I don't care about averages. I want to ensure there is never down-time.

Your momma never promised you a rose garden. And Seti, or any other Boinc project, never promised any downtime. That's the whole premise of Boinc, always some work to do somewhere, just maybe not on your preferred project.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

Projects need to start adjusting their perspective on what is a reasonable limit. Now.

Then give them the money to do so. Now.

Do you not see the star next to my name?

Yes, but was it enough for them to have the hardware, staffing, resources required to meet your desires?

It's all well & good to have hardware that can churn through 10,000 Work Units per day, but if they don't have the resources to supply that demand, they can't.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

For those of us on single cores, we'd notice if our quotas got cut in half...

?? No. The ratio is no different. So there would be no difference in noticeability.

My response you quoted above was in response to your proposed thought that an increase to 8 cores happened in conjunction with a decrease to 50 per core. This is one reason why you and I are butting heads on this - you won't do and/or don't understand some very simple math logic. While there would be effectively no change to you (400 = 400), for me 100 turns into 50. My effective quota would indeed be cut in half, while the effective result for you is equivalence.

I'm retarded. Got it. Way to keep this above board.

Let me ask you this. With your single thread machines, have you ever hit a 100 *or* 50 limit (legitimately)?

Fundamentally, I "get" the idea that you want your quad at 100%. It's just you don't seem to be looking at the entire picture...

Yes, I understand that I am a dullard.

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Yeah well....
The Boinc project is just that, a project. Which means, work in progress. Trying to get multi-thousands of computers to crunch together towards the same goal is not easy. They are trying hard to keep the infrastructure up with the increasing ability of the hosts to process the work, which is ramping up at an exponential pace.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

Looking at my families five computers, it would appear that over 80% of WU's are validated within 2 days. So any cache longer than this has a high chance of meeting the auto-abort situation.

....unless one turns off network activity....and aborts any short-deadline WUs beforehand (of course).

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Projects need to start adjusting their perspective on what is a reasonable limit. Now.

Then give them the money to do so. Now.

Do you not see the star next to my name?

Yes, but was it enough for them to have the hardware, staffing, resources required to meet your desires?

It's all well & good to have hardware that can churn through 10,000 Work Units per day, but if they don't have the resources to supply that demand, they can't.

What is the minimum amount I need to contribute to have a valid opinion?

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

I don't care about averages. I want to ensure there is never down-time.

Your momma never promised you a rose garden. And Seti, or any other Boinc project, never promised any downtime. That's the whole premise of Boinc, always some work to do somewhere, just maybe not on your preferred project.

I am not talking about server down time here. I am talking about client down time, due to rule-restrictions.

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Let's say you tanked up to full quickly after an outage. Let's say that uploading and reporting are working fine, but downloading is not, which is the situation we've had happen a few times lately. Have you thought through the impact when this happens? Here's what will happen:

The way around all that (I think) is to turn off network activity.

That's one way. The other way is to be on a version of BOINC that doesn't support the aborts, but then you'd lose the extra cache capability too...

Frankly, it is a benchmark *and* rivalry. I want to know how well my mac with alexkan's application performs against windows with chicken's. Is there some amount of competition? Heck yeah! That's the whole point of the the points and statistics pages.

OK, I can accept that, but do you "need" the benchmarking continuously? I would think that "benchmarking" would only be needed when either group puts out a new version. Also, how would you take overclocking into account? I think I saw you or someone mention that OC isn't possible on Mac systems? Really, all you need is to find a comparable spec / speed system and compare similar results. That shouldn't take any more than a few days and could more easily be handled by Alex and Simon working as coordinators, and semi-privately, as they both seem to cooperate with each other...

My gut feeling is that it's Francois' bravado and bragging that's the bigger influence on this... His company did an impressive thing with the P6-descended architecture. I never suggested an AMD processor for a laptop once the Pentium M was available. Once Core2 became available, it was the clear choice for performance/watt. He is setting himself up for eating a lot of crow if AMD is able to even just match their speeds, let alone exceed them (which is possible due to HyperTransport and the IMC with the crossbar). He seems to think that since he has an insider's information, he will be able to squeak more performance out of their architecture than an outsider. That's possible, but if he doesn't deliver then he has definitely set himself up for more crow...

The following stuff? No idea what you are talking about.

That was the history of why there's a limit in place. Sometimes the initial limiting reason is not the "only" good reason for having the limit.

Let's say you tanked up to full quickly after an outage. Let's say that uploading and reporting are working fine, but downloading is not, which is the situation we've had happen a few times lately. Have you thought through the impact when this happens? Here's what will happen:

The way around all that (I think) is to turn off network activity.

That's one way. The other way is to be on a version of BOINC that doesn't support the aborts, but then you'd lose the extra cache capability too...

Frankly, it is a benchmark *and* rivalry. I want to know how well my mac with alexkan's application performs against windows with chicken's. Is there some amount of competition? Heck yeah! That's the whole point of the the points and statistics pages.

OK, I can accept that, but do you "need" the benchmarking continuously? I would think that "benchmarking" would only be needed when either group puts out a new version. Also, how would you take overclocking into account? I think I saw you or someone mention that OC isn't possible on Mac systems? Really, all you need is to find a comparable spec / speed system and compare similar results. That shouldn't take any more than a few days and could more easily be handled by Alex and Simon working as coordinators, and semi-privately, as they both seem to cooperate with each other...

My gut feeling is that it's Francois' bravado and bragging that's the bigger influence on this... His company did an impressive thing with the P6-descended architecture. I never suggested an AMD processor for a laptop once the Pentium M was available. Once Core2 became available, it was the clear choice for performance/watt. He is setting himself up for eating a lot of crow if AMD is able to even just match their speeds, let alone exceed them (which is possible due to HyperTransport and the IMC with the crossbar). He seems to think that since he has an insider's information, he will be able to squeak more performance out of their architecture than an outsider. That's possible, but if he doesn't deliver then he has definitely set himself up for more crow...

The following stuff? No idea what you are talking about.

That was the history of why there's a limit in place. Sometimes the initial limiting reason is not the "only" good reason for having the limit.

I don't think who? is gonna have to eat much crow if the preliminary expos on the Penryn continue to hold up. I personally thing AMD is buried.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

What is the minimum amount I need to contribute to have a valid opinion?

None.
I'm just pointing out (yet again) that no matter what your hardware might be capable of, unless the projects have the resources necessary there is no way they will be able to meet those demands.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Looking at my families five computers, it would appear that over 80% of WU's are validated within 2 days. So any cache longer than this has a high chance of meeting the auto-abort situation.

Yep. I knew that much by looking at my 3-day cache. 2 days just isn't long enough to make it through sometimes. 3 days seems fine and doesn't seem like I have that high of a percentage of post-quorum results...although not reporting immediately could inflate that percentage. My Intel system sometimes goes for a good portion of a day without reporting. I've never taken the time to go through and figure out if the results were reported immediately if I would've been 2nd in... I also switched to 5.8.16 on my AMD, so it too is no longer reporting immediately (though I admit to some button pushing here and there)... It is either coincidence, or getting rid of reporting immediately seems to have solved the Validate Error issues for the box...

Brian

What is the minimum amount I need to contribute to have a valid opinion?

None.
I'm just pointing out (yet again) that no matter what your hardware might be capable of, unless the projects have the resources necessary there is no way they will be able to meet those demands.

No. You made it quite clear that I had no right to complain without providing the appropriate funding. So how much?

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

I don't think who? is gonna have to eat much crow if the preliminary expos on the Penryn continue to hold up. I personally thing AMD is buried.

Time will tell... AMD has the advantages of HyperTransport and the IMC already being there. That being said, the Israeli development team for Intel did a really good job. That had to have been motivated by AMDs success with K7 (original Athlon). The problem is that HyperTransport is admittedly better than FSB. From what I've been reading, Intel is also wanting to go away from FSB and put in an Integrated Memory Controller (IMC) in the die package, just like AMD has done. AMD is also admitting to going to an on-package shared cache like Intel has, and I believe I've seen some talk about on-die L3? I'll check on that later, and it is really OT for the thread, sort of...

What is the minimum amount I need to contribute to have a valid opinion?

None.
I'm just pointing out (yet again) that no matter what your hardware might be capable of, unless the projects have the resources necessary there is no way they will be able to meet those demands.

No. You made it quite clear that I had no right to complain without providing the appropriate funding. So how much?

No, you misunderstood what i was saying.

Your statement that started all this.

Projects need to start adjusting their perspective on what is a reasonable limit. Now.

And my resposnse is still the same- Users need to adjust their perspective on what is a reasonable expectation. With the resources they have, projects are limited in the work they can provide.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

What is the minimum amount I need to contribute to have a valid opinion?

None.
I'm just pointing out (yet again) that no matter what your hardware might be capable of, unless the projects have the resources necessary there is no way they will be able to meet those demands.

No. You made it quite clear that I had no right to complain without providing the appropriate funding. So how much?

Zombo........
No one has ever said that if you don't contribute you have no right to express your opinions. It was simply pointed out that if you wish to further the project and enhance the possibility of Seti/Boinc keeping up with the times you might contribute whatever sum you can justify to meet their needs.
I think it is a rather exciting development that the distributed computing part of the project (aside from Seti itself) is running into a few snags because they have snagged a bit more computing power that they can chew off at the moment. Be carefull of what you wish for.......
It seems only logical that if the DC computing user base is increasing in power expnentionally, that the Boinc base for supporting same would have to increase in power as well. And growing pains will ensue.
So if you can contribute, do so. If you cannot, all is well.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

Projects need to start adjusting their perspective on what is a reasonable limit. Now.

And my resposnse is still the same- Users need to adjust their perspective on what is a reasonable expectation. With the resources they have, projects are limited in the work they can provide.

and you said

Then give them the money to do so. Now.

So how much do I need to contribute to have a reasonable expectation?

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

Projects need to start adjusting their perspective on what is a reasonable limit. Now.

And my resposnse is still the same- Users need to adjust their perspective on what is a reasonable expectation. With the resources they have, projects are limited in the work they can provide.

and you said

Then give them the money to do so. Now.

So how much do I need to contribute to have a reasonable expectation?

The figure of $538,000 was mentioned for this year, less whatever has already been donated. Wanna pony up?

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

Let me ask you this. With your single thread machines, have you ever hit a 100 *or* 50 limit (legitimately)?

Not in a long time:

2006-03-31 00:48:15 [SETI@home] Message from server: No work sent
2006-03-31 00:48:15 [SETI@home] Message from server: (reached daily quota of 100 results)

That was pre-enhanced, when my CPU could chew through things faster...

My return question to you. Have you ever processed more than 400 results in a single day?

My quaddy averages about 52m or so on a full flavored Wu...with Chicken. That comes out to about 108 WUs/24 hours. With a quota of 400 for the rig, I'll never reach the WU quota limit. Except when the sever barfs my whole cache and assigns a new host ID and I have to start over from squat. But I think (hope) that the last server mods will mitigate that possibility from happening any time soon.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

So how much do I need to contribute to have a reasonable expectation?

The real question is, do you consider all your expectations to be "reasonable by default" simply because they are your expectations and disregarding any and all monetary contributions?

There needs to be balance to expectations. Give and take.

IMO, YMMV, etc, etc, etc...