LHC@home

As I've said on the main page, we've been out and about with our other work but we are back now and expecting some news soon.

In other going ons we have added 64bit windows to the client list so people looking for 64Bit versions will get Work Units (although it will just be a copy of the 32Bit application renamed for 64Bit).

And avatar upload kinda works, will get Alex to fix it properly tomorrow.

Thanks for hanging around and again sorry for the silence.

Thanks for the update mate.

Most of us are patiently awaiting the return of some WU's, don't mind the others ;)

---

The 64Bit windows platform is nice to have, but why didnt you add the 64Bit linux platform at the same time?

---

when life gives you lemons, make lemonade!

why didnt you add the 64Bit linux platform at the same time?

That may be more difficult to do. Various Linux distros do not come with the 32-bit libraries installed by default so the OS will not be able to run the 32-bit client and will throw errors.

---

why didnt you add the 64Bit linux platform at the same time?

That may be more difficult to do. Various Linux distros do not come with the 32-bit libraries installed by default so the OS will not be able to run the 32-bit client and will throw errors.

But there are also some 64bit Linux Distros that come with the 32-bit Libraries installed...
Also most of the 64bit Linux users do know that they need the 32bit Libraries, because the BOINC Manager doesn´t work without them...

So please Alex and Neasan could you add the 64bit Linux platform too?
I have one more Core2Quad and in a few days a 8 core Xeon System with 64bit Linux which can´t get work from LHC@home!

---

Why not just run BOINC x86? I used to ;)

---

Why not just run BOINC x86? I used to ;)

Because some projects have a huge speed up because of the 64 bit Linux... ;)

---

Because some projects have a huge speed up because of the 64 bit Linux... ;)

True :P

---

Server Status

Up, 11,991 workunits to crunch
6408 workunits in progress
12 concurrent connections


Oy vey........same old thing......got one and already sent it back and now it is tellin' me no again.

I guess it will have to be happy running Einsteins as usual.

(why do I keep buying these dual processors?)

---

Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life

Hi, As I just explained in another thread we have throttled the settings back fo a few days to coincide with a press release so that the jobs get shareed around a bit... especially if we get some new users.

Normal service to return next week.

Alex

@[B^S] Stefan Ledwina:

Just drop this app_info.xml file into the boinc/projects/lhcathome.cern.ch/ folder:

<app_info>
    <app>
        <name>sixtrack</name>
    </app>
    <file_info>
        <name>sixtrack_4.66_i686-pc-linux-gnu</name>
        <executable/>
    </file_info>
    <app_version>
        <app_name>sixtrack</app_name>
        <version_num>466</version_num>
        <file_ref>
            <file_name>sixtrack_4.66_i686-pc-linux-gnu</file_name>
            <main_program/>
        </file_ref>
    </app_version>
</app_info>

And then download the 32 bit executable which is at
http://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/download/sixtrack_4.66_i686-pc-linux-gnu

Restart boinc and crunch away! my amd64 machine

EDIT: ya'll need to update your css or something... the code bbcode tag looks horrible!

---

- A member of The Knights Who Say NI!
My BOINC stats site

Nice! Thanks for your help Toby! :)

[edit]
Because I forgot to chmod 755 the sixtrack app, I lost one result per host, but it should work now...

Thanks again Toby!

---

Glad to hear of more users coming on board now, and also more projects sometime in the future. As we all know, an issue with LHC has been that when WU's do come out, they get snapped up quick by only a few. I would hope that with more users, there is better sharing of WU's.
I did notice mention of a temporary measure to spread these current WU's around - I would suggest some form of this stay in place permanently. Otherwise all these keen new UK users will sign up, get a couple of WU's in this batch, and then wait (and complain) for months, hoping to catch more WU's.

And yes - I did get a WU - woohoo.

A-Ha I've worked it out fair distribution of work actually means "as long as I get a few thousand jobs it's fair distribution" ;-)

As Alex has said it is just a temporary measure to keep some jobs up for new users, also the quota is per CPU not user or IP so people with more than one machine should get 2 on each. Sorry some of the jobs were short ones but AFAIK they are not all quick ones.

We will look into trying to sort it so maybe it's a one job in, one job out situation i.e. as long as you are grinding through the jobs you can get another as soon as you send back the last.

Quota will be increased but I don't think it will ever go back up to the 500 per day it used to be until we have more jobs than sense ... oh wait passed that point ages ago ... until we have enough jobs to justify that kind of number as a quota.

... the quota is per CPU not user or IP so people with more than one machine should get 2 on each.

Thank you for clarifying how the quota restrictions are applied.

However, I am still puzzled by server message traffic when requesting work. I have two machines attached to this project. One received 2 WUs without difficulty. The second is repeatedly rebuffed with the explanation:

• Message from server: Not sending work - last request too recent: xxxx sec
  
• Deferring communication for x hr x min xx sec
  

... the quota is per CPU not user or IP so people with more than one machine should get 2 on each.

Thank you for clarifying how the quota restrictions are applied.

However, I am still puzzled by server message traffic when requesting work. I have two machines attached to this project. One received 2 WUs without difficulty. The second is repeatedly rebuffed with the explanation:

• Message from server: Not sending work - last request too recent: xxxx sec
  
• Deferring communication for x hr x min xx sec
  

Two workunits a day, one request an hour.

---

Two workunits a day, one request an hour.

So, the quota applies to CPU while the request time applies to user.
Just fate that first box received a WU before the second box asked. The second box was told NO. Then the first box requested and received work after the hour delay, but before the second box could try again.
First box happy. Second box pouting and waiting.

We will look into trying to sort it so maybe it's a one job in, one job out situation i.e. as long as you are grinding through the jobs you can get another as soon as you send back the last.

I think this is the way to go. But make it one (or whatever number is right) job per core, not one job per machine or user.

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

A-Ha I've worked it out fair distribution of work actually means "as long as I get a few thousand jobs it's fair distribution" ;-)

Right everyone - He's worked it out - so, time for a new admin?

Reality = Nice job, even if I can't get anymore wu's today at least I know there will be some left tomorrow and probably for a few days given that status now says

Server Status
Up, 44957 workunits to crunch
12501 workunits in progress
13 concurrent connections

This must be the highest number of wu's sent out for over a year.

---

It's not the speed, but the quality - Until I get a faster computer.

Two workunits a day, one request an hour.

So, the quota applies to CPU while the request time applies to user.
Just fate that first box received a WU before the second box asked. The second box was told NO. Then the first box requested and received work after the hour delay, but before the second box could try again.
First box happy. Second box pouting and waiting.

I am pretty request frequency is per machine.

Edit: I should have typed "...pretty sure request..."

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA