Message boards : Number crunching : I think we should restrict work units
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · Next

AuthorMessage
Gaspode the UnDressed

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 506
Credit: 118,619
RAC: 0
Message 14199 - Posted: 27 Jun 2006, 16:37:04 UTC - in response to Message 14198.  


If Project Admin thought it was broken, they would fix it.


Except, of course, there is no project admin.


Gaspode the UnDressed
http://www.littlevale.co.uk
ID: 14199 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
m.mitch

Send message
Joined: 4 Sep 05
Posts: 112
Credit: 1,832,123
RAC: 0
Message 14201 - Posted: 27 Jun 2006, 16:51:52 UTC


I think they do protest too much!

When the BOINC Manager has no LHC WU's it builds up debt.
When the BOINC Manager has LHC WU's it reduces debt.
When the BOINC Manager has processed enough LHC WU's to zero debt, it processes other projects.
When the BOINC Manager is processing other projects, it takes its normal time.
When the LHC project finishes supplying WU's, the last ones will be processed in normal time.
Then the cycle begins again.

Where is the proof that I'm taking more than my fair share of work?
The failure to answer my question doesn't make the opposing argument right.
I think the problem lies elsewhere.

ID: 14201 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile The Gas Giant

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 309
Credit: 715,258
RAC: 0
Message 14202 - Posted: 27 Jun 2006, 23:49:12 UTC

We are going around in circles see this post and this post.
ID: 14202 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Philip Martin Kryder

Send message
Joined: 21 May 06
Posts: 73
Credit: 8,710
RAC: 0
Message 14203 - Posted: 28 Jun 2006, 0:27:21 UTC - in response to Message 14197.  




.... the fact that you're deliberately doing something which *slows* down the project,
....


The above statement is an unproven assertion.

No, it isn't.

{quote]
No one has presented any evidence that the PROJECT would advance any faster.
{/quote]
Yes, they have.


Some work units **may** finish sooner.

Yes, they will.


But, that doesn't imply that the project can or would use them faster.
Nor does it prove that more work would become available sooner.

The above statement is an unproven assertion.


As has been pointed out, the project owners understand deadlines and daily work limits.

And, the fact that they have chosen NOT to restrict either, implies that the work is chugging along just fine.


please, say it again, I didn't hear it the first 300 times.



Perhaps you didn't - but where is the proof that you assert exists, that shows that the PROJECT (as contrasted to indivual work units) would advance faster?

ID: 14203 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Toby

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 137
Credit: 964,481
RAC: 0
Message 14204 - Posted: 28 Jun 2006, 2:50:17 UTC

Fact 1: There have been multi-month gaps between batches of work units.
Fact 2: Even the slowest computer with the biggest cache isn't going to hold the project up for more than a couple of weeks.
Fact 1 + Fact 2 means that there is slack time on the project side.
Conclusion: Hoarding work units is not responsible for slowing down the project.
Most likely they are working on other things and not too concerned about the work units finishing ASAP.

wohoo! a proof! I feel like I'm in high school all over again.

Prove me wrong.

Note: I myself do not do this. I just leave my settings alone and let BOINC handle it. I usually run out of work within a day or two of the project running dry. I just think this argument is silly and people shouldn't be chastised for doing something that is allowed by the project settings.
- A member of The Knights Who Say NI!
My BOINC stats site
ID: 14204 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile John Hunt

Send message
Joined: 13 Jul 05
Posts: 133
Credit: 162,641
RAC: 0
Message 14206 - Posted: 28 Jun 2006, 4:21:59 UTC - in response to Message 13778.  

Here's where I came in on this thread on the 29th May.....

Hey, who's bothered?
There are plenty of projects on BOINC to keep your PC busy...........



We are all arguing round in circles now, so for the sake of sanity, could everyone PLEASE read THIS and then just drop the subject please!





ID: 14206 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Philip Martin Kryder

Send message
Joined: 21 May 06
Posts: 73
Credit: 8,710
RAC: 0
Message 14207 - Posted: 28 Jun 2006, 5:34:03 UTC - in response to Message 14206.  

Here's where I came in on this thread on the 29th May.....

Hey, who's bothered?
There are plenty of projects on BOINC to keep your PC busy...........



We are all arguing round in circles now, so for the sake of sanity, could everyone PLEASE read THIS and then just drop the subject please!






Must we?

I like to keep bumping it up to encourage everyone willing to listen to lower their cache time...
ID: 14207 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Viking69
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Jul 05
Posts: 56
Credit: 5,542,209
RAC: 323
Message 14208 - Posted: 28 Jun 2006, 6:15:23 UTC - in response to Message 14207.  

Here's where I came in on this thread on the 29th May.....

Hey, who's bothered?
There are plenty of projects on BOINC to keep your PC busy...........



We are all arguing round in circles now, so for the sake of sanity, could everyone PLEASE read THIS and then just drop the subject please!






Must we?


OK, lets talk about somthing serious like Starving children in New York city's upper east side or who is the best actor in the Monty Python series?

I like to keep bumping it up to encourage everyone willing to listen to lower their cache time...


Let's crunch for our future.
ID: 14208 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Gaspode the UnDressed

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 506
Credit: 118,619
RAC: 0
Message 14209 - Posted: 28 Jun 2006, 8:39:52 UTC - in response to Message 14206.  



We are all arguing round in circles now...



Just like the nuclei in LHC.

Yes - we have become CERN's biggest accelerator to date!

Keep it up!


Gaspode the UnDressed
http://www.littlevale.co.uk
ID: 14209 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Andreas

Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 05
Posts: 33
Credit: 2,305,732
RAC: 952
Message 14210 - Posted: 28 Jun 2006, 9:14:13 UTC

All is fine if you return your results before deadline.

If you all go to bed and get your beauty sleep, when you wake up in a couple of hours, you'll feel good again.

Now let this thread rest in peace!
ID: 14210 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
senatoralex85

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 60
Credit: 4,221
RAC: 0
Message 14230 - Posted: 3 Jul 2006, 19:41:26 UTC
Last modified: 3 Jul 2006, 19:46:07 UTC

I find it quite amusing that this arguement would be non-existent if the project consistently had work. I am glad to see that there are people around that are just as stubborn as I am.


At birthday parties as a kid, we used to argue over who got the bigger slice of cake. Kids are kids..... This arguement about caching workunits sounds errily similar. So what if someone gets a few more workunits. What is the consequence? I think HomeGnome stated this point in a different way.

I disagree with HomeGnome that we should "let this thread rest in peace" if there are still a number of regular individuals discussing it. A leader once said "True peace is not merely the absence of tension, IT IS THE PRESENCE OF JUSTICE.

To adress the issue of "caching," I do not feel it violates any moral or ethical grounds. All that users are doing, including myself, is getting the maximum amount of workunits that boinc will allow at any one time. I do not use any optimized clients, or cheat with my benchmarks. Once BOINC says "I won't finish in time" I start crunching all of the workunits I have gotten until that time. While I have workunits cached, I leave my computer on 24/7 so that they usually finish in 2 days, long before the BOINC client "thinks" I will finish them. I have NEVER missed a deadline on ANY of my projects I crunch for. Besides, this project is unique in the fact that they may terminate early if the particles are "out of bounds." BOINC does not recognize this and thinks that the workunit will take 3 hours when in reality it may only take 3 minutes. If there are more workunits, I will continue to do the same thing.

I am not going to be critical of any one person or arguement here. I will continue this practice until the BOINC client is changed, or the project shortens its deadlines to the point that one cannot cache x amount of workunits at a time.


ID: 14230 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Philip Martin Kryder

Send message
Joined: 21 May 06
Posts: 73
Credit: 8,710
RAC: 0
Message 14231 - Posted: 4 Jul 2006, 2:52:07 UTC - in response to Message 14230.  

I find it quite amusing that this arguement would be non-existent if the project consistently had work. I am glad to see that there are people around that are just as stubborn as I am.


At birthday parties as a kid, we used to argue over who got the bigger slice of cake. Kids are kids..... This arguement about caching workunits sounds errily similar. So what if someone gets a few more workunits. What is the consequence? I think HomeGnome stated this point in a different way.

I disagree with HomeGnome that we should "let this thread rest in peace" if there are still a number of regular individuals discussing it. A leader once said "True peace is not merely the absence of tension, IT IS THE PRESENCE OF JUSTICE.

To adress the issue of "caching," I do not feel it violates any moral or ethical grounds. All that users are doing, including myself, is getting the maximum amount of workunits that boinc will allow at any one time. I do not use any optimized clients, or cheat with my benchmarks. Once BOINC says "I won't finish in time" I start crunching all of the workunits I have gotten until that time. While I have workunits cached, I leave my computer on 24/7 so that they usually finish in 2 days, long before the BOINC client "thinks" I will finish them. I have NEVER missed a deadline on ANY of my projects I crunch for. Besides, this project is unique in the fact that they may terminate early if the particles are "out of bounds." BOINC does not recognize this and thinks that the workunit will take 3 hours when in reality it may only take 3 minutes. If there are more workunits, I will continue to do the same thing.

I am not going to be critical of any one person or arguement here. I will continue this practice until the BOINC client is changed, or the project shortens its deadlines to the point that one cannot cache x amount of workunits at a time.



someone using logic!
Isn't it more fun just to argue our emotional opinions?
;-)


ID: 14231 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile anarchic teapot

Send message
Joined: 15 Feb 06
Posts: 67
Credit: 455,027
RAC: 16
Message 14235 - Posted: 4 Jul 2006, 9:10:41 UTC - in response to Message 14231.  

Caveat: this post results from pure boredom.

A leader once said "True peace is not merely the absence of tension, IT IS THE PRESENCE OF JUSTICE.

How do you detect the presence of justice? AFAIK, it's one of many things composed entirely of conceptrons, the most elusive particle in the Universe and generally agreed to be harder to nail down than a Higg's boson :P

I have NEVER missed a deadline on ANY of my projects I crunch for.

I have lost the odd WU. Not many, but computers go wobbly, hard disks go phut, people go on holiday and forget to flush the cache. There's no shame in it, and all the projects are set up to cope with the eventuality. However, you'd surely admit that the more WUs you've stashed away, the more is lost if (or rather, when) that happens.

Big caches are for slow computers on dial-up. Nobody else needs them. Forget logic, forget emotion, try a bit of common sense. Hey, I think I've worked out what quarks should really have been called: logic, emotion, commonsense, left, right, wishy-washy-centrists :D
(The French call the Top and Bottom quarks "Truth" and "Beauty", according to Wikipedia. Now there's class. Still no "Justice", though).
sQuonk
Plague of Mice
Intel Core i3-9100 CPU@3.60 GHz, but it's doing its bit just the same.
ID: 14235 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Philip Martin Kryder

Send message
Joined: 21 May 06
Posts: 73
Credit: 8,710
RAC: 0
Message 14242 - Posted: 6 Jul 2006, 1:30:38 UTC - in response to Message 14235.  

....
Big caches are for slow computers on dial-up. Nobody else needs them....


I understand that you may be bored ....


ID: 14242 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile [B^S] Dora

Send message
Joined: 27 Apr 06
Posts: 26
Credit: 13,559
RAC: 0
Message 14243 - Posted: 6 Jul 2006, 12:44:27 UTC

Well, I am a slow computer on dial-up and I got NO wus this time. OR the last time.

Fair?

I think not!!

Dora
ID: 14243 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile [B^S] Dora

Send message
Joined: 27 Apr 06
Posts: 26
Credit: 13,559
RAC: 0
Message 14244 - Posted: 6 Jul 2006, 13:26:55 UTC

PS.

Even though I have set my cache to max, because my capacity is so limited, it would only download 5 or 6 which would finish in PLENTY of time since I am always on....

Keep on truckin' all you farmers.... ;-)

Dora
ID: 14244 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Dronak
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 May 06
Posts: 20
Credit: 297,111
RAC: 0
Message 14247 - Posted: 7 Jul 2006, 0:46:57 UTC
Last modified: 7 Jul 2006, 0:51:42 UTC

Wow, there's something like 13400+ work units in progress and I got *three* that took a grand total of *68 seconds* to process. Amazing. And it'll probably be another 2-4 weeks before I see any more LHC work.

What's worse is that I run three other projects and I'm about 3 hours from running completely dry. SETI's currently down for maintenance, Einstein isn't sending me work for some reason (maybe debt related), and SZTAKI is in the middle of testing new work units of which I can't get any (apparently they're designed for some fairly uncommon platform). I never thought that I'd completely run out of work with 4 projects. Too bad LHC's batch is all gone. That *could* have held me over for a little while, at least until SETI came back up.
ID: 14247 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
[B^S] MattDavis

Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 04
Posts: 9
Credit: 36,319
RAC: 0
Message 14249 - Posted: 7 Jul 2006, 3:56:09 UTC

KABLAM!

I had no idea my random idea to chew on would create THE BIGGEST FIGHT EVER!!!
-----
ID: 14249 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Webmaster Yoda

Send message
Joined: 13 Jul 05
Posts: 12
Credit: 8,463
RAC: 0
Message 14250 - Posted: 7 Jul 2006, 4:49:21 UTC - in response to Message 14249.  
Last modified: 7 Jul 2006, 4:49:58 UTC

I had no idea my random idea to chew on would create THE BIGGEST FIGHT EVER!!!


Who's fighting? I've got no LHC work units, but there's plenty of work in other projects. Big deal.

And if they all run dry, my computers get a rest.
ID: 14250 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile paul and kirsty yates
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 05
Posts: 9
Credit: 17,459
RAC: 0
Message 14251 - Posted: 7 Jul 2006, 5:59:57 UTC

homegnome said
"If you all go to bed and get your beauty sleep, when you wake up in a couple of hours, you'll feel good again."


checked the progect last night NO NEW WORK 10 W/U IN PROGRESS (roughly)

checked the project this morning NO NEW WORK 10308 W/U IN PROGRESS ?????

WOW THAT WILL TEACH ME TO GO TO SLEEP

NEXT TIME IT GETS LOW I WILL SET BOINC TO ALLOW NEW TASKS EARLIER even if it takes a week or so for new work to arrive and adds extra a little work to the server if that is the only way i can get work so be it

this project never used to be like this i used to be able to run 16 projects and get work on a steady basis i.e at least one w/u a day for about a week or so until it ran dry
oh well the good old days are now gone

unleash the (w/u)HOGS of war

there is always next month or two or three
just have to keep checking back

:-(
as yoda says there are plenty of other projects and i still have work to crunch but i have been checking back here daily to check for new work
just think i wasted my time the last couple of weeks

rant over NOW i feel better lol
ID: 14251 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : I think we should restrict work units


©2022 CERN