU's(from the sending on march 21.), and there are 20 to do(all 'boince'!);-))) greetz from Switzerland littleBouncer   
|
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 545 Credit: 148,912 RAC: 0 |
> And there is CPDN in Alpha-State too! > (WU's are twice as long and have 5 turns!) > (not the 'public-one') Yes, well, it is not a new project. It is an improved model, or a companion model. > seems the '0 CPU-time-credit-problem' is solved. reported over 30 success > WU's(from the sending on march 21.), and there are 20 to do(all > 'boince'!);-))) I think I was having more troubles with the other model ... |
|
Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 352 Credit: 1,748,908 RAC: 64
|
I just turned in 2 v64boince WU's that took 11 hr's each to run and they showed the correct time, the only problem is that neither one of them added to my Total Credit or my Pending Credit. My Total & Pending Credit stayed the same after turning the Results in & I can't find any Result entry in that Computers results for the 2 WU's either ... Perplexing to say the least to cunch them that long for 0 Credits ... |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 545 Credit: 148,912 RAC: 0 |
> I just turned in 2 v64boince WU's that took 11 hr's each to run and they > showed the correct time, the only problem is that neither one of them added to > my Total Credit or my Pending Credit. > > My Total & Pending Credit stayed the same after turning the Results in > & I can't find any Result entry in that Computers results for the 2 WU's > either ... Perplexing to say the least to cunch them that long for 0 Credits > ... Were you doing LHC@Home here? Or in a closed beta? I have not seen an LHC@Home WU in quite some time ... |
|
Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 352 Credit: 1,748,908 RAC: 64
|
Were you doing LHC@Home here? Or in a closed beta? I have not seen an LHC@Home WU in quite some time ... ========== They were WU's from here I still had but hadn't crunched until today, I still have 3 or 4 on another computer also, will have to see what happens to them when I turn them in. The WU's were not past their Deadlines so I don't know what happened to them when I turned them in ... ??? I actually turned in about 15 other v64boince WU's over the last 3 or 4 days from that computer & every one of them recieved credit up untill the last 2 on it ... Heres the stdoutdae.txt Log Entry for the 2 WU's showing they Uploaded Ok ... And showing they got sent ok I guess ... ??? 2005-03-26 18:32:35 [LHC@home] Computation for result v64boince6ib1-24s6_8630_1_sixvf_20927 finished 2005-03-26 18:32:36 [LHC@home] Started upload of v64boince6ib1-24s6_8630_1_sixvf_20927_4_0 2005-03-26 18:32:39 [LHC@home] Finished upload of v64boince6ib1-24s6_8630_1_sixvf_20927_4_0 2005-03-26 18:32:39 [LHC@home] Throughput 19663 bytes/sec 2005-03-26 18:34:49 [---] May run out of work in 1.00 days; requesting more 2005-03-26 18:34:49 [LHC@home] Requesting 169035.39 seconds of work 2005-03-26 18:34:49 [LHC@home] Sending request to scheduler: http://lhcathome-sched1.cern.ch/scheduler/cgi 2005-03-26 18:34:50 [LHC@home] Scheduler RPC to http://lhcathome-sched1.cern.ch/scheduler/cgi succeeded 2005-03-26 18:34:50 [LHC@home] No work from project 2005-03-26 18:34:50 [LHC@home] Deferring communication with project for 40 minutes and 19 seconds 2005-03-26 18:46:26 [LHC@home] Computation for result v64boince6ib1-25s4_6645_1_sixvf_20963 finished 2005-03-26 18:46:27 [LHC@home] Started upload of v64boince6ib1-25s4_6645_1_sixvf_20963_2_0 2005-03-26 18:46:30 [LHC@home] Finished upload of v64boince6ib1-25s4_6645_1_sixvf_20963_2_0 2005-03-26 18:46:30 [LHC@home] Throughput 19642 bytes/sec 2005-03-26 18:46:51 [---] Insufficient work; requesting more 2005-03-26 18:46:51 [LHC@home] Requesting 172800.00 seconds of work 2005-03-26 18:46:51 [LHC@home] Sending request to scheduler: http://lhcathome-sched1.cern.ch/scheduler/cgi 2005-03-26 18:46:52 [LHC@home] Scheduler RPC to http://lhcathome-sched1.cern.ch/scheduler/cgi succeeded 2005-03-26 18:46:52 [LHC@home] No work from project 2005-03-26 18:46:52 [LHC@home] Deferring communication with project for 2 hours, 54 minutes, and 44 seconds 2005-03-26 18:47:02 [---] Exit requested by user |
|
littleBouncer Send message Joined: 23 Oct 04 Posts: 358 Credit: 1,439,205 RAC: 0 |
I do not have a such problem. Every WU I turn in last night(26./27.) was granted. I noticed some 'critical'-WU, which haven't take the hole prediction-time, because some 'stupid' paricles have left the colider. greetz littleBouncer (an example: 21 Mar 2005 17:09:36 UTC |27 Mar 2005 1:15:53 UTC |Over |Success |Done |1,332.92 |3.14 |4.54 Oh,sorry the WU ID:81757) ;-)) |
|
Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 71 Credit: 8,657 RAC: 0 |
> Were you doing LHC@Home here? Or in a closed beta? I have not seen an > LHC@Home WU in quite some time ... I received 7 on the 21st. |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 545 Credit: 148,912 RAC: 0 |
> I received 7 on the 21st. :( They don't love me any more! Oh, well ... |
|
Send message Joined: 17 Sep 04 Posts: 190 Credit: 649,637 RAC: 0 |
> They don't love me any more! > > Oh, well ... > What have you done that "they" don't love you anymore?? "They" are giving you a tea-schirt, so I'm not sure that "they" don't love you. Perhaps "they" simple hate Macs.. taking a look to one of the best number stats side you see that there was work delivered to much users: old CPUs: ========= the Pentium p120 MHz with 48 MHz of ram finished the SETI WU after 81 Hours (It could do 2 per week..) Now it's on the road with a Predictor WU might the destiny is friendly, so ot will get an LHC WU to try. So the p120 needs about 2 month to do the same work as 1 p3.xx GHz Intel is doing in 24 Hours. |
©2025 CERN