VLAR's
Message boards :
SETI@home Enhanced :
VLAR's
Message board moderation
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 05 Posts: 709 Credit: 5,834,108 RAC: 0 
|
Has any one got real, not projected times for Very low Angle range units, either here or on Seti. My P3 has a AR=0.011 unit on seti the estimated time now is 30(ish) hours. This computer doing ar=0.422, most common AR, units takes 16 hrs. Joe's graph suggest's 1.2n * 0.422 times and Insides time/deadline table doesn't go that low. Andy edit/ Sorry forgot to give link, http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=77117769 ID: 4746 ·  |
 Steve Cressman Send message Joined: 14 Nov 05 Posts: 296 Credit: 13,874 RAC: 0 
|
This might help you. Not realy sure how it will compare but it is the closest one I've got. ar = 0.0589. Took 8hrs 48min 54sec with the latest app ar = 0.422 takes 6hrs 9min on the three that where done with the latest app. So the 0.0589 took almost 50% longer. :) 98SE XP2500+ @ 2.1 GHz Boinc v5.8.8  
ID: 4748 · |
|
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 05 Posts: 709 Credit: 5,834,108 RAC: 0
|
Thanks Steve, On one of my other computers, I see I also have one of the AR=0.059 units. On that computer it took 6.64 hrs compared to 4.56 for an AR=0.423 unit (1.45 times). The main concern is probably not the crunch time but the deadline, I assume it was given 19.1 days as per Inglesides table. But from my estimated crunch time for this unit the deadline should be more like 40 days, twice as long. And just a thought wasn't the credit calculation formula divided into several sections so that the VHAR's did get significantly more credits than 0.422 units/time. So I assume that the calculation below AR=0.8 was similarly adjusted. Andy ID: 4750 · |
|
Send message Joined: 14 Jun 05 Posts: 94 Credit: 147,582 RAC: 0 
|
Joe's graph suggest's 1.2n * 0.422 times and Insides time/deadline table doesn't go that low. Well, seeing did write "same for smaller" & "same for larger", not sure how you can claim it doesn't go that low... :) But anyway, did find 2 VLAR's, AR=0.039461 at 51k and AR=0.058977 at 49.6k, both with v5.11. As a comparison, same computer uses around 46k on AR=0.422... On another computer, AR=0.039461 is 34k seconds, and 28k-30k for 0.42x. So, 10%-20% longer on VLAR seems to be the norm... ID: 4752 · |
|
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 05 Posts: 709 Credit: 5,834,108 RAC: 0
|
Ingleside, Just checked it again it is at 66.4% after 16h:24m. That would suggest about 24h:30m to complete. In this case that is 1.57 * time of ar=0.426463 unit. Your table says that AR's of 0.11 and lower should complete in about 75% of time of ar=0.422, looking at this one case, and that is why I asked on this site and not on main site, it would indicate that the time is twice that given in the table. Andy ID: 4753 · |
|
Send message Joined: 14 Jun 05 Posts: 94 Credit: 147,582 RAC: 0
|
Ingleside, A quick calculation places AR=0.42x at 2.6x while AR=0.039461 is at 3.0x, meaning VLAR is 15% longer... According to the splitter-info on the other hand, VLAR is 2.87x while AR=0.42 is 3.81x. Meaning, as already mentioned before & after the table, the estimate is too high for "normal" angle-range. As this thread has shown, it's actually a little too low on VLAR. On High angle-range it's closer to reality again... Ah, VHAR, the fastest is 0.48x, while majority is 0.5x-0.6x. Now, looking on your table, and after my "normalization", while on my computer it was 2.6x, your P-M was at 2.2x and p3 at 2.1x... On the only VLAR you had, it was 3.2x. Also, as already mentioned the P-M was very fast on VHAR at 0.35x. So, why the differences? Well, I'm using Amd while your computers is Intel, so one possibility is Intel has an advantage on "normal" angle-range over Amd, but doesn't have this advantage on VLAR... Another possibility, atleast on VHAR the large cache-size on P-M seems to have given an advantage, and likely also memory-speed will influence crunch-times... ID: 4772 · |
|
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 05 Posts: 709 Credit: 5,834,108 RAC: 0
|
The unit is still running it has now reached 90% in 26h:20m. I found another result wuid=77117765 with same ar two hosts have completed. A P4 3.8 GHz has taken 46k sec (~13hr) and an AMD 64 3000+ has taken 34k sec (~9.5hr). The credits claimed for the AMD Fpops 58.69, for the P4, non-fpops 99.12. Andy ID: 4781 · |
Pappa Send message Joined: 13 Nov 05 Posts: 1724 Credit: 3,121,901 RAC: 0 
|
Andy Finally got one over in Seti (running 5.2.13tx36) ar=0.017023 321599076 22633 seconds Real 12,074.62 reported... It looks like I am going to uninstall and reinstall... grrrrr... As I can't seem to get 5.2.13tx36 to turn off... AMD 64 3200 @2.4 Ghz 1024 RAM Windows 2003 Pro HostID 1233083 Thanks to Paul and Friends Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project ID: 4799 · |
|
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 05 Posts: 709 Credit: 5,834,108 RAC: 0
|
Andy Pappa, One of the reasons I asked over here was because of the claimed credits. And it may be an Intel thing but I see long crunch times, low credits for VLAR. Didn't want to excite the masses before they noticed. Andy ID: 4804 · |
|
Pappa Send message Joined: 13 Nov 05 Posts: 1724 Credit: 3,121,901 RAC: 0
|
Andy Generally Intel's are losing ground to AMD (yes I still owe you numbers)... I have been avoiding "optimized" other than a few machines for testing. The PII 350 and PII 400 should run for atleast another week sans optimized... With the different AR's they are getting it will give a better baseline... So far clean machines for 4.18/enhanced are the PII350, PII 400, Intel 2Ghz, AMD XP 2800 and AMD 3200 (slightly overclocked grin) and I will bring a AMD XP 2000 online (just upgraded the bios to fix a "slow" problem). I may be able to kick over a P3 733 for a bit... Al Andy Thanks to Paul and Friends Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project ID: 4818 · |
|
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 05 Posts: 709 Credit: 5,834,108 RAC: 0
|
Keeping an eye on these Seti units at the moment; wuid=77221870ar=0.4402 Time 9,365s, Granted 61.10 wuid=77312097ar=0.0286 Time 15,021s, Claimed 58.87 wuid=77430790ar=0.0310 Time 15,099s, claimed 58.87 Even if it is an Intel thing, Intel's are in the majority and I'm sure someone else out there in the wild is going to notice and there is going to be a flood of complaint's. Andy ID: 4821 · |
|
Pappa Send message Joined: 13 Nov 05 Posts: 1724 Credit: 3,121,901 RAC: 0
|
Andy I am sure there will be a full week of "blood letting!" to an extent people have forgotten the orignal 10 times claim and are not happy with the 2-4 times depending on AR and Computer type... I got the AMD XP 2000 kicked over, it had trux's 5.2.13tx36 and had issues... It burned the first two that showup as "in progress"... but is now running a 5.4.x BOINC Core ( think 6 and will look at moving to 9 later ).. HostID 2345777 I will try to get you some numbers started this evening as I can figure out where I left off... Al Keeping an eye on these Seti units at the moment; Thanks to Paul and Friends Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project ID: 4822 · |
 Send message Joined: 17 Jun 05 Posts: 61 Credit: 14,342 RAC: 0 
|
I am sure there will be a full week of "blood letting!" to an extent people have forgotten the orignal 10 times claim and are not happy with the 2-4 times depending on AR and Computer type...You'll also get months of Mac OS X rage from both PowerPC and Intel camps, as well as more furor when optimized apps fail to materialize... But I digress. ID: 4823 · |
|
Pappa Send message Joined: 13 Nov 05 Posts: 1724 Credit: 3,121,901 RAC: 0
|
Actually that is a valid point, however the reduction in time from the Original Estimates is very good! We have Mac Volunteers and a few issues... So to this point those that would/could optimize have not made themselves "visible." Are they taking a "wait and see?" They are not here... Can you contact them and provide some sense of urgency? I am sure there will be a full week of "blood letting!" to an extent people have forgotten the orignal 10 times claim and are not happy with the 2-4 times depending on AR and Computer type... Thanks to Paul and Friends Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project ID: 4825 · |
|
Send message Joined: 17 Jun 05 Posts: 61 Credit: 14,342 RAC: 0
|
Actually that is a valid point, however the reduction in time from the Original Estimates is very good! We have Mac Volunteers and a few issues... So to this point those that would/could optimize have not made themselves "visible." Are they taking a "wait and see?" They are not here... Can you contact them and provide some sense of urgency?I agree: We're making some damn fine progress. I think that the more-involved users, lovers of the cutting edge, are chugging away Beta WUs, but the vast majority of Mac users are (unfortunately) highly uncomfortable, impatient, or simply ignorant of Beta. They stick to SETI because it's "safe". What's really hurting is that the Mac users we really need (read: programmers) are focusing their energies on the optimized SETI α app (or, like me, are in finals week). I'm not in any team, so I have little day-to-day contact with Mac crunchers. Maybe we should contact Mac team leaders and have them pass on the call for volunteers? Edit: If you ever need a stable G5 to debug on, lemme know SFERTGIVBOertgan@.NAerobANmzsftgerredqanmz.@naertg (Give me a little advanced notice to get to the keyb., of course) ID: 4827 · |
Fuzzy Hollynoodles Send message Joined: 17 Jun 05 Posts: 2087 Credit: 257,732 RAC: 0 |
Has any one got real, not projected times for Very low Angle range units, either here or on Seti. Can I ask, how and where do I get that information? I don't have any additional programs installed. Would it be a good idea to get one of those, and in case which? [b]"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me[/b] 
ID: 4853 · |
|
Pappa Send message Joined: 13 Nov 05 Posts: 1724 Credit: 3,121,901 RAC: 0
|
Neo Sorry for the abbreviation but it is hard to highlight a "box" and cut and paste... As a the wife has our only working Mac in her office and it is mostly turned off other than troubleshooting Mac issues for her line of work... I have no basis or large interest... What is needed is someone to champion the cause... and become the Point of Contact as far as Seti goes... To be honest, I do not have the time... I still owe Andy a ton of statistics... Those are aimed at the credit analysis... So I wanted to make sure that this did not get lost... I also created a thread for Mac Issues... Pappa Actually that is a valid point, however the reduction in time from the Original Estimates is very good! We have Mac Volunteers and a few issues... So to this point those that would/could optimize have not made themselves "visible." Are they taking a "wait and see?" They are not here... Can you contact them and provide some sense of urgency?I agree: We're making some damn fine progress. Thanks to Paul and Friends Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project ID: 4857 · |
|
Send message Joined: 17 Jun 05 Posts: 61 Credit: 14,342 RAC: 0
|
Roger that. Right now the best I can do is figure out how to add the `-fast` compiler flag in ./configure (or is it `set CCFLAGS="-fast"`?), make, cross my fingers and hope that I don't blow WUs 4 at a time. EDIT: One more thing - I can't run anything lower than 10.4 (Tiger) on the Quad. The very, very soonest I can get a 10.2.8 or a 10.3.9 Mac is May 21st. ID: 4860 · |
 Send message Joined: 11 Feb 06 Posts: 540 Credit: 1,259,475 RAC: 0
|
Can I ask, how and where do I get that information? I don't have any additional programs installed. Would it be a good idea to get one of those, and in case which? For completed results, the angle range is reported in the "stderr out" message on the Result page, the first item in a 'statistics' line, preceding the FFT, Gaussian, pulse, and triplet counts. (For some reason mine are usually repeated several—or even many—times.) For WUs still on your system, open the file with a text editor and look for the "true angle range" tag, maybe thirty lines from the top. I don't know what the 'official' definition of a VLAR is, but if there's a zero immediately after the decimal point (as in "ar=0.054321") it probably qualifies. Values between about 0.3 and 0.6 are typical; VHARs likely start somewhere over 1.0.  ID: 4862 · |
|
Send message Joined: 17 Jun 05 Posts: 61 Credit: 14,342 RAC: 0
|
Follow-up: Just got the 5.13 app for OS X - I'll let it run for 24 hrs. I'll probably be into my commute when the first results come in (hostid=6654) The WUs dated 12 May on are being crunched by 5.13 ID: 4863 · |
©2025 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.