wasted time

Message boards : Number crunching : wasted time
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
Alan M. MacRobert

Send message
Joined: 10 Apr 99
Posts: 13
Credit: 4,385,900
RAC: 1
United States
Message 98294 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 13:37:44 UTC - in response to Message 97895.  
Last modified: 13 Apr 2005, 13:43:02 UTC

ID: 98294 · Report as offensive
Profile Spectrum
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Jun 99
Posts: 468
Credit: 53,129,336
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 98297 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 13:45:47 UTC - in response to Message 97675.  
Last modified: 13 Apr 2005, 14:27:19 UTC

I see the point that one should configure their system only to download WU's if the machine will be on long enough to cruch them (in time for the deadline), but ksnash has a point that the client end could be tweaked to abort the number crunching if a unit passes it's deadline before completing. Might not be a bad idea for future versions. Of course one could argue that this would encourage downloading of WU's without regard to deadlines..... Ah, what a confusing world we live in....

Does that amount to answering your own question or questioning you own answers?
Now I'm confuse
ID: 98297 · Report as offensive
Profile Kajunfisher
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 05
Posts: 1407
Credit: 126,476
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98298 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 13:46:37 UTC - in response to Message 98099.  

> >
> > > ... and the limit on "connect every 'x' days" should probably be
> closer
> > to 3
> > > than 10.
> >
> > No thanks.
> > 4 days worth of work is just right for me.
>
> 4 is 1 away from 3, 4 is 6 away from 10. 4 is closer to 3 than it is to 10.
>
glad you didn't say 11, i was running out of fingers and toes
No matter where you go, there you are...
ID: 98298 · Report as offensive
Ron
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Sep 99
Posts: 47
Credit: 3,900,704
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98299 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 13:52:08 UTC - in response to Message 98298.  


> glad you didn't say 11, i was running out of fingers and toes

Hmmmmm... by my count you should be able to make it up to twenty if using fingers and toes.

Of course, if you are a military veteran who lost a couple limbs in the war, wouldn't I look like the biggest arse!
<br><br><img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/1185sah.png'> <br>
Thanks to Tim (Captain Avatar) for my groovy Red Foxx avatar!
ID: 98299 · Report as offensive
Profile Spectrum
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Jun 99
Posts: 468
Credit: 53,129,336
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 98305 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 14:37:43 UTC - in response to Message 98299.  
Last modified: 13 Apr 2005, 14:44:39 UTC

>
> > glad you didn't say 11, i was running out of fingers and toes
>
> Hmmmmm... by my count you should be able to make it up to twenty if using
> fingers and toes.
>
> Of course, if you are a military veteran who lost a couple limbs in the war,
> wouldn't I look like the biggest arse!
>
Fred I love you're scence of humour
ID: 98305 · Report as offensive
Profile ralic
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 6 Jan 00
Posts: 308
Credit: 274,230
RAC: 0
Message 98327 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 15:33:00 UTC - in response to Message 97644.  

> credit. Ijust noticed the results were past the time. If I am not going to
> get credit for the time I volunteer for crunching it would be nice if the
> client would go ahead and throw out the results since they are useless.

While you feel that the results may be useless to you (report late and get no credit), they are not useless to the project. Each valid result is useful science.

The goal of this project is science and not credit.

I'm curious as to why you feel that the client should be changed to suit the goal of the user?
Why do you feel that the time is wasted?

ID: 98327 · Report as offensive
Profile ksnash

Send message
Joined: 28 Nov 99
Posts: 402
Credit: 528,725
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98347 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 16:53:46 UTC - in response to Message 97895.  

>
> Alan I am confused by your post.
>
> I think the days of set it and forget it are over, BOINC was created to
> include many projects and many different types of users...
>
> To down load a WU and then shut tour computer down, and then complain that the
> WU expired, is a Dooh! type of problem. We should be telling the guy to turn
> on his computer and if he wants to run it once and awhile then he should not
> run any BOINC project...
>
> Keep in mind The programs were created for unused CPU time and dont have that
> if
> the CPU ISN't Running.....
>
>
>
>
>

I didn't turn it off for long time just one or two days yetall the sudden all the wu went to expire. Some were probably from the time that berekeley was down for a week. That pushed a bunch into expiring. Icouldn't see the expire date and didn't know that the ones I was crunching would automatically be thrown out. They don't keepthem because someone else has alreadycompleted them. BOINC is breaking a bunch of useful protocols.
ID: 98347 · Report as offensive
Profile Paul D. Buck
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Jul 00
Posts: 3898
Credit: 1,158,042
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98355 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 17:17:45 UTC - in response to Message 98299.  

>
> > glad you didn't say 11, i was running out of fingers and toes
>
> Hmmmmm... by my count you should be able to make it up to twenty if using
> fingers and toes.

Tom Lerher said once, "Base 8 is like base 10 really ... if you are missing 2 fingers ..."
ID: 98355 · Report as offensive
1mp0£173
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 8423
Credit: 356,897
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98368 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 17:41:15 UTC - in response to Message 98347.  

> I didn't turn it off for long time just one or two days yetall the sudden all
> the wu went to expire. Some were probably from the time that berekeley was
> down for a week. That pushed a bunch into expiring. Icouldn't see the expire
> date and didn't know that the ones I was crunching would automatically be
> thrown out. They don't keepthem because someone else has alreadycompleted
> them. BOINC is breaking a bunch of useful protocols.

I only see two computers in your account. One has no work showing and "0 days" for the turn-around time. The other has a turn-around time of just under 14 days.

"Expired" has a particular meaning in BOINC. It means that after the deadline, work units can be reassigned if a quorum has been met. If you return work "late" but you beat the other machines, and complete the quorum, then you get credit.

I'm guessing that you have "connect every 'x' days" set to something near 10. You probably wouldn't have lost any work if that value was closer to 5.
ID: 98368 · Report as offensive
Profile mikey
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Dec 99
Posts: 4215
Credit: 3,474,603
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98404 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 19:35:39 UTC - in response to Message 97675.  

> I see the point that one should configure their system only to download WU's
> if the machine will be on long enough to cruch them (in time for the
> deadline), but ksnash has a point that the client end could be tweaked to
> abort the number crunching if a unit passes it's deadline before completing.
> Might not be a bad idea for future versions. Of course one could argue that
> this would encourage downloading of WU's without regard to deadlines.....
> Ah, what a confusing world we live in....
>
But even IF your units are expired, IF you send in your expired unit BEFORE the people that got it on the resend you WILL get credit for crunching it!
Now Berkeley IS playing around with the units, they have been experimenting with sending units the second time to machines that return it 24 hours or less.
Doesn't always work, but I have gotten some units like that before.

ID: 98404 · Report as offensive
Profile Kajunfisher
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 05
Posts: 1407
Credit: 126,476
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98422 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 20:33:16 UTC - in response to Message 98355.  

> >
> > > glad you didn't say 11, i was running out of fingers and toes
> >
> > Hmmmmm... by my count you should be able to make it up to twenty if
> using
> > fingers and toes.


This is a perfectly good reason why you should never post when you are tired. I didn't realize how tired I was until I woke up 1 1/2 hours later with my head on the keyboard. I am a veteran and I do have all my fingers and toes. I didn't think such a simple thing as counting your own fingers and toes could get so, well, complicated ;-)


No matter where you go, there you are...
ID: 98422 · Report as offensive
Astro
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 02
Posts: 8026
Credit: 600,015
RAC: 0
Message 98425 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 20:43:14 UTC - in response to Message 98422.  

I
> didn't think such a simple thing as counting your own fingers and toes could
> get so, well, complicated ;-)
>
Don't forget that Thumbs aren't fingers. 10 toes, 8 fingers, 2 thumbs.

Just to complicate it some more
ID: 98425 · Report as offensive
Profile Paul D. Buck
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Jul 00
Posts: 3898
Credit: 1,158,042
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98448 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 21:48:24 UTC - in response to Message 98425.  

> Don't forget that Thumbs aren't fingers. 10 toes, 8 fingers, 2 thumbs.
>
> Just to complicate it some more

Well, then base 6 is like base 8 really ....


Thankfully, big toes are still big toes ...
ID: 98448 · Report as offensive
Profile Kajunfisher
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 05
Posts: 1407
Credit: 126,476
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98453 - Posted: 13 Apr 2005, 21:54:59 UTC

lol
No matter where you go, there you are...
ID: 98453 · Report as offensive
Profile Siran d'Vel'nahr
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 7379
Credit: 44,181,323
RAC: 238
United States
Message 98487 - Posted: 14 Apr 2005, 0:43:57 UTC

All I have to say is that if you're going to participate, participate 100% of the time. I have 2 PCs running 24/7/365. One crunches only SETI because it's my older slower PC. I do 3 projects on my just under a year old one.

Nobody will benefit if someone downloads a bunch of WUs and then turns the PC off for a week or 2.

Just my 2 scents worth.... >:-)

L8R....

T'Khasi Time: Wednesday, 13 April 2005 - 05:43 PM --700 (Pacific Standard Time)

CAPT Siran d'Vel'nahr - L L & P _\\//
Winders 11 OS? "What a piece of junk!" - L. Skywalker
"Logic is the cement of our civilization with which we ascend from chaos using reason as our guide." - T'Plana-hath
ID: 98487 · Report as offensive
1mp0£173
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 8423
Credit: 356,897
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98547 - Posted: 14 Apr 2005, 3:11:41 UTC - in response to Message 98487.  

> All I have to say is that if you're going to participate, participate 100% of
> the time. I have 2 PCs running 24/7/365. One crunches only SETI because it's
> my older slower PC. I do 3 projects on my just under a year old one.

Oh, I don't know.....

I think that the point is: if you're going to participate, be consistent. You don't need to crunch 24/7 -- BOINC knows how much a host crunches each day and adjusts accordingly.

At the same time, don't grab two weeks of work and then take a couple of weeks off either.

Somewhere in the middle everything works fine.
ID: 98547 · Report as offensive
Profile Digger
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 4 Dec 99
Posts: 614
Credit: 21,053
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98572 - Posted: 14 Apr 2005, 5:20:00 UTC - in response to Message 98487.  

> All I have to say is that if you're going to participate, participate 100% of
> the time.

I must respectfully disagree with you on that one. Nobody is expected to crunch 24/7 if they normally would not have their computer(s) on all the time. SETI asks only that you donate spare CPU cycles, not create more cycles specifically to crunch WU's. In fact, i should think the developers would consider that as wasteful. With a little fine-tuning as Ned said, you can crunch for however many hours your computer is on daily, and contribute to the science of SETI every bit as much as the rest of us. :)

Happy Crunching!

Dig
ID: 98572 · Report as offensive
BarryAZ

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 16,982,517
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98577 - Posted: 14 Apr 2005, 5:32:19 UTC - in response to Message 98572.  

> I must respectfully disagree with you on that one. Nobody is expected to
> crunch 24/7 if they normally would not have their computer(s) on all the time.
> SETI asks only that you donate spare CPU cycles, not create more cycles
> specifically to crunch WU's. In fact, i should think the developers would
> consider that as wasteful. With a little fine-tuning as Ned said, you can
> crunch for however many hours your computer is on daily, and contribute to the
> science of SETI every bit as much as the rest of us. :)
>
I agree -- I've found that in order to avoid working units that will not be submitted by 'deadline', *manually* going into program files, BOINC, Projects,
setiathome.berkeley.edu and deleting soon to be overdue untouched units so that I don't waste cycles on work that is a waste of CPU time, I can avoid the problem.

However, frankly, this problem is something of a system design AND interface issue that probably SHOULD be dealt with in ways that don't require a manual attack mode. I mean, given the design choice to require duplicate results (multiple duplicate results) in order to eliminate 'cheating', you'd think there would be an option to kill off the units to avoid waste. I realize avoiding waste is viewed as unAmerican, but really.


ID: 98577 · Report as offensive
Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21804
Credit: 2,815,091
RAC: 0
United States
Message 98578 - Posted: 14 Apr 2005, 5:33:21 UTC - in response to Message 98487.  

Can't argue with Gillian.
ID: 98578 · Report as offensive
Aurora Borealis
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Jan 01
Posts: 3075
Credit: 5,631,463
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 98582 - Posted: 14 Apr 2005, 5:39:06 UTC - in response to Message 98577.  

> However, frankly, this problem is something of a system design AND interface
> issue that probably SHOULD be dealt with in ways that don't require a manual
> attack mode. I mean, given the design choice to require duplicate results
> (multiple duplicate results) in order to eliminate 'cheating', you'd think
> there would be an option to kill off the units to avoid waste. I realize
> avoiding waste is viewed as unAmerican, but really.
>
>
It is being dealt with. Boinc V 4.2x+ have an option to abort individual WU. My understand is that future versions will have a feature to assign extra time to WU that are nearing deadline to ensure they are done in time.

Boinc 4.30 Alpha

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470
ID: 98582 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : wasted time


 
©2024 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.