See my next post


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Old
---------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing I would really like is to have a separate field showing the Total CPU Time my computer devotes to a project. I think this could be done entirely on the server side with no changes to Boinc or its project applications.

The Total CPU Time is something that is easily understood and has more meaning for me.

Also a thought is you could still total users results that are marked as invalid and receive no credit for whatever reason; i.e. past deadline, results invalid, etc. Their cpu time spent would still count in the Total CPU Time and not be lost in the ether of the Internet.

I totally agree that some info of actual donated CPU-time, regardless of failed upload of result, error while computing WU et.c. would look very nice on the 'Projects'-pane in BOINC .... BUT; a simple display of how many hh:mm:ss the individual projects have been running on the computer isn't satisfying for a user like myself, who are running ThreadMaster to reduce the CPU-load at certain hours/situations. It would need to be a more precise indication of the actual CPU-work .... how many calc's, reformulated into units that doesn't end up in the insane numbers that the performed calc's would. Cobblestones.
We're propably saying the same thing, Boinc User, just in different ways ;)

---

[br]BOINC is A.W.E.S.O.M.E, and then some.[br]

Payroll Type Credit System

To make it easier to understand the current credit system you might think of credits as payment for work done by the collective group of users that did each work unit. Some do not receive payment while others do. The Credits don't tell me anything useful about my computer system. At best it is an abstract payment for work SETI says it finds useful.

If you look at your pay stub from work you get the following information:

Hours Worked
Overtime Hours
Gross Pay
Deductions
Net Pay
Gross Pay YTD
Net Pay YTD


To make the current credit system more user friendly additional information would be helpful. Such as:

Total WU Downloaded ( Broken down by Host also for each item )
Total Valid WU
Total CPU Time
Total Valid Time
Total Claimed Credit
Total Credit ( this and the abstract RAC is all we get )


Yes I could go through the result table now that it is turned back on and get some of this info but the system could do this much easier.

I would be happy just to have this info on the account page even if it wasn't exported in the XML stats.

The additional information I feel would make it easier to understand or at least accept the current Credit System.

This addtional info would actually tell me something useful.

All this could be done on the server side with no changes to BOINC or its Project Applications.

> I totally agree that some info of actual donated CPU-time, regardless of
> failed upload of result, error while computing WU et.c. would look very nice
> on the 'Projects'-pane in BOINC .... BUT; a simple display of how many
> hh:mm:ss the individual projects have been running on the computer isn't
> satisfying for a user like myself, who are running ThreadMaster to reduce the
> CPU-load at certain hours/situations. It would need to be a more precise
> indication of the actual CPU-work .... how many calc's, reformulated into
> units that doesn't end up in the insane numbers that the performed calc's
> would. Cobblestones.
> We're propably saying the same thing, Boinc User, just in different ways ;)
>
>

Actually the Total CPU Time would come from the WU's themselves and would reflect an accurate cpu time.

The changes I would like are server side only. All the info would be gathered by the servers and displayed on the account page of each user.

I'm not all sure that even more work for the project-servers is the right way. Infact is CDPN the only server that haven't been down for extended periods yet, as far as I've noticed. But if the returned WU already contains the actual number of calculations performed by the client to complete it, or easily could be redesigned to do so, then yes .. give us the info dag nabbit :)

---

[br]BOINC is A.W.E.S.O.M.E, and then some.[br]

For SETI "Best score" database entries (pulse, triplet ...) in the user record would be great too :-)

> For SETI "Best score" database entries (pulse, triplet ...) in the user record
> would be great too :-)
>
Ahh the neat setispy form classic seti@home, which had great features in the field of informing what actually have come out of your WU's.
BoincLogX just doesn't give the same satisfaction, and neither does the result-log presented at your account.

Can anyone explain by the way, why BoincLogX doesn't catch the results send to CDPN? I've got more than 500 credit by CDPN since I started using BoincLogX, but BoincLogX haven't logged'em. The reason I chose to run BoincLogX, was to make my own statistic to check if BOINC distributes the resources as set up. But it's kind af rediculous to try making that statistic if it will only be more or less accurate once pr. how long it takes to complete a CPDN-WU.

And last; the CPU-time in seconds currently displayed for each result, is this simply how long time the WU have been running on my computer, or is 1 second of CPU-time a standard unit such as par example CDROM-drive speed? If solely being how long the WU have run on the computer, it's totally worthless. 1 second of CPU-time by client in the daytime isn't the same, in computingpower, as 1 second at night, since I only allow BOINC projects to utilize all it can get at night, and a maximum of 60% during the day, often less.
But i now see that's what this thread is all about.

---

[br]BOINC is A.W.E.S.O.M.E, and then some.[br]

> ...
> Can anyone explain by the way, why BoincLogX doesn't catch the results send to
> CDPN? I've got more than 500 credit by CDPN since I started using BoincLogX,
> but BoincLogX haven't logged'em. The reason I chose to run BoincLogX, was to
> make my own statistic to check if BOINC distributes the resources as set up.
> But it's kind af rediculous to try making that statistic if it will only be
> more or less accurate once pr. how long it takes to complete a CPDN-WU.


My guess would be : BoincLogX logs only results that are in the state "ready to report", not trickles. 500 credits is somewhere at trickle 6 or 7, one CPDN model has 3 phases x 25 trickles so it will grant about 75.6 x 75 credits before the model is done. The trickles produce a scheduler request but afaik. not any data to send back to the project. After finishing a phase some data get sent back and it adds stats about the model phase to the result page.

>
> My guess would be : BoincLogX logs only results that are in the state "ready
> to report", not trickles. 500 credits is somewhere at trickle 6 or 7, one CPDN
> model has 3 phases x 25 trickles so it will grant about 75.6 x 75 credits
> before the model is done. The trickles produce a scheduler request but afaik.
> not any data to send back to the project. After finishing a phase some data
> get sent back and it adds stats about the model phase to the result page.

I'm not even sure i fully understand the concept of trickles. Or even what it actually means :) But your'e saying, that BoincLogX will only create 3 entries pr. CDPN unit? Despite their taking soo long to complete.

> ...
> I'm not even sure i fully understand the concept of trickles. Or even what it
> actually means :) But your'e saying, that BoincLogX will only create 3 entries
> pr. CDPN unit? Despite their taking soo long to complete.


I think those trickles are just for the users so they can see that the machine does something useful, the project probably wouldn't need them at all. I checked the sched_request.xml when it just was about to trickle and it had not many data in it.

I'm not even sure if BoincLogX will recognize the phases as it is not really an outgoing work unit, just some intermediate data. So maybe BoincLogX can only see the final state of the model - for me that would be only once in 1.5 or even more than 2 months on a dual MP2600+ (not all models need the same time).


edit: I have to correct my post above, I think each phase has "only" 24, not 25 trickles.

> And last; the CPU-time in seconds currently displayed for each result, is this
> simply how long time the WU have been running on my computer, or is 1 second
> of CPU-time a standard unit such as par example CDROM-drive speed? If solely
> being how long the WU have run on the computer, it's totally worthless. 1
> second of CPU-time by client in the daytime isn't the same, in computingpower,
> as 1 second at night, since I only allow BOINC projects to utilize all it can
> get at night, and a maximum of 60% during the day, often less.
> But i now see that's what this thread is all about.
>

I can confirm that the cpu time is indeed the actual time boinc gets to run on the cpu. Try it yourself by running a cpu intensive program and watch the elapsed CPU Time on the Boinc display. At certain times the counter slows or stops.

No I am not interested in wall clock time, only in the cpu time which is reported by the workunit.

In other words the 1 cpu second is the same day or night, and regardless of workload. : )

Edit: In other other words if Boinc only gets to run .6 out of every second then the cpu time only increments .6 second.
; )

> ...
> Edit: In other other words if Boinc only gets to run .6 out of every second
> then the cpu time only increments .6 second.
> ; )
>
So yet again to put it other words: you wish for the CPU-time to be reformed into a standard, though not a standard based on actual calc's performed, but solely a 'local' standard?

I can't by any means accept that for intance a WU I spotted at LHC had been treated by 6 clients. All the WU's requested 0.18 (doh!) credit, yet only one of the 6 clients actually got any credit at all (though NO errors from either of the clients). Serious reforming need to be done in a manner, that this cannot happen. The validation-part in it self is ok, as it reduces the risk of frauding WU's in order to move up the ranks, and 'never mind' then, that you might not get credited the second the WU is returned. But the above mentioned crediting kinda ticks me off! I've already had quite a few WU's not credited , due to errors in computing, uploading, et.c. but that doesn't mean that I haven't contributed precious CPU (not to forget electricity which is an actual expence in the respective currencies for the user), but still the projects are able to say "no, that's not good enough, nothing for you on that one" and THAT is kind of a hard pill to swallow! So what that you couldn't use it? I still wish to have the computing done recognized in SOME way. I find it disrespectfull that the current method of crediting doesn't take into consideration, that we actually pay, in true currency, to support the projects. Escpecially when a perfectly good WU gets no credit due to UL-error on behalf of the projects server or whatever.

---

[br]BOINC is A.W.E.S.O.M.E, and then some.[br]

> > ...
> > Edit: In other other words if Boinc only gets to run .6 out of every
> second
> > then the cpu time only increments .6 second.
> > ; )
> >
> So yet again to put it other words: you wish for the CPU-time to be reformed
> into a standard, though not a standard based on actual calc's performed, but
> solely a 'local' standard?
>

If you go to your Account page and display the Results for your WU's you see the following columns, CPU Time, Claimed Credit and Granted Credit.

What I would like is to have the server display the totals for those columns on the Account page. As well as the other fields also mentioned previously.

I'm not suggesting any changes to the way credits are calculated.

I just want the additional info to understand the credits.

: )

>
> I'm not suggesting any changes to the way credits are calculated.
>
> I just want the additional info to understand the credits.
>
> : )

Yes, i know, but you have to admit that the system of creditting is unfair when regarding the possibility of getting no credits for a perfectly good WU, for whatever the reason might be, and certainly when due to errors by the project. A display of total of e.g. the claimed credit and WU CPU-time would better this though, no doubt.

---

[br]BOINC is A.W.E.S.O.M.E, and then some.[br]