Observation of CreditNew Impact


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : Observation of CreditNew Impact

Previous · 1 . . . 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · Next
Author Message
sleepy
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 May 99
Posts: 79
Credit: 23,157,477
RAC: 18,066
Italy
Message 1384760 - Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 8:35:52 UTC - in response to Message 1384669.


I also draw your attention to his comment, "My RAC has gone down by less than 10%. Is this worse for people using anonymous platform?".


With immense respect to all SETI developers and in particular to the people working at the labs, I would add to your comment (with whom I agree regarding data and perspective. I walked the same path) that, as I already pointed out some posts above, Eric was comparing the throughput of stock applications.

This means he was basically comparing V6 stock application vs. V7 stock, which is however heavily optimised, even if not fully.
To put things in an easier way, though partially incorrect, it is a bit like comparing V6 stock against V6 optimised.
If stock and optimised give the same credits, it means that now credits given for same amount of work done are cut in half, since optimised are roughly double (or more) efficient respect to stock.
This is the reason why Eric sees things almost staying the same.

If he basically switched from full paying/half efficient stock V6 to half paying/full efficient optimised (though stock) V7, then it is quite reasonable that the balance is roughly even (though, even so, there is a 10% reduction).
Who was and is on optimised, of course had nothing to gain switching, since he/she already was using the best software and thus found his/her credit cut in half.

Of course this has nothing to do with the scientific work done. The project as a whole is now more efficient and does more accurate analysis.
Though many people will tend to switch to AP and maybe processing power of MB will be reduced (this should be an "antropological" migration that should be observed form the cockpit, especially if the big crunchers will go this way, if not already there).

Happy crunching!

Sleepy
____________

Profile Yezok/Zeek.Seti.Cluster
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Jul 99
Posts: 52
Credit: 2,811,153
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1384885 - Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 17:49:20 UTC - in response to Message 1384760.

RAC score is totally screwed since updating to seti v7 I am running 5 machines and was averaging about 5000 RAC per day running seti v6.x since upgrading to v7 I have dropped to about 1900 per day and still dropping was running lunatics v.40 and now v.41
____________
Gimme BEER and WU's!!!!

Lionel
Send message
Joined: 25 Mar 00
Posts: 576
Credit: 234,968,428
RAC: 220,140
Australia
Message 1385019 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 4:09:07 UTC - in response to Message 1384885.


You are not alone here, every one is suffering. In my case, I saw a 54% decline in daily credit after moving to v7.


____________

Profile CLYDEProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Aug 99
Posts: 2307
Credit: 23,981,236
RAC: 32,457
United States
Message 1385092 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 12:40:50 UTC - in response to Message 1385019.
Last modified: 27 Jun 2013, 12:44:44 UTC


You are not alone here, every one is suffering. In my case, I saw a 54% decline in daily credit after moving to v7.


My concern isn't the drop in the RAC (we are all in the same boat & perhaps this will be the New Normal). But...

A lack of real response from those managing this Project.

Is this really the New Normal? OK

A mistake was made and will be adjusted. OK

A mistake was made, but will not be fixed. OK

We don't understand what happened & are investigating. OK

Just some real feedback to those who have spent time & money on the Project.

Am I wrong?
____________

Lionel
Send message
Joined: 25 Mar 00
Posts: 576
Credit: 234,968,428
RAC: 220,140
Australia
Message 1385095 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 12:52:11 UTC - in response to Message 1385092.



I agree and do not think that you are wrong.




____________

Profile Donald L. JohnsonProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 5 Aug 02
Posts: 6254
Credit: 734,778
RAC: 1,174
United States
Message 1385142 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 16:50:22 UTC - in response to Message 1385092.


You are not alone here, every one is suffering. In my case, I saw a 54% decline in daily credit after moving to v7.

My concern isn't the drop in the RAC (we are all in the same boat & perhaps this will be the New Normal). But...

A lack of real response from those managing this Project.

There HAVE been real responses from Dr. K and the v7 developers, in THIS THREAD and others. You apparently have not seen them.

Here's a summary of what you have missed:

CreditNew is a function of BOINC, not Seti@Home. Eric has said he has neither the knowledge not the authority to change CreditNew.

Because the v7 science apps do more analysis, they were expected to take longer to process, so tasks per day and RAC were expected to drop, but the change in credit per task was NOT expected to be as large as it seems to have been. This HAS been brought to Dr. Anderson's attention, but we really don't expect him to make any changes.

Eric and others have said it may take as long as 5-6 weeks after roll-out for things to settle out and a new "normal" establish itself. We are not there yet, but reports are that credit grants are beginning to return to v6 levels.

So for at least the next couple of weeks, the old rule still applies:
Here at Seti@Home, patience is not just a virtue, it is a REQUIREMENT.

____________
Donald
Infernal Optimist / Submariner, retired

Grant (SSSF)
Send message
Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 5861
Credit: 60,414,882
RAC: 49,155
Australia
Message 1385171 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 18:07:44 UTC - in response to Message 1385142.


On my slowest cruncher (and the one that had a couple of days downtime & problems getting work after timing out WUs) RAC did rebound slightly, but has started to fall aagin, but is not quite back down to it's lowest point so far. On my faster system, RAC continues to fall.
____________
Grant
Darwin NT.

Lionel
Send message
Joined: 25 Mar 00
Posts: 576
Credit: 234,968,428
RAC: 220,140
Australia
Message 1385249 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 23:16:20 UTC - in response to Message 1385127.

It is what it is, what it is, what it is.

I am done fretting about my RAC, and at this point just consider it the new norm.
It shall probably do some further self adjusting as time goes on.

It shall not affect the amount of work I do for the project, and that is the most important thing.

RAC for me is still relevant as a benchmark against all other participants on the Seti project. And I don't care how that relates to the credits that other projects wish to hand out like candy.

Meow.




Mark, firstly let me say that I appreciate your view and position.

I (and undoubtedly others) consider there to be a problem. Where that problem is and how it manifests itself is beyond my ability (and that of many others) to analyse and determine, but not beyond the ability of those that created the system. The issue as to whether they have the will or desire to do this and understand the issue is another question.

I, like you, only crunch Seti, so cross project credit rates are of no issue or interest to me either.

The issue of benchmarking within the project is, as I agree with you, relevant here. To that end, I started conducting my own “simple test” a few days ago. The outcome of this may be of interest to some, but as it looks at the moment, it would appear to show that there is an issue in here as well.

Lionel


____________

Profile doublechaz
Send message
Joined: 17 Nov 00
Posts: 66
Credit: 32,582,091
RAC: 10,370
United States
Message 1385282 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 4:01:53 UTC

Seems to me the credit has varied a good deal with each new version of the app going back more than ten years. Who cares? We're all in this project, the only place where scores for this project have any meaning.

I came here to see if I could find out why my RAC is half what it used to be. The answer is that everyone is seeing the same. It's an artifact of the version change. Nothing broken. Ok. Question answered.

Nothing to whine about. Thanks everyone for clearing that up.


____________

Grant (SSSF)
Send message
Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 5861
Credit: 60,414,882
RAC: 49,155
Australia
Message 1385310 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 6:22:49 UTC - in response to Message 1385282.
Last modified: 28 Jun 2013, 6:25:07 UTC

We're all in this project, the only place where scores for this project have any meaning.

But the fact is that Seti is a part of BOINC. And one of the points of BOINC is that people are able to compare work done between projects. So if the granting of credits is stuffed, then one of the main points of BOINC is stuffed.

It's an artifact of the version change. Nothing broken.

The very fact that it has occured, and occured with the magnitude it has indicates that it is very, very broken. There have been version changes before, but it has never affected the granting of credits as badly as has happened this time around.
____________
Grant
Darwin NT.

sleepy
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 May 99
Posts: 79
Credit: 23,157,477
RAC: 18,066
Italy
Message 1385349 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 10:23:04 UTC - in response to Message 1385310.


But the fact is that Seti is a part of BOINC. And one of the points of BOINC is that people are able to compare work done between projects. So if the granting of credits is stuffed, then one of the main points of BOINC is stuffed.


I have been complaining about the credit crunch myself, but this is not exact or complete (to tell the truth, you only say that credit gauging is just one of the points).
The main purpose of BOINC is actually to provide a convenient platform for distributed computing that many projects can use.

Then, giving the same credit for the same amount of work is a nice gig, and I find that the fact that it is not happening is not good, but it is not the main issue.

Sleepy
____________

Profile cov_route
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 13 Sep 12
Posts: 295
Credit: 7,359,604
RAC: 11,379
Canada
Message 1385432 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 16:30:49 UTC
Last modified: 28 Jun 2013, 16:33:20 UTC

There are four separate mechanisms at play: the performance of the V7 MB stock apps, the amount of computation in MB V7 workunits, CreditNew, and the fact that AP has not changed.

0. One axiom: RAC matters. If you have robust mental health and laugh off things like this then you would have a hard time caring about CreditNew.

1. The new stock MB apps are closer to the optimized apps in performance than they were before V7.

2. The amount of computation has been increased per MB workunit.

3. CreditNew has been implemented in such a way that credit per MB workunit processed by stock has remained constant.

4. AP processing still generates RAC at the same rate as before.

Point 1. means that either RAC generated by stock had to go up or RAC generated by optimized had to go down. Point 3. caused the latter to occur. Either alternative would have be defensible although increasing RAC for stock would have generated less of a stir.

Both choices can be defended because credit is not directly related to the number of mathematical calculations done on a wu, nor has anyone come up with a practical way to make such a link in the mixed CPU/GPU world. The only question, therefore, is how to do the abstraction. CreditNew is probably just as defensible as anything else, the problem is that it's byzantine. Speaking for myself, I can't get a feel for how it works.

The thing that's indefensible as I see it is the difference in RAC generation between the current versions of optimized MB and AP. MB v7 increased the amount of computation while maintaining (stock) or decreasing (optimized) RAC. AP has not changed.

That means you can now receive a *lot* more credit by processing AP. That's illogical. You will see people (probably with high-performance machinery) vacuuming up all the AP they can just for RAC's sake. That's bound to create hard feelings. And will probably break (or warp) CreditNew which AFAICT relies on unbiased population statistics. Skewed stats = broken CreditNew.

Sten-Arne
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 1 Nov 08
Posts: 3510
Credit: 20,646,883
RAC: 22,112
Sweden
Message 1385452 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 17:03:48 UTC - in response to Message 1385443.

And your point was?

In reference to Seti.

What was your point, exactly?

What does it matter if Seti grants a million credit points or one?

It is simply not an issue anymore.

Let it go.

I respectfully shall request that this thread be closed, as it's original intent has now been fulfilled.


+1
____________

Profile cov_route
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 13 Sep 12
Posts: 295
Credit: 7,359,604
RAC: 11,379
Canada
Message 1385466 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 17:54:15 UTC - in response to Message 1385443.
Last modified: 28 Jun 2013, 17:54:29 UTC

The point which I thought was clear is that people are encouraged to run AP at the expense of MB. This will result in an inequitable distribution of credit. I doubt this outcome was intended by the developers.

I will assume people find credit (and presumably the fair assignment thereof) to be noteworthy if they go so far as to put it in their sig.

Profile cov_route
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 13 Sep 12
Posts: 295
Credit: 7,359,604
RAC: 11,379
Canada
Message 1385482 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 18:13:06 UTC

I wonder why I'm having so much trouble finding AP wu's to run?

What could be causing that? Hm.

Keith White
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 May 99
Posts: 370
Credit: 2,887,028
RAC: 2,470
United States
Message 1385506 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 19:00:53 UTC - in response to Message 1385482.

AP queue on the server ran dry and creation of new AP is on the low side. It's finally starting to filling up the queue again but it's still tiny compared to it's "filled" level of 25K (4K right now).

Also if you have MB and AP enabled on your rig, if the server is out of MB, you get AP so there are times when suddenly the AP queue is sucked dry soon after the MB.

When I look at my AP wingmen I've only spied a few that only process AP units and sadly they are also the ones that haven't dialed in for weeks.

I understand what you were trying to say. AP, since the app didn't change, is the only stable app in terms of credits per hour while V7 MB with all the systemic changes that you outlined is in flux and since some among us seem to have tied up some bit of their self into crunching feel hurt with the reduction of their RAC.

But there's nothing to be done about it.
____________
"Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh." - The Doctor

Previous · 1 . . . 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Observation of CreditNew Impact

Copyright © 2014 University of California