21) Message boards : Number crunching : Are We There Yet? (Message 21749)
Posted 12 Dec 2009 by rembertw
Post:
...but I\'m still unsure whether or not to give up on this.
Sadly enough that is the only available information. Whether to give up or not is up to your discretion. You have the same information that some use to blindly believe in this project and that others use to discard this project as failed.

It is up to you.
22) Message boards : LHC@home Science : So, what\\\'s up with LHC@home? (Message 21746)
Posted 11 Dec 2009 by rembertw
Post:
So, the LHC is up and running, lots of news from their weblogs.

What about work for this project?
Thanks.
The answer for your question can be found in the Café forum, under Whatever happened... thread. Look for the posts coming from bigmac.
23) Message boards : Number crunching : Are We There Yet? (Message 21737)
Posted 9 Dec 2009 by rembertw
Post:
... or is it now a lost cause?
All the answers can be found in the \"Café\" under \"Apologies\". Look for the posts coming from \"bigmac\".
24) Message boards : Cafe LHC : Crunch WCG until LHC@Home gets running. . . . (Message 21730)
Posted 8 Dec 2009 by rembertw
Post:
Ever since the DC projects at Entropia and UD stopped, WCG has been my most important project with a little over 50% of my cycles. They have great projects, give very good support by way of their mods, techs and scientists.

LHC is stuck on 1,7% but that is -of course- because of the lack of work units...
25) Message boards : Number crunching : 20.08.2009 10:45 GMT (Message 21729)
Posted 8 Dec 2009 by rembertw
Post:
Maybe on that day they had much to say...
26) Message boards : Number crunching : Old Pending Credits (Message 21690)
Posted 27 Nov 2009 by rembertw
Post:
\'View Pending\' in my user account list 8 pending credits dating back 1 to 2 years -- most with 0 credit. I don\'t really care, but am wondering why these have not been purged form the system by now.
The answer is in the Apologies tread in the Café. There you can see the project has other worries than purging old data. Find the bigmac posts there.
27) Message boards : Number crunching : one for all (Message 21640)
Posted 20 Nov 2009 by rembertw
Post:
So, all this talk about lhc is up and whatnot, is it really, is it producing work for us ? or is all the work beeing diverted to somewhere else ?
Is it time for us to give up and remove this project from our project list ?

Hoping to get an involved person to tell us, no just some ramdom troll ....

The answer is in the apologies thread in the café, especially the bigmac posts. He is not a \"ramdom troll\". Read and you will know. You might be required to think about the answers though.
28) Message boards : Cafe LHC : Whatever happened to LHC@home....apologies and thanks. (Message 21607)
Posted 9 Nov 2009 by rembertw
Post:
If LHC@home could have provided 100,000 cpu equivalents despite the antics of a certain individual and the reply ramblings of others instead of the less than 100 cpu equivalents, then the antics and ramblings are a side effect of what can be a huge cost saver.

Easy to ignore.

Anyway, it\'s up to the higher LHC realms to decide what to do next. Obviously LHC@home still gets support from the user base otherwise these boards would be dead for a longtime already. If the people with the power decide to continue with LHC@home, then they obviously will get more than their current less-than-100 internal volunteers.
29) Message boards : Cafe LHC : Whatever happened to LHC@home....apologies and thanks. (Message 21602)
Posted 7 Nov 2009 by rembertw
Post:
Yeah... I guess IR = 0 is better than IR=2, IR=3, and far better than that "gosh awful" IR=5...right?

This has nothing to do with the matter at hand. Bigmac clearly stated that "...someone with real authority and responsibility..." implying that he does not have the authority or responsability to go ahead with LHC@home on his own.

The exerpt from the email suggests that the Management Board is not convinced at all of the power of Boinc/LHC@home and prefers an in-house solution for the calculations. Or it might be that, with the thousands of scientists on the Collider project, it is simply a story of pet projects, power games, or complete ignorance on the topic of distributed computing.
30) Message boards : LHC@home Science : LHC Update: 2 October 2009 (Message 21547)
Posted 11 Oct 2009 by rembertw
Post:
So, there is some hope that <i>\\\\\\\"The Work Will Flow\\\\\\\"</i> in the near future?

Check the \"apologies\" thread in LHC Cafe. Or define some hope in percentage. 0.00001% is indeed \"some hope\".
31) Message boards : LHC@home Science : LHC NEWS (Message 21546)
Posted 11 Oct 2009 by rembertw
Post:
...been causing problems and slowing down...

While this is certainly interesting information, it has nothing to do with the slowdown in LCH@home. Check the \"apologies\" thread in LHC Cafe.

If you were referring to the actual LHC project, and not the @home addition, then you may or may not be right. I don\'t know about that.
32) Message boards : LHC@home Science : LHC@Home name is misleading because no collider data available to BOINC (Message 21545)
Posted 11 Oct 2009 by rembertw
Post:
...I had some compliments for my writings ...

I won\'t comment about writing skills, but I do suggest to read the \"apologies\" thread in the LHC cafe.

To any outsider, this thread shows clearly the future of public crunching for LCH.
33) Message boards : Number crunching : lhcathome.cern.ch blacklisting IP addresses? (Message 21537)
Posted 7 Oct 2009 by rembertw
Post:
[ADDED] Blocking IP adresses ???

Nope, simply no work to do.

Take a look at the \"apologies\" thread in the Café for more info.
34) Message boards : Number crunching : Can't get work (Message 21536)
Posted 7 Oct 2009 by rembertw
Post:
Is the Large Hadron Collider, still out off order, or in some testing fase?

As far as I know LHC itself is now starting up. Don\'t get your hopes up though, it is doubtful that LHC@home will get serious work later on, considering that LHC has its own internal GRID.

You can find more in LCH Café, somewhere in the \"apologies\" thread.
35) Message boards : Cafe LHC : Whatever happened to LHC@home....apologies and thanks. (Message 21449)
Posted 1 Aug 2009 by rembertw
Post:
I am about to see several years of work down the drain
if the Server issue is not resolved.


Now *this* must be hurting...
36) Message boards : Number crunching : Wow, it is quiet! (Message 21411)
Posted 24 Jun 2009 by rembertw
Post:
Does anyone know if all of the data from the first time that LHC was turned on has been processed? I can\\\'t remember where I was reading it but I think them had over 1,000 computers and they were still wanting more computing power.


All data from that time has been processed, and there have been trickles of new data in the meantime.

They needed a lot of computerpower at that time because of the Minimum Quorum (3)- Initial Replication settings (5). By now they have changed to a MQ 2 - IR 2 setting which effectively reduces the needed computer power.

I assume that LHC will let it be known on the boards if and when they restart, and whether they are in need of extra processors.
37) Message boards : Cafe LHC : Earth Hour (Message 21323)
Posted 28 Mar 2009 by rembertw
Post:
Top prevent massive blackouts, please also:
- if your lights, computers, ... are off, do NOT switch them on exactly one hour later. Pick 65 minutes, 90 minutes, ...
- if you ignore the whole thing: consider turning off delicate machinery like computers shortly BEFORE the herd turns on their stuff again.

Nothing worse for a powergrid then a massive surge in demand for power. Compare with text messages on December 31st at 24:00h. Many grids just can not handle it so it can cause brownouts and blackouts.

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-210731.html
38) Message boards : Number crunching : Changes to Quorum and Replication ! (Message 21251)
Posted 24 Feb 2009 by rembertw
Post:
I have just noticed that my latest tasks are showing quorum and replication of 2 and 2.

However there also seems to be a problem with some of these new tasks, ...


Due to popular demand etc etc. No more waste: back on board. To the mods: why not post this change in policy on the front page?
39) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem with WU (Message 21146)
Posted 30 Jan 2009 by rembertw
Post:
\"Aborted by project\"; why is this?


I can not answer with certainty about the credit story, I will leave this for someone else to answer.

The \"why\" question is easier to answer: every work unit is sent out immediately 5 times. Every time is one task. The moment 3 tasks are returned with identical results the other 2 tasks around get canceled. This is what happened with your 2 tasks. 3 others also had your Work Unit but were faster returning the result.

Depending on the speed of your computers you can count on an average of 40% (2 out of 5 tasks) that will get canceled at some time. If you want to be more certain that you actually can crush the tasks that are allotted to you, then the best way is to keep your queue as short as possible. This way you get constantly tasks from \"fresh\" Work Units, with less chance that others are faster. Or with bigger chance that their tasks are somewhere down their queue.


Previous 20


©2024 CERN