v5.27 (MB) live on main.

Author	Message
Alinator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Apr 05 Posts: 4178 Credit: 4,647,982 RAC: 0	Message 617181 - Posted: 9 Aug 2007, 20:29:51 UTC Last modified: 9 Aug 2007, 20:41:17 UTC OK, now go look at the other ~62.4 credit results on the wingman (AR = 0.4265 rounded to 4 places) and calculate the credit rate for them compared to the 5.27 result. Alinator ID: 617181 ·

dnolan Send message Joined: 30 Aug 01 Posts: 1228 Credit: 47,779,411 RAC: 32	Message 617186 - Posted: 9 Aug 2007, 20:40:30 UTC - in response to Message 617170. Last modified: 9 Aug 2007, 20:41:45 UTC I think I have just been "bitten" by a 5.27!! Computer claimed granted 3452433 62.40 53.11 2767666 53.11 53.11 Yup, had a ton of these already myself... Me 60.68 51.63 Wm 51.63 51.63 Me 34.60 29.45 WM 29.45 29.45 Me 60.54 51.52 WM 51.52 51.52 And those are just a very few examples from only one machine. -Dave ID: 617186 ·

Philadelphia Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 12 Feb 07 Posts: 1590 Credit: 399,688 RAC: 0	Message 617200 - Posted: 9 Aug 2007, 21:00:46 UTC Last modified: 9 Aug 2007, 21:01:42 UTC I 'think' what Alinator is say (I may be wrong, message was somewhat cryptic) is that the guy that returned the lower cobblestones, while running 5.27 he reduced his processing time quite a bit from a similar WU that he ran without 5.27. So he's getting less cobblestones but he's processing it faster. It took me about 20 or so minutes to decrypt the message out and I'm still not really sure that's what's Alinator's referencing. ID: 617200 ·

Alinator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Apr 05 Posts: 4178 Credit: 4,647,982 RAC: 0	Message 617209 - Posted: 9 Aug 2007, 21:16:22 UTC Last modified: 9 Aug 2007, 21:27:07 UTC LOL... If you calculate the credit rates for the 5.27 and the 5.15's you'll find the 5.27 paid better in credits per hour for the 0.4265's (by a considerable margin). So it's pretty hard to say you're getting 'gypped' with 5.27 from the stock crunchers POV. I like to use the old axiom, "It's better to teach someone to fish, than to just give them a fish". ;-) <edit> In this case for the wingman: ~17 credits per hour with 5.27 and ~11 credits per hour for 5.15. <edit2> In fact I'll bet the 50.6 credits per hour Fred got with his C2D is still higher than it would have gotten if it had run the result with 5.27. Alinator ID: 617209 ·

zoom3+1=4 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 30 Nov 03 Posts: 65764 Credit: 55,293,173 RAC: 49	Message 617234 - Posted: 9 Aug 2007, 21:49:17 UTC So what is the amount per WU or whatever relative to 5.15s 3.35 value? I think that is what is holding up the Chickens new seti apps from being released. So is the credit multiplier (3.81 at beta, 2.8 for the new apps, 3.35 currently) Like so or what? Josef W. Segur mentioned 5.27 is using a 2.85 multiplier of course. So mark Me confused as to what the new multiplier will be. http://lunatics.at/discussion-forum/gearing-up-for-multibeam.msg3991.html;topicseen#msg3991 The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's ID: 617234 ·

Fred W Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 13 Jun 99 Posts: 2524 Credit: 11,954,210 RAC: 0	Message 617240 - Posted: 9 Aug 2007, 22:00:13 UTC - in response to Message 617209. LOL... If you calculate the credit rates for the 5.27 and the 5.15's you'll find the 5.27 paid better in credits per hour for the 0.4265's (by a considerable margin). So it's pretty hard to say you're getting 'gypped' with 5.27 from the stock crunchers POV. I like to use the old axiom, "It's better to teach someone to fish, than to just give them a fish". ;-) <edit> In this case for the wingman: ~17 credits per hour with 5.27 and ~11 credits per hour for 5.15. <edit2> In fact I'll bet the 50.6 credits per hour Fred got with his C2D is still higher than it would have gotten if it had run the result with 5.27. Alinator Quite possibly true. No doubt time will tell. I'm not going to climb out of my pram over it anyway. Just thought it an interesting point for the discussion - and it does make my estimating a bit more complex as I have been able to (gu)estimate about 1 cobblestone/minute/working core with the optimised app. (Note: most of the time one core is devoted to CPDN to try to complete the 2 WUs from there that I accidentally downloaded a couple of months ago!) ID: 617240 ·

W-K 666 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19078 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67	Message 617261 - Posted: 9 Aug 2007, 22:32:31 UTC - in response to Message 617200. I 'think' what Alinator is say (I may be wrong, message was somewhat cryptic) is that the guy that returned the lower cobblestones, while running 5.27 he reduced his processing time quite a bit from a similar WU that he ran without 5.27. So he's getting less cobblestones but he's processing it faster. It took me about 20 or so minutes to decrypt the message out and I'm still not really sure that's what's Alinator's referencing. Yup, I think you got it. Andy ID: 617261 ·

Fuzzy Hollynoodles Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9659 Credit: 251,998 RAC: 0	Message 617316 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 0:38:01 UTC - in response to Message 616502. Looks like 5.27 (MB) has made it over here. One of my boxes just pulled it down and is using it. Edit: I had just checked the app versions available (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/apps.php), saw 5.27 was installed for x86 windows and linux.. So I removed my app_info.xml file, did a project reset, and bingo, got the 5.27 client. And I just snatched one. :-D Click the pic "I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me ID: 617316 ·

Jim-R. Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 7 Feb 06 Posts: 1494 Credit: 194,148 RAC: 0	Message 617320 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 0:47:55 UTC - in response to Message 617316. Last modified: 10 Aug 2007, 0:51:47 UTC Looks like 5.27 (MB) has made it over here. One of my boxes just pulled it down and is using it. Edit: I had just checked the app versions available (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/apps.php), saw 5.27 was installed for x86 windows and linux.. So I removed my app_info.xml file, did a project reset, and bingo, got the 5.27 client. And I just snatched one. :-D Click the pic Sorry to burst your bubble but did you check the date on that wu? It was not a mb wu. You did get the mb application, but your work unit is from 2000, definitely not a multibeam! edit) unless that's what you were looking for! But since the mb wu's haven't got here yet I don't think everyone's complaining about the credits should be done until we try the new app on what it is designed to run on! 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. ID: 617320 ·

Andy Lee Robinson Send message Joined: 8 Dec 05 Posts: 630 Credit: 59,973,836 RAC: 0	Message 617331 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 1:25:05 UTC So, what exactly is the difference between the old data and the new MB data that makes a new app necessary? ID: 617331 ·

Sutehk Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 11 Jun 99 Posts: 42 Credit: 1,443,674 RAC: 0	Message 617339 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 1:38:59 UTC Another question: What happens when one of these new MB WU has to get crunched by a 5.17 chicken soup? I am going to run into this scenario shortly on my main cruncher. ID: 617339 ·

Pappa Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Jan 00 Posts: 2562 Credit: 12,301,681 RAC: 0	Message 617344 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 2:08:51 UTC - in response to Message 617339. I Like this one, there have been problems with (chicken soup, as Users thought they could be a large fish in a small pond) did not validate in Seti Beta... All that work and no credit cuasing other problems that took time to identify... What most do not know is that "Out of the Box" with the MultiBeam Data and the 5.27 Seti Application things are faster/comparable to what Chicken Soup does now... You can Thank Joe and Simon and Crew for that (the input for the base source code)... I do have to say with the various Angle Ranges there are some things that will take some time to work out... But then, You should go read the Seti Beta Forums until a FAQ shows up... Another question: What happens when one of these new MB WU has to get crunched by a 5.17 chicken soup? I am going to run into this scenario shortly on my main cruncher. Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project. ID: 617344 ·

Josef W. Segur Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 30 Oct 99 Posts: 4504 Credit: 1,414,761 RAC: 0	Message 617378 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 3:36:58 UTC - in response to Message 617331. So, what exactly is the difference between the old data and the new MB data that makes a new app necessary? If you showed the graphics when running a MB WU with the old app, it wouldn't identify the source of the data correctly. That cosmetic issue is about the only fundamental difference, other than the new app being about 25% faster on average. There is no difference in the science results. When you get into social factors, there's also the different credit multiplier of course. I consider that a BOINC issue rather than anything essential to getting the work done. Of course it's important, there might be many fewer users without a way of measuring work done which encourages some competition. Joe ID: 617378 ·

archae86 Send message Joined: 31 Aug 99 Posts: 909 Credit: 1,582,816 RAC: 0	Message 617383 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 3:59:26 UTC - in response to Message 617320. Sorry to burst your bubble but did you check the date on that wu? It was not a mb wu. You did get the mb application, but your work unit is from 2000, definitely not a multibeam! Is there a quick and easy way to tell? I've got a fresh one that appears to be data logged on March 3, 2007, and which has the impressively far in the future return deadline of October 1 (over 50 days from date of issue). Is this perhaps a multibeam? If not, how to tell? perhaps a multibeam WU? ID: 617383 ·

Byron Leigh Hatch @ team Carl Sagan Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 4548 Credit: 35,667,570 RAC: 4	Message 617384 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 3:59:27 UTC I just got a Work Unit data recorded 03 March 2007 03mr07aa.15818.6207.4.4.142 ID: 617384 ·

Byron Leigh Hatch @ team Carl Sagan Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 4548 Credit: 35,667,570 RAC: 4	Message 617385 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 4:04:38 UTC - in response to Message 617383. Is this perhaps a multi beam? yes it is a multi beam wu :) Kind Regards Byron ID: 617385 ·

Jim-R. Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 7 Feb 06 Posts: 1494 Credit: 194,148 RAC: 0	Message 617394 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 4:14:44 UTC - in response to Message 617383. Last modified: 10 Aug 2007, 4:18:18 UTC Sorry to burst your bubble but did you check the date on that wu? It was not a mb wu. You did get the mb application, but your work unit is from 2000, definitely not a multibeam! Is there a quick and easy way to tell? I've got a fresh one that appears to be data logged on March 3, 2007, and which has the impressively far in the future return deadline of October 1 (over 50 days from date of issue). Is this perhaps a multibeam? If not, how to tell? perhaps a multibeam WU? I'm not sure without doing some research the exact date that the multibeam recorder recorded it's first work, so I can't say an exact date to look for but yours and Byron's both are one of the multibeam. You can tell by the date as an easy way without reading into header files and such. The date is the first three groups of two characters in the filename in the format ddmmyy. In this case you both have one that was recorded on the third of March, 2007. Most of the linefeed work we are running now has dates in the 1999 to 2001 range. 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. ID: 617394 ·

Byron Leigh Hatch @ team Carl Sagan Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 4548 Credit: 35,667,570 RAC: 4	Message 617402 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 4:32:35 UTC - in response to Message 617394. Last modified: 10 Aug 2007, 5:28:52 UTC Hi Jim thanks for that info some more info from Josef W. Segur: I just got a Work Unit data recorded 03 March 2007 03mr07aa.15818.6207.4.4.142 Byron Yes, there are at least two Multibeam splitter processes running. That one with Process ID 15818 is working Beam 0 Polarity 1, while PID 15285 is working Beam 0 Polarity 0. The creation time is recent, so these are not the WUs which Matt mentioned being released much earlier. There's been a change to the work from what we've seen in Beta. The Chirp limits have been increased from 20 and 50 to 30 and 100. That both broadens the search and increases the crunch time. I guess crunch time will be about 75% longer than what we've seen in Beta, so maybe 40% more than a Line feed unit of the same angle range. Joe http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=41412#617386 Kind Regards Byron ID: 617402 ·

jason_gee Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 7489 Credit: 91,093,184 RAC: 0	Message 617406 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 4:59:03 UTC - in response to Message 617402. Last modified: 10 Aug 2007, 5:00:57 UTC Okay, So I have one of these '07 units sitting in the cache of one of my machines. My questions are: - I am running chicken 2.2B, will it run/validate correctly? - if it runs, will it run longer or faster than stock 5.27? - will it give me more or less credit/time than stock 5.27? Jason MB wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=146173344 "Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions. ID: 617406 ·

Jim-R. Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 7 Feb 06 Posts: 1494 Credit: 194,148 RAC: 0	Message 617407 - Posted: 10 Aug 2007, 5:12:50 UTC - in response to Message 617406. Okay, So I have one of these '07 units sitting in the cache of one of my machines. My questions are: - I am running chicken 2.2B, will it run/validate correctly? - if it runs, will it run longer or faster than stock 5.27? - will it give me more or less credit/time than stock 5.27? Jason MB wu http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=146173344 As posted by Papa, there have been numerous problems running the mb units with Chicken's app. Many have run and crunched fine, but many more have not. So it may not validate, or may give other errors. However at this point unless you are willing to do a project reset and take the chance of losing them both you will just have to take your chances with it. I would set "no new work" until you can crunch your cache down and remove your app_info.xml file and let the system download the new app. If properly done, a shutdown followed by a reset should cause the work units to be resent as "lost work units" and the new application downloaded to crunch them. 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. ID: 617407 ·

©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.