LHC@home

> Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource
> Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share.
> Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource
> Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share.
> Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource
> Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share.
> Resource Share. Resource Share. Resource Share.
>
>

Huh?

I don't want to take part in multiple projects, what if LHC@Home actually gets some work for about an hour, but I'm too busy in another project then I loose the chance of getting some WU's?

EXACTLY! Ive already joined 2 BOINC projects...why do I need to join more to keep my systems from being idle. I shouldnt have to choose more than 2 if there are only 2 I want to participate in....I have been DCing for years now and HATE idle systems. MOst DCers pick projects they like and support. Im not going to pick some lame project I have no interest in simply to give my systems something to do...

...and as far as asking more projects to join BOINC, from what Ive seen, that would be a mistake...if out of the 5 or 6 projects in BOINC only 1 is running regularly [and ironically its one of the newer BOINC projects], it sounds like a disaster waiting to happen at this point.

...back to Folding@Home and Lifemapper for awhile I guess...

Spectre

> Huh?
>
> I don't want to take part in multiple projects, what if LHC@Home actually gets
> some work for about an hour, but I'm too busy in another project then I loose
> the chance of getting some WU's?
>
>

You'll miss out on that block of data and the sicence will be processed by someone else.

LHC looks to be different to other projects in that the WU's are generated as the physicists need to simulate the properties of the magnetics as they are installed and commissioned. At least that is my understanding from high school physics and reading the CERN web pages.

What is the problem here? Each DC project has its own characteristics. LHC has an intermittent work load, CPDN has WUs that take weeks to run, Folding requires a dedicated client, and so it goes. There are plenty to choose from, both BOINC and non-BOINC. If the characteristics of a particular project don't suit you or your computers then run a different one.

If you want to run LHC units then BOINC is required, and sometimes there will be no work. If you're not happy with that then run another BOINC project alongside or choose different project, but don't complain about it.


Giskard - the first telepathic robot.

> EXACTLY! Ive already joined 2 BOINC projects...why do I need to join more to
> keep my systems from being idle. I shouldnt have to choose more than 2 if
> there are only 2 I want to participate in....I have been DCing for years now
> and HATE idle systems. MOst DCers pick projects they like and support. Im not
> going to pick some lame project I have no interest in simply to give my
> systems something to do...
>
> ...and as far as asking more projects to join BOINC, from what Ive seen, that
> would be a mistake...if out of the 5 or 6 projects in BOINC only 1 is running
> regularly [and ironically its one of the newer BOINC projects], it sounds like
> a disaster waiting to happen at this point.
>
> ...back to Folding@Home and Lifemapper for awhile I guess...
>
> Spectre


If there is no data to process there is no data to process.

We are doing this to help the projects in the studies not the other way around (them keeping our machines busy in our idle time punching out heat and generating greenhouse gasses).

I would also point out that the goal of the project was stated as;

"The goal for the challenge is to get many thousands of people to join LHC@home, and to run for at least 50 days!"

I think somewhere it was stated that they were aiming for 50k people to join but I cant find that now (and thank god they didnt anyway).

Anyway the point is that the project was only promised to be for the short term and then its future would be reviewed.

What might be interesting is if Markku or one of the other admins could give us some idea of the long term plans for the project if indeed there are any.

Angs

Well I've gone back to SETI@Home for the meanwhile. I've lost interest in LHC@Home now I'm afraid.

> Well I've gone back to SETI@Home for the meanwhile. I've lost interest in
> LHC@Home now I'm afraid.
>
>

From this very thread:
================================================================================
2) overly redundant crunching. According to Dr. Anderson, seti classic is/was sending work units out DOZENS of times just to keep everyone happy with the work unit supply. Only 3 results are required for accuracy checks. Thus over half of the CPU power was going to waste - not what 'hardcore crunchers' want to hear.
================================================================================

SETI@Home should keep your computer engaged in 'useful' work!


Giskard - the first telepathic robot.

Since they don't have pending credit up again I'm going to have to put up with the bad performance on CPDN.

There's something fundamentally wrong with projects wanting to use the vast power of Distributed Computing, going to all the trouble to produce and release a client (hopefully a stable one) and then only having enough work for only a very small fraction of the people that would want to run their project.

Unless I'm missing something, it appears LHC could operate with only a couple of hundred CPUs. I'm not sure how many WUs are released at once, but 10,000 of the current (last) type we saw could easily be crunched by 150 PCs in a day. Give them 2 or 3 days to do the triple-checks and by then the physicists should be ready again.

DC is for projects that can't be accomplished otherwise - it sounds like this one could have been accomplished without a worldwide rollout, and the resulting negative publicity after people switch to it, only to find that it's idle a huge majority of the time.

@ willy1: Well they already admitted that they Under Estimated the Processing Power out there and probably allowed to many Clients to join the Project ...

Personally I think a lot of people will just simply drift away from Projects like this if they can't get the WU's to run and it will just leave more WU's for those that stay with it...

its simple girls and boys
have the project wu to send
go to you account in the perferences
do contact the network every 30 days,download a lot of work
if you have much stuff download
take the perforances back to 1 day contact network
cruch and be happy about the sience and your credits enjoy
;-)

http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/images/mshvolcanocam.jpg

> its simple girls and boys
> have the project wu to send
> go to you account in the perferences
> do contact the network every 30 days,download a lot of work
> if you have much stuff download
> take the perforances back to 1 day contact network
> cruch and be happy about the sience and your credits enjoy
> ;-)
>
> http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/images/mshvolcanocam.jpg
>

As usual you are talking bullshit.
Even if you set your settings to 30 days you will not download more than 100 workunits due to the quota limit.
If you wouldn't spam the forums so much with useless/senseless threads and would read the remaining threads more carefully you would know these facts and others too.

> As usual you [Guido] are talking bullshit.

Its his strong point

sorry forgot to say
50 limit per day right
dear angstrom
100 wu s are 50 hours to work
one wu need at my computer 29 to 31 minutes to cruch
you see work for 2 days for me happy cruning knight!!!
--------------------------
0r is it just so someone knight have to much wood in or upstairs in the head ;-)
mmh yap yap

> you see work for 2 days for me happy cruning knight!!!

I just set my cash to 1 day and guess what I get 2 days of work. So Guido you set your cache for 30 days. Download two days worth then set your cache back to 1 day.

How strange

> Forgive me if Im a little suspicious about that whole thing. Its been over a
> month and they have no idea when they are getting their server?

They do know why...

They (Predictor) ordered a brand new release that apparently wasn't quite ready for production just yet. And last I heard, Dell was waiting on the 2GB RAM modules to populate the server with.