1) Message boards : Number crunching : /stats/ empty (Message 15164)
Posted 23 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Hopefully someone will remember to bump this thread again when QMC are in post as admins


Where has QMC come from? Its QM, possibly QMU (Queen Mary University)


QMC, now Queen Mary, University of London, used to be Queen Mary's College - a university college in the Mile End Road. And I can tell you, whatever the inside was like, that part of the Mile End Road was horrible. I opted for Southampton instead, just because the Mile End Road was SO dirty!

Of course, it may have changed in the intervening 30 years. But then again...

2) Message boards : Number crunching : Graphical interfase (Message 15151)
Posted 21 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Just a quick question here, as I cannot remember if it has been covered in previous postings --

Does running the graphical display have any effect on the processing speed of the computer? Has there been any definitive testing wherein a set of units were processed by a machine running the graphics, and then processed again with graphics disabled? If so, what were the results?

Personal thought here - with older machines, I would assume there would be a significant impact, but the newer machines, and machines with high level graphic cards would probably see less impact.

This is just my curiousity acting up, as I run all my machines in the 'as a service' mode, which precludes the operation of the graphics display ...


It is inevitable that running any sort of process will affect number crunching performance. The exact effect of this will very according to the needs of each process, and the hardware available to service it.

In the case of the LHC screen saver the parameters affecting the screen saver can be adjusted by the user on an interactive basis. However, it incorporates an auto-pilot mode that resets the parameters to a minimal demand level once the user stops fiddling.

I suppose that you could measure the effect of running the screen saver in autopilot, but this measurement would only be valid for the precise architecture on which it is measured. You could measure it across a range of different machines and architectures to get an average, but what would be the point? Diehard crunchers will almost always choose a configuration that maximises crunching performance. For those who want to run the screen saver the crunching performance is probably secondary.

3) Message boards : Number crunching : Fairer distribuiton of work(Flame Fest 2007) (Message 15110)
Posted 16 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:


Yes indeed. Let's be clear.

Chrull has provided a deadline based system...

So we clearly differ, but I am not sure at what point you differ from me Gaspode.

Are you saying the project should not react to a change in the circmstances?

Are you saying that in your opinion the voluntary work aspects are irrelevant to the long term success of a DC project? (if so I'd enjoy having that debate with you, but I'd prefer you to start another thread for it).

Or am I still missing your point?

best regards,
River~~


I am not sure we do differ. I have had the debate about participant support in the SETI forums when BOINC was still V3, and raised the issue with David Anderson because support was diabolically bad at that time. Poor support from CERN is one reason why I have withdrawn processing power from the project for the time being. It is true that the available LHC workload doesn't distribute evenly across the available participant base and on that I have already made my position clear. Since there is presently more crunching power than available work is my second reason.

(Incidentally,I subsequently formed the view that the approach adopted by SETI@Home is scientifically pointless, and took my processors elsewhere. This is not my view of LHC@Home)

As to whether LHC@Home should adapt its modus operandi, then it should if it sees the need. Of course, it presupposes that they are able to change, and with no staff assigned nothing at LHC will change until the migration to QMC is complete. If you read the posts in this thread you will see that a number of contributors are suggesting that control of deadlines might be away to 'improve' matters. I am merely highlighting the fact that this has already been done.

The same posts also take 'improve' in the sense that benefits the participant base as they see it. This doesn't necessarily tally with what the project would see as an improvement, and since I am here for the science (when I AM here) it is surely the project that should decide what constitutes an 'improvement'.

4) Message boards : Number crunching : Fairer distribuiton of work(Flame Fest 2007) (Message 15089)
Posted 13 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Let's try again:

Since there is some debate about the use of deadlines for optimising the work flow see this excerpt from my earlier post:


It is CERN's problem if the the work takes too long to complete, and they are the people to decide if that is so, and to take action if it is needed. So, some time ago Chrulle implemented a dynamic deadline system which aims to optimise the return of work.



So, just to be absolutely clear on the point: Chrulle has implemented a deadline-based system to optimise the workflow.

5) Message boards : Number crunching : when we have news woks? (Message 15065)
Posted 11 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Ladyzguy - this world runs on mutual respect. You don't know who might read your posts or when, so have some respect for the rest of us and keep your four-letter words for an environment where you can be sure that offence won't be caused. I'd guess you don't have children, or you'd understand my comments.

Thank you for changing your sig, though. I appreciate it.

6) Message boards : Number crunching : when we have news woks? (Message 15054)
Posted 11 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Ladyzguy: please could you modify your sig to remove the four-letter word. I've just had to explain your epithet to my 4yo boy, with the caveat that he's not to use the word. The justification for this was that you're probably not a very nice person. I'm sure that's not true, so please don't make me lie again.

Thanks

7) Message boards : Number crunching : Please note: this project rarely has work (Message 15015)
Posted 7 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
So Garfield is on its way, but are there other applications waiting further ahead? And when LHC finally starts producing huge amounts of data, will they be needing us (currently some 72000+ comps) to help with the data analysis, or will that be done completely "in-house"?


Geant4 has been ported to the BOINC platform, but there are issues with the amount of data needed by the application (up to 1Gb).

Once the collider starts operating the amount of data produced continuously for ten years will be truly colossal (10 petabytes per annum) - way beyond the capacity of most (if not all) PCs. The processing will be done around the world, but on mightier machines than the average cruncher can offer.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Intel compiler version for x86 Mac OS X? (Message 14952)
Posted 2 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:

Mac OS X is a flavour of Unix, as is Linux.




Not true on either count. Unix has long been the copyright software of AT&T. Versions have crept out to other vendors, but OSX and Linux are not derived from Unix.

Linux is an independent development of software that has a superficial Unix-like appearance. Mac OSX is a proprietary system, and it, too, has only a superficial resemblance to Unix.

9) Message boards : Number crunching : Fairer distribuiton of work(Flame Fest 2007) (Message 14951)
Posted 2 Oct 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Not this again...

There have been endless arguments about fair distribution of work, and while I generally side with the 'keep your cache small' camp, there will always be the diehards who, rightly or wrongly, take large amounts of work just to leave it sitting in a cache for days. I can't be bothered to argue the point any more.

It is CERN's problem if the the work takes too long to complete, and they are the people to decide if that is so, and to take action if it is needed. So, some time ago Chrulle implemented a dynamic deadline system which aims to optimise the return of work.

If this still doesn't fit your ideology crunch other projects while there's no LHC work, and look forward to Garfield.

10) Message boards : Number crunching : LHC@home Alpha petition (Message 14861)
Posted 24 Sep 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
If you like LHC@home and LHC@home Alpha, sign this LHC@home Alpha petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/LHCalpha/petition.html.


What unspeakable arrogance!

The LHC team will operate their project as they see fit. They are not beholden to you, me, or anyone else.

I wouldn't open my front door just because a bunch of self-important jokers demand that I should.

You'd do well to remember that the project is run for the benefit of CERN, and not for the benefit of the crunchers.


11) Message boards : Number crunching : Forum problems (Message 14858)
Posted 24 Sep 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
The option to rate a posting in the forum seems not to work at present - the link brings up a blank page and the rating is not actioned. The new symbols also have no obvious key.

12) Message boards : Cafe LHC : LHC Alpha (Message 14856)
Posted 24 Sep 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
No, but sign this petition.


What unspeakable arrogance!

The LHC team will operate their project as they see fit. They are not beholden to you, me, or anyone else.

I wouldn't open my front door just because a bunch of self-important jokers demand that I should.

You'd do well to remember that the project is run for the benefit of CERN, and not for the benefit of the crunchers.

13) Message boards : Cafe LHC : The Death Of LISA (Message 14776)
Posted 21 Sep 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
These pathetic politicians will never understand the value of physics & astronomy. We find huge ammounts being allocated by the US government for defence related R&D (US$70 bn)& also for the National Institutes of Health (US$30bn) but they have very little for NASA (US$17 bn)& NSF(US$ 5 bn). US will pay dearly in the long run for neglecting physics & maths.


Since when has US$17 billion been very little money? I think I could probably manage for a year on that!

14) Message boards : LHC@home Science : Strength of glass on the moon (Message 14631)
Posted 8 Sep 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:

Well, actually you would if heat dispersion though fluid convection is an issue, as it is, for example, for household windows


Good point, but I bet it's not cost effective for domestic insulation.

How many domestic windows are there on the moon?


15) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Any plans for a Solaris Version of LHC@home ? (Message 14626)
Posted 7 Sep 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
<blockquote>I am sorry but no only the Linux and Windows client will be available.

Christian S�ttrup
LHC@home Developer</blockquote>

But what about linux@sparc.
I've ... problem:
2005-08-31 10:31:44 [LHC@home] Message from server: platform 'sparc-unknown-linux-gnu' not found
2005-08-31 10:31:44 [LHC@home] New host venue: home
2005-08-31 10:31:45 [LHC@home] Deferring communication with project for 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 58 seconds

Is or will be linux@sparc supported ?

Thanks,
krutny


The only platforms supprted are Windows 32-bit and Linux 32-bit. This is primarily due to the platforms supported by the chosen compiler. Selecting a different compiler is not an option because of the numerical sensitivity of SixTrack. This issue has been discussed extensively in the message boards.

At present there is no system administrator, and no work. LHC has more than enough participants to service the small amount of work that is generated from time to time, so there's no incentive to extend the number of supported platforms, nor any resource available to do it.


16) Message boards : LHC@home Science : Strength of glass on the moon (Message 14624)
Posted 5 Sep 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Ernesto

I think you have muddled the concepts here.

The strength of materials is not generally affected by a lunar (or any other) environment, so the strenght of glass is the same on the Moon as it is here. There may be long term effects associated with degradation in a space environment caused by radiation, micro-meteorites, etc. The main strength of glass is in tension, so glass fibres could perhaps be used where a tensile load is to be carried. Kevlar probably provides a better strength to weight ratio, and since weight is the key determinant in launch costs, glass wouldn't be used. So, beyond it's obvious use as a component in windows I don't see that there be much use for it.

Aerogel is a silicon based substance, and there the similarity to glass largely stops. Although it has a density approaching that of air, it is extremely porous. You wouldn't use it for windows unless you wanted all your air to leak through it.
You can get more details about Aerogel on the NASA web site.

17) Message boards : Number crunching : Pending credit not being validated! (Message 14611)
Posted 29 Aug 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
While the project isn't sending out any work, isn't it a good time to grant credits on all the pending wu's outstanding, some for more than a year, thereby clearing the database etc of all outstanding results and freeing up disk space, on Alpha aswell.

Would also be a good idea to sort out the sending out of work units so that the quorum isn't exceeded before the dealine date the initial wu's are sent out so that the pending credit problem doesn't happen again. Other projects don't have this problem, so maybe someone@LHC should talk to them.


And who, precisely, is going to do all this work?
18) Message boards : Cafe LHC : 5 separate ufo's caught on nasa shuttle video (Message 14607)
Posted 29 Aug 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Only five? I saw more than that. Of course, there's no evidence that this is unedited NASA video. Even if it is, there are many explanations.

Remember: UFO = Unidentified Flying Object. Nothing says they're alien, or even extraterrestrial. They're just unidentified.

19) Message boards : Number crunching : Bye all! (Message 14579)
Posted 21 Aug 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:
Ok - I've had enough of this.

I made a single post wishing you all well, and gave as my reason for departing as the poor state of the project.

Since then I seem to have been turned into the devil incarnate beacuse I 'whinge and moan', because I 'post a dummy spit', because I 'hate the project', blah, blah, blah...

So let's get it right.

I don't hate the project. LHC has always been my favourite project, and the other projects don't interest me for a variety of reason I don't intend to expound upon here. I am disappointed by the lack of work, and the dearth of any realistic system support from CERN. And since electricity prices in Britain have doubled in the last 18 months I can't leave PCs on idly waiting for small amounts of work that don't materialise. So, I shut down BOINC.

I watch the boards from time to time to see if I can contribute. If I can, maybe I'll start BOINC up again. Meanwhile, I'd trouble those of you who have posted the real whining to stay polite.

Crunch well, everyone!

20) Message boards : Cafe LHC : Einstein is back up..... (Message 14564)
Posted 17 Aug 2006 by Gaspode the UnDressed
Post:

I spy with my little eye something beginning with "A".


Anthromorphemics

Somehow I think that one is a made up word :)


I spy with my little eye something beginning with "E"


Einstein is back up.....

Is recursion allowed? Or is it just swearing twice?

I spy with my little eye something beginning with "Q"



Next 20


©2022 CERN