Get Out of My House (Jan 18 2011)

Sounds like Synergy got there not a moment too soon! Good luck in sorting things out, we'll still be here looking forward to business as normal. :-)
____________
Damsel Rescuer, Kitty Patron, Raccoon Friend, Uli Fan,
Julie Supporter, ES99 Admirer, PETA Member, 1st Childhood

Good luck!!! Whether with Synergy or another machine, hope things go relative smoothly.

I have a question...Is it possible to separate uploads/downloads?

If the uploads could also be routed through the new lab Gbit line. This could leave the Hurricane Elec. line purely for downloads...

??
____________
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, 'hmm... that's funny...'" -- Isaac Asimov

At least when Synergy (New Bruno) comes up it will be a true test to see if it can handle the load of the project with everyone uploading their completed WU's. I have over 4k to report alone.

Todd
____________

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

I would disagree with the statement that we can make do without redundant servers for this project. Considering the number of hosts are now over 2 million for just this project that is an incredible amount of computing power and really was the spirit of the architectural design. The work still needs to go somewhere.

I don't think some people here realize the scope of the data returned and the impact of the loss of storage devices. To serve the project as has been demanded by the users, some are very vocal, there does need to be many factors considered.

It isn't about throwing money at a problem in hopes of a resolution. Things break and need to be replaced over time - requiring money or donations to achieve the goal. Not much different that expecting to drive your new car with the same tires for 150k miles or not getting an oil change.

When your dataset increases, your load and time between failures also increases. When trying to make do with piecemeal equipment it can be very challenging to make a go of it.

Todd

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

BOINC is supposed to make it possible to do big science on a vanishingly small budget. That means redundant servers are often out of the question.

So instead of redundant servers so that something can always take work, we have a client that handles outages gracefully.

It has to be that way because the standard solution (throw money at the problem) is not available to BOINC projects.

Aye, Capn' Todd....

I face challenges just keeping 8 crunching rigs online some days.

Power supplies age, motherboard components age, things change.
Adjustments to settings are required.

Of course, the kitties push the rigs pretty hard, so any change in tolerances can sometimes throw things outta whack.

I suspect that Eric, Matt, and crew sleep much better recently with the new servers at work.....

I know that even with the latest short outage, we are enjoying the longest streak of uptime in Seti history for many moons.

You and all other contributors have done well.
____________
******

"Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty."

As it is kitten, so shall it be done.

I would disagree with the statement that we can make do without redundant servers for this project. Considering the number of hosts are now over 2 million for just this project that is an incredible amount of computing power and really was the spirit of the architectural design. The work still needs to go somewhere.

I don't think some people here realize the scope of the data returned and the impact of the loss of storage devices. To serve the project as has been demanded by the users, some are very vocal, there does need to be many factors considered.

It isn't about throwing money at a problem in hopes of a resolution. Things break and need to be replaced over time - requiring money or donations to achieve the goal. Not much different that expecting to drive your new car with the same tires for 150k miles or not getting an oil change.

When your dataset increases, your load and time between failures also increases. When trying to make do with piecemeal equipment it can be very challenging to make a go of it.

Todd

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

BOINC is supposed to make it possible to do big science on a vanishingly small budget. That means redundant servers are often out of the question.

So instead of redundant servers so that something can always take work, we have a client that handles outages gracefully.

It has to be that way because the standard solution (throw money at the problem) is not available to BOINC projects.

[snip]

When your dataset increases, your load and time between failures also increases. When trying to make do with piecemeal equipment it can be very challenging to make a go of it.

Todd