v5.27 (MB) live on main.

Message boards : Number crunching : v5.27 (MB) live on main.
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 9 · Next

AuthorMessage
Alinator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 05
Posts: 4178
Credit: 4,647,982
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Profile dnolan
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 01
Posts: 1228
Credit: 47,779,411
RAC: 32
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Philadelphia
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Feb 07
Posts: 1590
Credit: 399,688
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Alinator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 05
Posts: 4178
Credit: 4,647,982
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 65815
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Fred W
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 13 Jun 99
Posts: 2524
Credit: 11,954,210
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
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 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19123
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Fuzzy Hollynoodles
Volunteer tester
Avatar

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 · Report as offensive
Profile Jim-R.
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Feb 06
Posts: 1494
Credit: 194,148
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Andy Lee Robinson
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Dec 05
Posts: 630
Credit: 59,973,836
RAC: 0
Hungary
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Sutehk
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Jun 99
Posts: 42
Credit: 1,443,674
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Pappa
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jan 00
Posts: 2562
Credit: 12,301,681
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Josef W. Segur
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Oct 99
Posts: 4504
Credit: 1,414,761
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
archae86

Send message
Joined: 31 Aug 99
Posts: 909
Credit: 1,582,816
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Byron Leigh Hatch @ team Carl Sagan
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jul 99
Posts: 4548
Credit: 35,667,570
RAC: 4
Canada
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Byron Leigh Hatch @ team Carl Sagan
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jul 99
Posts: 4548
Credit: 35,667,570
RAC: 4
Canada
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Jim-R.
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Feb 06
Posts: 1494
Credit: 194,148
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Byron Leigh Hatch @ team Carl Sagan
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jul 99
Posts: 4548
Credit: 35,667,570
RAC: 4
Canada
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 · Report as offensive
Profile jason_gee
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Nov 06
Posts: 7489
Credit: 91,093,184
RAC: 0
Australia
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 · Report as offensive
Profile Jim-R.
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 7 Feb 06
Posts: 1494
Credit: 194,148
RAC: 0
United States
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 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 9 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : v5.27 (MB) live on main.


 
©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.