Interesting, it never seemed to me that there was a bandwidth problem. To me donwloading SAH takes seconds, AP minutes.

You win the lottery! We all have problems to DL WU from SETI.

There is a strong perception there is a bandwidth problem by those who want high RAC's.

Of course if you have a high RAC you number of DL WU needed to keep your hosts is bigger, but i realy don´t understand why now a high RAC is Bad?.

I agree 100% with Mark, if RAC is what we are looking for, there are a lot of others projects who "paid" more RAC for the same amount of processing power and electric power we spend to mantain our RAC, i could say only for me, i just here because a dream, and thats all, nothing about science, RAC or anything else just about a dream to answer the old question: are we alone?

On other hand, someone loose the focus, yes there is a bandwidth problem, anyone could see by the crickets the link is uses at 100% most of the time, and anybody who knows a little about network usage knows, no network works fine when you use 100% of it´s capacity.

---

There is a strong perception there is a bandwidth problem by those who want high RAC's. I've asked several times but the lab boys don't answer is are they collecting data at a much faster rate than we are processing it. If not, then in reality there isn't a bandwidth issue.

And there is a strong perception by some with low RACs that there is simply no bandwidth problem at all. Or that those with high RACs are more interested in their stats than the science. Both are untrue, at least speaking for myself.

However, your question is a valid one, and I would be interested in the answer as well.

No one is saying that people with high RAC's aren't interested in the science. However there are those that seem as if they are chasing RAC more than they are interested in science, or that they know better than the project scientist what data should be sent out and how fast.

As to the question being valid, if we are crunching faster than it is being collected, then eventually the well runs dry and bandwidth is moot.

In any case the possible move to a co-lo spot on campus should remove one of the two political reasons for the bandwidth limit. Unfortunately the other political reason is $$$/month based and may not be so easy to overcome, unless someone can get it buried deep in a budget.

---

unless someone can get it buried deep in a budget.

This way, it will stay political for eternity!

There is a strong perception there is a bandwidth problem by those who want high RAC's. I've asked several times but the lab boys don't answer is are they collecting data at a much faster rate than we are processing it. If not, then in reality there isn't a bandwidth issue.

And there is a strong perception by some with low RACs that there is simply no bandwidth problem at all. Or that those with high RACs are more interested in their stats than the science. Both are untrue, at least speaking for myself.

However, your question is a valid one, and I would be interested in the answer as well.

No one is saying that people with high RAC's aren't interested in the science. However there are those that seem as if they are chasing RAC more than they are interested in science, or that they know better than the project scientist what data should be sent out and how fast.

As to the question being valid, if we are crunching faster than it is being collected, then eventually the well runs dry and bandwidth is moot.

In any case the possible move to a co-lo spot on campus should remove one of the two political reasons for the bandwidth limit. Unfortunately the other political reason is $$$/month based and may not be so easy to overcome, unless someone can get it buried deep in a budget.

Well, my opinion is let's get the infrastructure capable of handling as much as the project can dish out. If that means that we are processing more data than the project is gathering...I think that would be a wonderful thing.
Then room would be open to either gather more data if possible, or process the data in more depth than is currently being done.
Either way....the bandwidth we now have is not being used to it's fullest, as most know that when maxxed out like this, the end result is less data actually being transferred than it appears, as much is lost to retries, transmission errors, etc..
If we had a 200Mb pipe, I think it would solve a lot of problems. More would be better, of course, but I would not be surprised if maximum usage ended up to be 200Mb or less after an outage, and settling in at not much over the 100Mb we have now, but it would be fully utilized, not wasted with corrupted data transfer attempts.

---

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

It seems that the capacity of the servers still is degraded. I noticed, that during the last weeks, DL of astropulse and standard 6.03 work units takes hours.
I'm DL from Europe, but even during the early morning hours local time, when the activities on the US side should be low, DL will not speed up.
I'm constantly running out of work units.

Is this a persistant problem?

It seems that the capacity of the servers still is degraded. I noticed, that during the last weeks, DL of astropulse and standard 6.03 work units takes hours.
I'm DL from Europe, but even during the early morning hours local time, when the activities on the US side should be low, DL will not speed up.
I'm constantly running out of work units.

Is this a persistant problem?

You just noticed this...now? LOL.
Yes, it is a persistent problem.
We have been debating about it for years now.

---

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

It wasn't that much of a problem up to some months ago.
It's getting worse and my question is, what will be done about it?
If bandwidth is not the bottleneck, is it the server capacity?

It wasn't that much of a problem up to some months ago.
It's getting worse and my question is, what will be done about it?
If bandwidth is not the bottleneck, is it the server capacity?

+1

It wasn't that much of a problem up to some months ago.

It's been a problem for almost 2 years.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

In response to Garys post on this page, I am also having the exact same problem.
I am also based here in the UK.

I'm a noob, joined only a month or so ago...so I do not know much about the day-to-day runnings of SETI just yet.

However...my first week using Boinc (exclusively for SETI) gave me many, many tasks...all DL'd very quickly indeed. Now I seem to get appox 50% of a task before it grinds to a halt...and then, as others have said, can take on average 6-8 hours for the rest to DL'd but I am also only getting 2, maybe 3 tasks at a time...whereas I had initially been recieving a minimum of 8 each time boinc connected to the servers....so my task list kept a nice stockpile to be getting on with.

I'm not a techy, but I do find this both curios and frustrating.

Did I join SETI on a 'good week' then?...or is this a quirk for newcomers to the project?

In response to Garys post on this page, I am also having the exact same problem.
I am also based here in the UK.

I'm a noob, joined only a month or so ago...so I do not know much about the day-to-day runnings of SETI just yet.

However...my first week using Boinc (exclusively for SETI) gave me many, many tasks...all DL'd very quickly indeed. Now I seem to get appox 50% of a task before it grinds to a halt...and then, as others have said, can take on average 6-8 hours for the rest to DL'd but I am also only getting 2, maybe 3 tasks at a time...whereas I had initially been recieving a minimum of 8 each time boinc connected to the servers....so my task list kept a nice stockpile to be getting on with.

I'm not a techy, but I do find this both curios and frustrating.

Did I join SETI on a 'good week' then?...or is this a quirk for newcomers to the project?

Interesting ... this morning DL'd 70 work units PDQ. There were a couple that timed out, but by the time the rest had gone, they went right away without intervention.

I'm beginning to wonder if what people are seeing is a related to a wonky TCP/IP stack or overloaded routers somewhere between the lab and them. I'm wondering if the timeouts are due to excessive latency in the route causing one end or the other to timeout prematurely.

I'm thinking this because if it is the same people having trouble, while others have no trouble then it may be related to the path or time the packets are taking to the lab. I know we are slamming the lab, but you would expect that to randomly cause issues, not for the same people most of the time.

---

Add to that fact that those having issues, if they use a proxy, will then get excelent download rates, till the proxy gets closed down.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

The problem appears ans disapears without any changes of network triming.

For example, it seems a quiet slow :

SET@home|setiathome-5.28x86_64-pc-linux-gnu|19,67%|1,25/6,33 MB|38:15:24|0,00KBps|Téléchargement: réessayer dans 05:21:50

Im having the same issue here. WUs sitting mostly downloaded then stalled. I connect to a proxy service and they start downloading again, but very slowly...

---

If you have Windows hosts and have DL problems, you shoulD read this thread:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=71002

---

There's an answer to the stall problem being passed out in
Number Crunching for the Windows users. Funny that, getting a fix
to a problem in a forum for problems instead of one for news.

There's an answer to the stall problem being passed out in
Number Crunching for the Windows users. Funny that, getting a fix
to a problem in a forum for problems instead of one for news.

Yes, it's nice when volunteers are part of the solution, not just part of the problem.

I'm a great believer in the principle of BOINC being a provider of Distributed Wisdom, not just a consumer of Distributed Computing.

Can we get a Hallelujah?

A temporary fix will be good for me, i wont be spending £20 a month on wasted electricity!

How do I 'use a proxy'?

Many thanks,

Gary

Add to that fact that those having issues, if they use a proxy, will then get excelent download rates, till the proxy gets closed down.

How do i use a proxy?