Posts by scsimodo

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Google Earth Placemarks for BOINC Projects (Message 11115) Posted 28 Oct 2005 by scsimodo Post: [quote]Here is a Collection of Placemarks that show the location of some Projects. How does one use this collection (below) with Google Earth? I tried to copy it and that did not work. And I do not know how to "enter" this collection into Google Earth. Thanks, Richard Placemark collection can be found here: http://www.pcschmiede.de.tf/boinc/ [/quote ] Save the file, fire up Google Earth, chose "file - open" and load this file. Et voila! Now you have an additional entry under "Places" (on the left) scsimodo
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Attention LHC Developers! (Message 10827) Posted 21 Oct 2005 by scsimodo Post: <blockquote> You think Denmark's weather is bad? You should try living in Scotland for a while. :-d</blockquote> The first thing I learned during my holiday in Scotland was: "There's no bad weather, only bad clothing" Same as in Jamaica, down there they have no rain, it's simply liquid sunshine :-)) scsimodo
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta goes to full production. (Message 10671) Posted 10 Oct 2005 by scsimodo Post: <blockquote>"This project is in the beta phase of development." On the main Rosseta page. Where did you find that announcement adrian?</blockquote> It's on the home page: October 6, 2005 We are happy to announce that this project is no longer beta. We are getting very interesting scientific results and the project is operating well thanks to user participation and input. We will post updated results soon so stay tuned!
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Linux slower than Windows (Message 10231) Posted 17 Sep 2005 by scsimodo Post: <blockquote>Hi, Now that I've got all the Linux proponents all worked up, here's my story: During the past week, I upgraded my main PC on which I run Win2K. According to BoincView I got about 11.2 credits/hr running W2K on the pre-upgrade machine (AMD64 3000+). After the upgrade I used the AMD64 3000+ mobo and chip to build a machine on which I installed Fedora Core 4. Now BoincView shows that the credits/hr dropped to about 6.7. Why this dramatic drop? The only differences are going from a 160GB to 40GB HDD and from 1.5GB RAM to 256MB. Surely that can't be the cause of such a dramatic drop in performance? It's more depended on the CPU than anything else if my logic isn't flawed? I've seen this drop in actual credits/hr processed as well. Any suggestions for a Linux novice? Thanks! V7</blockquote> Linux Core Clients are not well optimized. The Benchmark results are much lower that under windows (on the same computer). Try to install an optimized Linux client, this may help you: http://www.boincsynergy.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2307 scsimodo
5) Message boards : Number crunching : hoarding (Message 10105) Posted 12 Sep 2005 by scsimodo Post: <blockquote> LHC@Home COULD reduce the max number of results per day that each host can download. This would effectively prevent hoarding, but it would have the unfortunate side-effect of not allowing any more work if all of your results produce bad particles. Right now it is set at 100/day/host, and it is reduced by 1 for every invalid result returned. LHC could set it to 15/day/host, and that would help eliminate hoarding. </blockquote> LHC is a project that depends on previous result to produce and give out new work. They need the results as fast as possible. Look at the stats, LHC has no work since 3 days and there a still over 11K results "missing". Limiting WUs per CPU - in this case - would have the effect that almost all results were finished and most likely new work is on the way for all users. I never understood the sense behind fetching more than 2 days of work. There's always at least one project that has enough work. So why not attaching to multiple projects? That's one reason BOINC was developed. I've seen computers in the stats that collect dozens or hundreds of WUs and returning only a few (maybe due to system crashes or they lost interest). All others have to wait until the WUs are resent. No real problem for a project but annoying when you have to wait for credits or for project devs that need the results to send out new work. If I had to decide I would limit the "get work for x days" to 3 days. IMHO no one needs more. But that's just me...
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Win vs Linux Completion Times (Message 8547) Posted 14 Jul 2005 by scsimodo Post: > Any differences in completion between Win and Linux. One optimized better > than the other? I know with Einstein Linux takes nearly 2x as long. Well, can't tell you about differences in LHC, but Predictor WUs take significantly longer under Linux. (Mobile-Sempron 2800+, 512 MB RAM) Linux (Ubuntu) : 1h - 1h10 WinXP : 35 - 40 minutes Don't know where the difference comes from, my notebook runs at full speed under both OS. LHC WUs are hard to compare due to highly different (real) completion times. Although, I assume WU times are higher under Linux.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : So where did they go to? (Message 7416) Posted 3 May 2005 by scsimodo Post: > I've got two units in my download list on the server that aren't on my system. > This one and > this one. > I've done a search for them, but nope, they aren't around. Me too! One of my PCs downloaded some kind of "ghost WUs". They show up in my download list but never arrived on my HD.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : constant HD activity? (Message 7266) Posted 28 Apr 2005 by scsimodo Post: Anyone else experiencing a constant (every second) HD activity when running those new LHC units? On my PC (Athlon XP 2600+, Win2k), LHC seems to write to disk every(!) second (on other PCs too). It's quite annoying. All other other projects (S@H, E@H, P@H) run "quiet", an update is made at most every minute. Older LHC WUs (a few weeks ago) didn't show this behaviour)
9) Message boards : Number crunching : No saved restart results ? (Message 6000) Posted 23 Feb 2005 by scsimodo Post: > I posted this in the Linux Q&A section, see > http://lhcathome.cern.ch/forum_thread.php?id=1130 > > HTH Thank you, Michael! I'll keep an eye on it, especially regarding a possible credit problem due to miscalculated total times. scsimodo
10) Message boards : Number crunching : No saved restart results ? (Message 5996) Posted 23 Feb 2005 by scsimodo Post: Every time a LHC WU is resumed it starts computing from the very beginning. Other projects resume their work from the last saved restart result, LHC not. My fault or a known issue? It's a not so big issue with WU times under 1 hour, but longer WUs will never finish. (and waste CUP cycles) Boinc CC 4.21, Ubuntu-Linux (Warty) scsimodo
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Hooray for the new workunits (Message 3702) Posted 12 Oct 2004 by scsimodo Post: Hi! Since the new WUs flow out, about 50% of them complete within 0 seconds to one or two minutes. Is anyone experiencing the same? I remeber reading a post that this are WUs with high energy particles (right explanation???) so there might be WUs that have short computation times because some particles get "lost". Is this the case, or is it some error on my machine? scsimodo
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Has someone tried out the Linux client? (Message 2503) Posted 27 Sep 2004 by scsimodo Post: > The title says all? What performance do you have? My linux is currently > broken, but if you have more performance on Linux like on the CPND client, > I'll probably reinstall it. So tell me your experience! Works like a charm over here. WU time is about 40 minutes (Athlon XP 1800, Gentoo Linux, Kernel 2.6.6). Claimed credit seems to be a bit low (3,5 per WU) in comparison to an Athlon XP 2600 (30 minutes per WU, average 7,5 credits, W2K SP4). Had some problems with existing S@H WUs on startup (ran into errors, trashed two - not yet startet - WUs) but everything seems to be ok now. WU times are as expected (even a few minutes shorter), Linux version of sixtrack runs well, everything's ok so far. Just give it a try, it's worth it IMHO scsimodo

LHC@home