Message boards : Number crunching : the Problem with Boinc
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2

AuthorMessage
Profile Blank Reg

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 04
Posts: 49
Credit: 25,253
RAC: 0
Message 9602 - Posted: 23 Aug 2005, 21:35:18 UTC
Last modified: 23 Aug 2005, 21:37:04 UTC

I for one see no problem other that you wanting every thing your way. Boinc is a multi-project platform, you only want to run one, then live with in the rules, you want a ton of WUs on hand, then run Boinc 24/7 by attaching to other projects, you do not like short deadlines then do not download any WUs before you go on vacation.
I have the fire retardant foam at the ready.. Ohh and yes I have fast machine always on connection, connected to multipule projects and I am happy happy happy with Boinc........ Running 4.72 CC smooth.......
BOINC Wiki
ID: 9602 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John McLeod VII
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 165
Credit: 146,925
RAC: 0
Message 9605 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 1:37:56 UTC

If you want to run LHC except when it is out of work, Pick another project, and set the resource shares to 10000 and 0.000001. BOINC will crunch a cache full of work for the other project, and then mostly crunch LHC unless LHC is out of work. The above settings would crunch one hour of the other project for every 10000000000 hours of work for LHC while LHC has work to hand out.


BOINC WIKI
ID: 9605 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Contact
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 04
Posts: 45
Credit: 444,800
RAC: 15
Message 9608 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 3:50:27 UTC - in response to Message 9605.  

<blockquote>Pick another project, and set the resource shares to 10000 and 0.000001.</blockquote>
Once again John McLeod VII comes up with the solution.
I’ve used similar settings to concentrate on different projects from time to time. It works as advertised.
Even if you don’t really like another project, donate a small share knowing that it will help you achieve full steam for your main project.
ID: 9608 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile DrKRHILL

Send message
Joined: 13 Jul 05
Posts: 2
Credit: 38,651
RAC: 0
Message 9611 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 5:46:08 UTC

Contact

Not really.

Why should anyone have to run multiple projects(that they don't like or want to contribute to) 24/7 just to retain their status for the one they like (and LHC makes more scientific sense than most)?

Boinc is so full of flaws that I sometimes suspect that it was actually written by Microsoft.
ID: 9611 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile adrianxw

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 04
Posts: 179
Credit: 673,019
RAC: 0
Message 9616 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 8:56:50 UTC

>>> Boinc is so full of flaws

I don't think that is necessarily true, but I do agree with you that running another project with a low resource share is the obvious, but incorrect solution to the OP's problem. It does not address the specific situation at all.

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

ID: 9616 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Betting Slip

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 04
Posts: 41
Credit: 27,497
RAC: 0
Message 9617 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 9:08:23 UTC - in response to Message 9616.  
Last modified: 24 Aug 2005, 9:50:33 UTC

(and LHC makes more scientific sense than most)


WHY?


and why not run another project? There is NO WORK for LHC at the moment... ACCEPT!

EDIT: BOINC 4.45 is great and runs great on the 2 comps we have running it, it is no more full of flaws than XP, IE6, Norton Internet Security and many more I know I run them all.
BOINC is also a massive step forward for DC and will continue to evolve in the future and take its place in history.
ID: 9617 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Scott Brown

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 16
Credit: 15,568
RAC: 0
Message 9622 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 12:35:28 UTC - in response to Message 9605.  

<blockquote>If you want to run LHC except when it is out of work, Pick another project, and set the resource shares to 10000 and 0.000001. BOINC will crunch a cache full of work for the other project, and then mostly crunch LHC unless LHC is out of work. The above settings would crunch one hour of the other project for every 10000000000 hours of work for LHC while LHC has work to hand out.</blockquote>

Normally, I would agree with JMVII, but in this case the original poster said very clearly that CPDN was not an option due to disk space limitations and Einstein would be problematic due to its shorter deadlines (though these have recently changed). With SETI down at the moment, that would leave only predictor...

This actually brings up an interesting point...what if our original poster particpated in more than one project. For example, let's say that a user is signed up with 3 projects (LHC, SETI, & Protein Predictor). If all three are not up (LHC out of work, SETI and PP down, etc.--a situation that has happened more than once since the start of BOINC) then the 24/7 status of the client machines is penalized (again, working under the assumption that other projects are not options--e.g., less than 800mhz machine can't do CPDN, etc.)

I am not sure there is a 'fix' for this given the system design, but it is an interesting quirk in BOINC...
ID: 9622 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Paul D. Buck

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 545
Credit: 148,912
RAC: 0
Message 9626 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 14:33:51 UTC - in response to Message 9611.  

<blockquote>Why should anyone have to run multiple projects(that they don't like or want to contribute to) 24/7 just to retain their status for the one they like (and LHC makes more scientific sense than most)?</blockquote>
They are not required to do so. But, on the other hand if they only want to participate in one project and that project does not always have work, then they have to live with the occassions where there is no work. LHC@Home, at this time is one where there is only occasional work. Perhaps in the future there will be more work on a more steady basis. But that is not the case right now.

<blockquote>Boinc is so full of flaws that I sometimes suspect that it was actually written by Microsoft.</blockquote>
It is interesting that a problem that is the consequence of how the participant wants to run BOINC is all of a sudden a failure of BOINC. We can only process work that is issued. If there is no work, there is no work. It has nothing to do with BOINC at all...
ID: 9626 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile adrianxw

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 04
Posts: 179
Credit: 673,019
RAC: 0
Message 9628 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 15:56:30 UTC
Last modified: 24 Aug 2005, 16:00:10 UTC

>>> They are not required to do so.

You are right Paul, but once again, this does not address the point raised by the OP. He HAS accepted that there is no work, but seems required to keep his PC powered up for no reason in order to prevent his machine being penalised by BOINC.

Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

ID: 9628 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Ageless
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Sep 04
Posts: 143
Credit: 27,645
RAC: 0
Message 9631 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 18:14:08 UTC
Last modified: 24 Aug 2005, 18:20:15 UTC

The OP has another problem with one of his PCs. Host 17659 claimed 0.00 for his last couple of units, but got full credits for it anyway.

Now, as for the actual problem, Boinc/computer not being on that much, I wonder if it also has to do with what looks like a fixed turnaround time for everyone. Mine is 13.89 days, the OPs is, I see adrianxw's is, so are a lot of computers Paul Buck has.

But has any one here asked what his percentages are that LHC is saying his computer is on, connected to etc.? Do know, that we cannot see those amounts, only for ourselves can we see it. So we have to rely on the OPs information if he's correct in his assessment or not. It could be something completely different that took his 'cache' down. Yet without numbers we don't know. We don't even know which Boinc version he is running.

So to then say Boinc is so full of flaws, without being informed completely, is just (in my opinion) flame baiting.

<blockquote>Normally, I would agree with JMVII, but in this case the original poster said very clearly that CPDN was not an option due to disk space limitations and Einstein would be problematic due to its shorter deadlines (though these have recently changed). With SETI down at the moment, that would leave only predictor...</blockquote>
If you can navigate the Hungarian site, there's also SZTAKI Desktop Grid, which takes up very little room and even very little memory (32MB).
Jord

BOINC FAQ Service
ID: 9631 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile JigPu

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 26
Credit: 600,998
RAC: 0
Message 9632 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 19:04:39 UTC
Last modified: 24 Aug 2005, 19:05:37 UTC

Should the OP be required to run more than one project for BOINC to work as he wishes -- No.
Should the OP be required to run his PC 24/7, regardless of wether there isn't any work -- No.
Should the OP be penalized (in amount of work downloaded) for running BOINC only while work is available? -- No.


Where the OP is getting screwed is the last statement. While BOINC dosen't penalize you for running it only while work is available, it does "penalize" you for running it intermittantly (and rightly so!). It's a safeguard to prevent machines that are only on for a portion of the day from downloading more work than they can possibly handle. If you take my laptop for instance, it's on for only a few hours a day (let's say 3). In order to honor the "connect every" setting (of 2 days) and to make sure that too much work isn't downloaded (going past deadlines == bad), BOINC actually downloads only 6 hours of work. If it actually downloaded 2 days (48 hours) of work, lots of my WUs would likely miss their deadlines.

BOINC dosen't care WHY a machine is off, it just notices it is and so cuts back the amount of work it should download accordingly. I wholeheartedly agree that it needs modification so that it will work in special cases like the OP is in (heck, it isn't quite perfect yet even for the users it was designed to safeguard against).


PS -- Adding a second project won't really help out. I'm pretty sure that the preference is project independant, so if you're only downloading 6 hours of LHC right now, you'll end up downloading 5 hours of LHC and 1 hour of something else. Also, I don't know for sure if leaving the machine on 24/7 will re-increase the number (testing with my laptop shows that it dosen't come back up after going down :() Berkeley definatly needs to do some tweaking with this...

Puffy
ID: 9632 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile DrKRHILL

Send message
Joined: 13 Jul 05
Posts: 2
Credit: 38,651
RAC: 0
Message 9634 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 20:51:41 UTC - in response to Message 9631.  

<blockquote>The OP has another problem with one of his PCs. Host 17659 claimed 0.00 for his last couple of units, but got full credits for it anyway.

Now, as for the actual problem, Boinc/computer not being on that much, I wonder if it also has to do with what looks like a fixed turnaround time for everyone. Mine is 13.89 days, the OPs is, I see adrianxw's is, so are a lot of computers Paul Buck has.

But has any one here asked what his percentages are that LHC is saying his computer is on, connected to etc.? Do know, that we cannot see those amounts, only for ourselves can we see it. So we have to rely on the OPs information if he's correct in his assessment or not. It could be something completely different that took his 'cache' down. Yet without numbers we don't know. We don't even know which Boinc version he is running.

So to then say Boinc is so full of flaws, without being informed completely, is just (in my opinion) flame baiting.

"Flaming" BOINK is my hobby{:-)
Any user astute enough to participate in other (non-boinc) DC projects will know why. And 4.45 has serious problems that "being informed" will not solve.
Comparing boinc to XP,IE, and other disasters proves my point.

<blockquote>Normally, I would agree with JMVII, but in this case the original poster said very clearly that CPDN was not an option due to disk space limitations and Einstein would be problematic due to its shorter deadlines (though these have recently changed). With SETI down at the moment, that would leave only predictor...</blockquote>
If you can navigate the Hungarian site, there's also SZTAKI Desktop Grid, which takes up very little room and even very little memory (32MB).</blockquote>
ID: 9634 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Contact
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 04
Posts: 45
Credit: 444,800
RAC: 15
Message 9635 - Posted: 24 Aug 2005, 21:21:46 UTC - in response to Message 9632.  
Last modified: 24 Aug 2005, 21:26:18 UTC

<blockquote>Adding a second project won't really help out. I'm pretty sure that the preference is project independant, so if you're only downloading 6 hours of LHC right now, you'll end up downloading 5 hours of LHC and 1 hour of something else.</blockquote>
If that second project has a very low share (0.000001) and your main project a very high share (10000) BOINC will be forever hesitant to download work from second project. To be accurate jm7 says below it will seek work at a ratio of 1 to 10000000000 hours. Looks like forever to me.
You may be handed work when you 1st attach but i bet you’d never download work from a back-up project unless LHC is out of work.
So you don’t really have to run another project, just attach.
But when LHC is out of work it may be interesting to see what your chosen back-up project is all about.
ID: 9635 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John McLeod VII
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 165
Credit: 146,925
RAC: 0
Message 9637 - Posted: 25 Aug 2005, 2:00:50 UTC

When you first attach to a project like that, it will request work (not much, but enough) and you will crunch that (mostly in No Work Fetch and Earliest Deadline First). You may get another few as the cuttoff is - queue size. After that I would not expect to see that project again unless the primary was out of work.


BOINC WIKI
ID: 9637 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Chrulle

Send message
Joined: 27 Jul 04
Posts: 182
Credit: 1,880
RAC: 0
Message 9649 - Posted: 25 Aug 2005, 12:59:49 UTC - in response to Message 9632.  

<blockquote>
Should the OP be penalized (in amount of work downloaded) for running BOINC only while work is available? -- No.

Puffy</blockquote>

The OP will only be penalized the next time he downloads. Then the OP runs only LHC 24/7 and the work request should be back to normal.


Chrulle
Research Assistant &amp; Ex-LHC@home developer
Niels Bohr Institute
ID: 9649 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John McLeod VII
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 165
Credit: 146,925
RAC: 0
Message 9662 - Posted: 26 Aug 2005, 0:32:36 UTC - in response to Message 9649.  

<blockquote><blockquote>
Should the OP be penalized (in amount of work downloaded) for running BOINC only while work is available? -- No.

Puffy</blockquote>

The OP will only be penalized the next time he downloads. Then the OP runs only LHC 24/7 and the work request should be back to normal.

</blockquote>
It takes a little longer than just the once, but it does recover.


BOINC WIKI
ID: 9662 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Number crunching : the Problem with Boinc


©2021 CERN