Hi,

You now seeing the effect I indicated would happen 3 days ago. But nobody listens to me. Message forum_thread.php?id=30570#299712

and from that post:

As The latest of Trux's clients uses Fpops to calculate credits for enhanced, but I understand that it uses DCF to do the calibration, and on my computer the DCF has gone up from 0.13 to 0.55

Do you mean that your DCF was 0.13 with seti 4.18 and your DCF is now 0.55 with seti_enhanced 5.12?
That's not an effect of the Boinc client. It's an effect of the different science applications. They *do* need different correction factors (Or are you surprised that seti and einstein need different DCFs? No, I guess). You will get the same DCF with a standard client as with trux's optimized client.

I still do not see any problems crunching seti_enhanced with trux's calibrating client. There is no credit soup, no messed up requests of new work and so on. I'm running it on three computers. The calibration is turned on on two computers and turned off on one computer. So far, I didn't notice any problems.

The only "problem", which I mentioned earlier, is that the calibration of seti and seti_enhanced does not fit together (because of the higher DCF of seti_enhanced). As a result you claim less than the 30 "standard credits" with the old seti 4.18.

And if you want to turn off the calibration: That's done on a project scope. You cannot turn off the calibration for seti_enhanced but leave it turned on for seti.

Regards,
Carsten

Hi,

You now seeing the effect I indicated would happen 3 days ago. But nobody listens to me. Message forum_thread.php?id=30570#299712

and from that post:

As The latest of Trux's clients uses Fpops to calculate credits for enhanced, but I understand that it uses DCF to do the calibration, and on my computer the DCF has gone up from 0.13 to 0.55

Do you mean that your DCF was 0.13 with seti 4.18 and your DCF is now 0.55 with seti_enhanced 5.12?
That's not an effect of the Boinc client. It's an effect of the different science applications. They *do* need different correction factors (Or are you surprised that seti and einstein need different DCFs? No, I guess). You will get the same DCF with a standard client as with trux's optimized client.

I still do not see any problems crunching seti_enhanced with trux's calibrating client. There is no credit soup, no messed up requests of new work and so on. I'm running it on three computers. The calibration is turned on on two computers and turned off on one computer. So far, I didn't notice any problems.

The only "problem", which I mentioned earlier, is that the calibration of seti and seti_enhanced does not fit together (because of the higher DCF of seti_enhanced). As a result you claim less than the 30 "standard credits" with the old seti 4.18.

And if you want to turn off the calibration: That's done on a project scope. You cannot turn off the calibration for seti_enhanced but leave it turned on for seti.

Regards,
Carsten

Because it is very likely that the DCF will rise due to crunching enhanced 5.12 units then the calibration for credits if and when that host then does another Seti 4.18 then I predict the calibration will produce a credit calculation for 4.18 that is different from those produced before the introduction of enhanced.

My DCF prior to enhanced here was 0.13 approx, my DCF on Beta crunching exclusively enhanced unit my DCF is 0.279144.

Andy

are there any installation instructions?

---

words are the symbols of mental experience

are there any installation instructions?

For my take:

suggested installation procedure

with the exception that the subsequent appearance of version 513 needs a revised app_info.xml, for which my offering is:

513,512,418 compatible app_info.xml

Both assume you were already running crunch3r's 4.11 for the non-enhanced SETI with unrevised file names.

---

are there any installation instructions?

If you are speaking of installing the SETI Enhanced application, yes and no. If you are using an optimized version of the seti program now you will have a file calleed "app_info.xml" that you have installed in your SETI project directory. If you don't know what I'm talking about, or you do but know you didn't put one there, then no, everything is done automatically the first time you get a new enhanced wu to crunch. If you do happen to have the "app_info.xml" file in your project directory, then simply deleting this file will allow BOINC to download the standard enhanced application. In other words if you delete this file from your project directory, (or it's not there to start with) then there is nothing you as a cruncher needs to do except eit back and watch for a ver. 5.12 appliccation to show up in the work tab.

---

Jim

Some people plan their life out and look back at the wealth they've had.
Others live life day by day and look back at the wealth of experiences and enjoyment they've had.

Crystallize, gecko_r7

I am coming in late but see two things... First has been mentioned that Trux's .......

Second I went and found your AMD XP 2600 and when I look at the ResultID's I see that you gained about 1,000 seconds over the standard 5.12 Enhanced Application for a AR 0.42xxx result... Generally before version 5.11 in Enhanced Beta the optimized app had a 50% advantage... After 5.11 it became between 5-20% depending on the Angle Range (AR) of the WU...

Pappa

Yes, I know it says so on the account page but infact Real time, it's not true, before I did a WU in a bit over 5h 30 minutes on the XP, "real time" even if it said a lot more on the page.

But now it says a lot less but in fact it takes longer ... but of course nobody believes me...

I'm using the 5.3.12tx36 BOINC version. (not 5.2.13tx36), is there something wrong with that version ?
I have no problems with not enough cache

I looked on host 2037940
and results:
resultid=321015388
WU true angle range is : 0.4265, <real_cpu_time>23461
resultid=320059162
ar=0.426499, <real_cpu_time>28665

with same ar there is a change from 28665 to 23461 sec, thats a decreas in time of 82%.

Thats about what is expected.

Andy

Hi Andy,

Because it is very likely that the DCF will rise due to crunching enhanced 5.12 units then the calibration for credits if and when that host then does another Seti 4.18 then I predict the calibration will produce a credit calculation for 4.18 that is different from those produced before the introduction of enhanced.

My DCF prior to enhanced here was 0.13 approx, my DCF on Beta crunching exclusively enhanced unit my DCF is 0.279144.

Sorry, Andy, I've just noticed that I didn't understand your posting correctly. Initially, I thought that you are saying that your increased DCF is a result of the calibration. But now I've noticed that we are saying all the same.

Regards,
Carsten

Hi Andy,

Because it is very likely that the DCF will rise due to crunching enhanced 5.12 units then the calibration for credits if and when that host then does another Seti 4.18 then I predict the calibration will produce a credit calculation for 4.18 that is different from those produced before the introduction of enhanced.

My DCF prior to enhanced here was 0.13 approx, my DCF on Beta crunching exclusively enhanced unit my DCF is 0.279144.

Sorry, Andy, I've just noticed that I didn't understand your posting correctly. Initially, I thought that you are saying that your increased DCF is a result of the calibration. But now I've noticed that we are saying all the same.

Regards,
Carsten

Glad we have cleared that up, just as a matter of interest I don't use trux's optimised client.

Andy

what's the difference between

Windows 5.12_IPP_SSE2

and

Windows 5.12_IPP_SSE3 ?

---

words are the symbols of mental experience

Since SSE2 and SSE3 are assosiated with Optimised cruching have a look at:

SSE2 &

SSE3

---

Hello,

is it possible that the optimized enhanced 5.12 application is interfering with the 5.13 beta application?

I've just tried to install the optimized 5.12 SEE2 on a computer which is also running SE 5.13 beta. The application starts without any problems. But when it is requesting new workunits I get the following messages:

2006-05-11 20:13:57 [SETI@home] Sending scheduler request to http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi
2006-05-11 20:13:57 [SETI@home] Reason: To fetch work
2006-05-11 20:13:57 [SETI@home] Requesting 1 seconds of new work
2006-05-11 20:14:02 [SETI@home] Scheduler request to http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi succeeded
2006-05-11 20:14:02 [SETI@home] WU refers to nonexistent app_version: setiathome_enhanced 513
2006-05-11 20:14:02 [SETI@home] Can't link workunit 25fe99ab.5673.9970.442338.3.218 in sched reply
2006-05-11 20:14:02 [SETI@home] link_result: nonexistent WU 25fe99ab.5673.9970.442338.3.218
2006-05-11 20:14:02 [SETI@home] Can't link result 25fe99ab.5673.9970.442338.3.218_3 in sched reply
2006-05-11 20:14:02 [SETI@home] No work from project

The app_info.xml is ok. It has nothing with "5.13" in it. I'm using it on two other computers without any problems.

I had to reset SETI beta (--> deleting everything with "5.13") to manage to download new workunits for the optimized seti_enhanced 5.12.

Regards,
Carsten

Hello again,

is it possible that the optimized enhanced 5.12 application is interfering with the 5.13 beta application?

I've just tried to install the optimized 5.12 SEE2 on a computer which is also running SE 5.13 beta. The application starts without any problems. But when it is requesting new workunits I get the following messages:
[...]

Hm, I just read a few other threads. It looks like that 5.13 workunits are distributed here at the main project -- not only at SETI beta. Is there any official confirmation? I couldn't find anything in the news.

And this might explain my error messages. When I tried to download new workunits for the first time SETI wanted to give me 5.13 units. As I have an app_info.xml I couldn't download the correct application. And it was just a fortunate coincidence that it worked again after I have resetted SETI beta ...

It looks like everybody should update his/her app_info.xml ...

Regards,
Carsten

edit: confirmed!
I edited my app_info.xml and I've just downloaded my first 5.13

[...]
And this might explain my error messages. When I tried to download new workunits for the first time SETI wanted to give me 5.13 units. As I have an app_info.xml I couldn't download the correct application. And it was just a fortunate coincidence that it worked again after I have resetted SETI beta ...

It looks like everybody should update his/her app_info.xml ...

From where can you download a linux 5.13 s@h application?

Regards,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

From where can you download a linux 5.13 s@h application?

Regards,
Martin

From what I read, 5.13 was a special tweak for Windows 98 users, so I doubt you want or need one for Linux!

If you use the app_info.xml posted here, 5.13 workunits should be downloaded but crunched OK with your existing 5.12 application.[edit]You'll need to adapt it for the Linux filenames, I expect - sorry[/edit]

(The first part works - I've got a couple downloaded - but I haven't reached them in the queue yet, so I can't promise the second part!)

@Crunch3r,
Will you be compiling an optimized 5.13? I've got a couple of old MMX running Win98 that would appreciate all the help they can get....

---

From where can you download a linux 5.13 s@h application?

Regards,
Martin

From what I read, 5.13 was a special tweak for Windows 98 users, so I doubt you want or need one for Linux!

If you use the app_info.xml posted here, 5.13 workunits should be downloaded but crunched OK with your existing 5.12 application.[edit]You'll need to adapt it for the Linux filenames, I expect - sorry[/edit]

OK, following your example, the modified version for linux is:

<app_info>
    <app>
        <name>setiathome</name>
    </app>
    <file_info>
        <name>setiathome-4.07.i686-pc-linux-gnu.static</name>
        <executable/>
    </file_info>
    <app_version>
        <app_name>setiathome</app_name>
        <version_num>470</version_num>
        <file_ref>
            <file_name>setiathome-4.07.i686-pc-linux-gnu.static</file_name>
            <main_program/>
        </file_ref>
    </app_version>
    <app>
        <name>setiathome_enhanced</name>
    </app>
    <file_info>
        <name>setiathome-5.12.i686-pc-linux-gnu</name>
        <executable/>
    </file_info>
    <file_info>
        <name>setiathome-5.12.i686-pc-linux-gnu.so</name>
        <executable/>
    </file_info>
    <app_version>
        <app_name>setiathome_enhanced</app_name>
        <version_num>512</version_num>
        <file_ref>
            <file_name>setiathome-5.12.i686-pc-linux-gnu</file_name>
            <main_program/>
        </file_ref>
        <file_ref>
            <file_name>setiathome-5.12.i686-pc-linux-gnu.so</file_name>
        </file_ref>
    </app_version>
    <app>
        <name>setiathome_enhanced</name>
    </app>
    <file_info>
        <name>setiathome-5.13.i686-pc-linux-gnu</name>
        <executable/>
    </file_info>
    <file_info>
        <name>setiathome-5.13.i686-pc-linux-gnu.so</name>
        <executable/>
    </file_info>
    <app_version>
        <app_name>setiathome_enhanced</app_name>
        <version_num>513</version_num>
        <file_ref>
            <file_name>setiathome-5.12.i686-pc-linux-gnu</file_name>
            <main_program/>
        </file_ref>
        <file_ref>
            <file_name>setiathome-5.12.i686-pc-linux-gnu.so</file_name>
        </file_ref>
    </app_version>
</app_info>

Note the duplicated

    <app>
        <name>setiathome_enhanced</name>
    </app>

- one for each of "512" and "513", and that linux has the additional ".so" file to include.

Now for whenever I get one of these enhacements!

Happy crunchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Since SSE2 and SSE3 are assosiated with Optimised cruching have a look at:

SSE2 &

SSE3

Thanks... duh

:)

---

words are the symbols of mental experience

@Crunch3r,
Will you be compiling an optimized 5.13? I've got a couple of old MMX running Win98 that would appreciate all the help they can get....

I've tested and found that Crunch3r's 5.12 apps don't have the timer problem, so there's no need for him to build 5.13. Besides, 5.13 did still have the problem, and 5.14 has just been activated in the Beta test project.

                                                              Joe

As far as I can see, Crunch3r's optimized binaries do not distribute ".so" libraries, yet the app_info.xml listed below references the ".so". I am having app_info.xml problems since it doesn't seem to handle the .so correctly. (referring to the app_info.xml mentioned 2 posts above).

---

Hi,

If you use the app_info.xml posted here, 5.13 workunits should be downloaded but crunched OK with your existing 5.12 application.[edit]You'll need to adapt it for the Linux filenames, I expect - sorry[/edit]

(The first part works - I've got a couple downloaded - but I haven't reached them in the queue yet, so I can't promise the second part!)

I've just returned my first 5.13 unit crunched with Crunch3r's 5.12 application: #323501113. It worked fine and it's valid.

Regards,
Carsten

I use 5.3.12.tx36 and the latest crunch3r SSE2 for P4
-->Enhanced_5.12_IPP_AR_FPOPS_SSE2.zip
has the validator a problem this morning with the short WUs?? I got some Validate errors.
Have a look at this
319800536
319800440
319800401
has anybody a good idee what to do?
some other wus are correct