What's happening... (Nov 8, 2014)

Message boards : Technical News : What's happening... (Nov 8, 2014)
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 9 · Next

AuthorMessage
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3377
Credit: 268,545,165
RAC: 93,459
United States
Message 1599347 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 8:32:34 UTC - in response to Message 1599238.  

Thank you, Eric.

One more question: what's happening with Beta?


Beta is offline until the bruno replacement is up and running.


It's nice to be given a new Bruno. I don't know who did it, but I am happy they were willing and able.
ID: 1599347 · Report as offensive
Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 9286
Credit: 56,781,525
RAC: 19,085
United Kingdom
Message 1599351 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 8:37:10 UTC - in response to Message 1599347.  

Thank you, Eric.

One more question: what's happening with Beta?


Beta is offline until the bruno replacement is up and running.


It's nice to be given a new Bruno. I don't know who did it, but I am happy they were willing and able.

Well from Eric's post,

Next week we're planning to replace Bruno with a Sun X4540 that the Lab was removing from service.


Not exactly new but if it works!!
"Liberal and proud to be"
ID: 1599351 · Report as offensive
BONNSaR

Send message
Joined: 9 Nov 04
Posts: 38
Credit: 19,668,791
RAC: 243
Australia
Message 1599354 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 8:53:13 UTC

I just crunched the numbers and power costs for me are approx AU$1000 per annum running a 400watt PC 24/7 but with about 9 hours a day now supported by solar PV this comes down to approx AU$660 per annum. Plus a AU$2k computer build that will hopefully last about 4 to 5 years, sure it's a bit of money but it's the investment in science I'm happy to make as a volunteer. I probably spend more than that on coffee and takeaway so BOINC costs pale into insignificance really with all the other costs of modern living.
ID: 1599354 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio Project Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 6681
Credit: 1,966,369
RAC: 346
Italy
Message 1599434 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 16:03:29 UTC

I have a SUN workstation running 24/7 since January 2008. I always respected the SUN hardware before it became Oracle.
Tullio
ID: 1599434 · Report as offensive
Profile HAL9000
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6530
Credit: 185,573,363
RAC: 44,690
United States
Message 1599448 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 17:24:48 UTC - in response to Message 1599257.  

Thank you Eric!!!!!
I will always crunch what is sent to me.

Exactly. There is data that needs to be processed. So processed it shall be! Maybe some data needs to be sent out again. I don't see any issue with that. They know what they need processed & if I can help crunch some of it I will.

I suppose increasing the minimum quorum could be used if they wanted to have more results with the same data. Depending on how closely the apps look at the data chunks. I could see requiring 3 or 4 results as still be scientifically legitimate, & not considered "busy work".
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!
ID: 1599448 · Report as offensive
Cosmic_Ocean
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Dec 00
Posts: 2936
Credit: 11,068,084
RAC: 536
United States
Message 1599462 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 18:21:26 UTC - in response to Message 1599448.  

I suppose increasing the minimum quorum could be used if they wanted to have more results with the same data. Depending on how closely the apps look at the data chunks. I could see requiring 3 or 4 results as still be scientifically legitimate, & not considered "busy work".

Especially to combat those situations where two GPUs get paired up together and spew out -9 overflows when it shouldn't have been a -9 overflow WU. I know that situation isn't frequent, but it also isn't uncommon/rare.
Linux laptop:
record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up)
ID: 1599462 · Report as offensive
Profile HAL9000
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6530
Credit: 185,573,363
RAC: 44,690
United States
Message 1599544 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 21:11:53 UTC - in response to Message 1599462.  

I suppose increasing the minimum quorum could be used if they wanted to have more results with the same data. Depending on how closely the apps look at the data chunks. I could see requiring 3 or 4 results as still be scientifically legitimate, & not considered "busy work".

Especially to combat those situations where two GPUs get paired up together and spew out -9 overflows when it shouldn't have been a -9 overflow WU. I know that situation isn't frequent, but it also isn't uncommon/rare.

I think to fix that extra code would have to be added to keep all of the results going to the same kind of hardware. I don't think having 3 or 4 GPUs spit out a false -9 overflow would be very helpful.
Perhaps a mechanism that sends out overflow results for 2nd round of crunching or something along those lines.
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!
ID: 1599544 · Report as offensive
David S
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 99
Posts: 18352
Credit: 23,984,994
RAC: 5,255
United States
Message 1599556 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 21:37:04 UTC

My total municipal utility bill, for water, wastewater, electricity, and currently a surcharge for the new recycling bins they "gave" everybody, averages around $100/month. I don't know how much of that is attributable to crunching and the associated air conditioning. I keep my crunchers in the basement where it's fairly cool all the time, so I really don't know if they need much cooling or if they contribute to heating in the winter. My "farm," such as it is, is only two boxes and one of those only crunches on its GPU.

-----------

I took the comment about Angela forcing Eric to post an update as being exaggerated for humor.

-----------

On the assumption that the replacement for bruno won't come any sooner than tomorrow's outage, I'm going to let my phone and tablet have another pair each of Main tasks... if they can get any!
David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

ID: 1599556 · Report as offensive
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3377
Credit: 268,545,165
RAC: 93,459
United States
Message 1599574 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 22:06:49 UTC - in response to Message 1599448.  
Last modified: 10 Nov 2014, 22:19:49 UTC

]
Exactly. There is data that needs to be processed. So processed it shall be! Maybe some data needs to be sent out again. I don't see any issue with that. They know what they need processed & if I can help crunch some of it I will.


And we've both been around long enough for you to know I feel the same way.

What I *wish* we could do (and I don't even know that there is a way to do it) is fund the project at a level where we were reprocessing and re-looking at data because the code was constantly being improved and the search made more sensitive.

I'm not even opposed to looking through data gathered by other projects.

It would be nice to know if there was any result (even a null), but you know, the state of affairs is what it is and I think we all accept that even if we don't much like it.

If I remember correctly, part of what the AstroPulse work was doing was helping Eric with a "hydrogen survey" that has far-reaching implications not only for SETI but for many disciplines in more traditional Astronomy and Astrophysics. I would like to think our contribution would be helping Eric with his interstellar medium work even if we never find an alien.

The only way someone could interpret my comment about the cost of doing this as some form of rejection of the project or dissatisfaction with the progress of science is if they just needed an excuse to fuss and a target to fuss-at.

Eric has explained this, so there's no need to re-re-re-state what has already been said. MY only clarifying comment would be that it is cheaper for you, me, the planet, Berkeley, the project, and everyone else concerned if things like: For lack of $10,000 we didn't have an adequate database backup. It's cheaper to *provide* that $10,000 than to spend $100,000 re-crunching that data that wasn't backed-up.

Now everybody reading along needs to give me a break: I don't know that the situation I just described happened. It's a hypothetical example and if you don't know what a hypothetical example is, please look-it-up.

As far as I know, there has been no request for an infrastructure improvement of the backup database sort, nor do I know if it's desired, or needed, or if any amount of money would prevent that sort of trouble. I do know that the last time we were asked to raise funds to support a hardware acquisition it took about a day to raise the 100% of the necessary funds. The willingness is there.

Spending $10,000 instead of $100,000 is common sense and it isn't a reflection on any person, or people, or committee. Well, it may be a reflection on me. I spend the money I spend crunching instead of sending it as a tax-deductible contribution to Berkeley.

On a dollar-for-dollar basis, the most efficient use of my funds would be at the project's source. Unfortunately, a $6,000 donation would be such a small, small drop in the bucket that it wouldn't make a difference to them while being a very significant sacrifice for me.

My personal philosophy about giving away money prevents me from dropping any significant amount in a bucket that I don't know for a metaphysical certainty will get full and be put to the intended use. ...for the same reason I wouldn't bother trying to put out a raging house fire with a $2.00 one liter bottle of water. I might as well throw the $2.00 on the fire. Better still, I could do neither and save the $2.00.

Some of that's personal experience and local, where I've given money to an organization that I saw just throw it down the drain because some rah-rah committee-person spent "other people's money" with no respect for it at all; governments do it all the time, and sadly universities do it while screaming that they are under-funded. I am NOT accusing SETI@Home of doing that; just explaining where my "feelings" come from.

It never dawned on me that saying it is a huge waste of money to do the SAME analysis twice (no matter why) would be interpreted as my saying we can't look at the same data twice (analyzing it for different things) or that my saying we can raise some money to pay for shipping disks rather than do stuff that doesn't need to be done would be interpreted the way it was.

It's really pretty funny that I'd tell Eric that if he needs shipping money we'll get it to him (that it's less than a drop in the bucket compared to processing costs) and somehow that's seen as a complaint.

It's also pretty ironic that as I disclose my personal cost of participating we'd have server processes go haywire and my personal costs would be reduced to zero.
ID: 1599574 · Report as offensive
tbret
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 99
Posts: 3377
Credit: 268,545,165
RAC: 93,459
United States
Message 1599576 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 22:15:19 UTC - in response to Message 1599556.  
Last modified: 10 Nov 2014, 22:15:49 UTC



I took the comment about Angela forcing Eric to post an update as being exaggerated for humor.



Of course it was. In fact, it was a follow-on to a comment Eric made some time ago about Angela prodding him to post something. So the comment was a little "inside joke" for people who remembered Eric's comment. And I smiley-faced behind it just to be sure everyone knew it was a "tease."

I was commenting as though I was a long-time friend and "playing."

The warped reception that comment got (and you don't know the half of it) reminded me why I don't post as much in public as I used-to. Walking on eggshells and needing to use my "professional voice" when engaged in my hobby just wears me out. I have a hobby to get away from having to be "professional" and watch everything I say as if on the witness stand.
ID: 1599576 · Report as offensive
Darth Beaver Special Project $75 donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 6700
Credit: 20,724,852
RAC: 1,077
Australia
Message 1599583 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 22:34:30 UTC

Thank's Angela for giving Eric a little pook hehehehe , and Thanks again Eric for the updates .
ID: 1599583 · Report as offensive
Royce Wilkins
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 22 Feb 04
Posts: 10
Credit: 24,977,899
RAC: 566
United States
Message 1599625 - Posted: 10 Nov 2014, 23:58:44 UTC

Hello all,
I may have missed where to find the post about stats not being updated, but I have noticed for 4 - 5 ish days I am crunching data and Bonic stats and Free-DC have not shown any changes.

I hope this will be fixed soon. No intent to push on anyone, I just did not see a notice.

Thanks for your effort Eric K!
Royce
ID: 1599625 · Report as offensive
Royce Wilkins
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 22 Feb 04
Posts: 10
Credit: 24,977,899
RAC: 566
United States
Message 1599635 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 0:15:03 UTC - in response to Message 1599625.  

Hello all,
I may have missed where to find the post about stats not being updated, but I have noticed for 4 - 5 ish days I am crunching data and Bonic stats and Free-DC have not shown any changes.

I hope this will be fixed soon. No intent to push on anyone, I just did not see a notice.

Thanks for your effort Eric K!
Royce


For the record: $25 a month for electricity for my 2 computers running only GPU units, not including estimated AC costs. Not including hardware costs (recent upgrades). 600 watt PS (GTX480)- AMD 4 core and a 1000 Watt PS (GTX970) AMD 8 core FX.
ID: 1599635 · Report as offensive
Profile Raistmer
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 01
Posts: 5980
Credit: 81,686,388
RAC: 19,057
Russia
Message 1599636 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 0:16:44 UTC - in response to Message 1599544.  

I suppose increasing the minimum quorum could be used if they wanted to have more results with the same data. Depending on how closely the apps look at the data chunks. I could see requiring 3 or 4 results as still be scientifically legitimate, & not considered "busy work".

Especially to combat those situations where two GPUs get paired up together and spew out -9 overflows when it shouldn't have been a -9 overflow WU. I know that situation isn't frequent, but it also isn't uncommon/rare.

I think to fix that extra code would have to be added to keep all of the results going to the same kind of hardware. I don't think having 3 or 4 GPUs spit out a false -9 overflow would be very helpful.
Perhaps a mechanism that sends out overflow results for 2nd round of crunching or something along those lines.
t

yep,it will prevent such type of errors. But will increase inconclusives rate ultimately. Same hardware tends to round results in the same way. But that way is different between types of hardware. Hence, with your proposal, more results rounded differently will be paired agains each other. And it will increase rate of inconclusives with additional task issued to resolve inconclusive.
There are always some signals too close to threshold to feel even slightest difference in rounding.
ID: 1599636 · Report as offensive
Profile BilBg
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 May 07
Posts: 3717
Credit: 9,265,550
RAC: 349
Bulgaria
Message 1599666 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 1:00:59 UTC - in response to Message 1599636.  
Last modified: 11 Nov 2014, 1:05:42 UTC

You talk about the "increasing the minimum quorum" and "keep all of the results going to the same kind of hardware" effect.

But what about "a mechanism that sends out overflow results for 2nd round of crunching"?
I understand this as:
If validator have 2 "overflow results" ('initial replication') and they match - do not mark the WU as valid - instead send 3-rd task to check is that real or false overflow



- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)
ID: 1599666 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15657
Credit: 64,519,826
RAC: 14,544
United States
Message 1599730 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 2:27:58 UTC - in response to Message 1599574.  

The only way someone could interpret my comment about the cost of doing this as some form of rejection of the project or dissatisfaction with the progress of science is if they just needed an excuse to fuss and a target to fuss-at.


That isn't the only way. Certainly I took the rather ambiguous wording you used differently than you intended, but it wasn't a malicious attempt to fuss and focus on fussing at you. From my reading, it simply didn't make sense initially.
ID: 1599730 · Report as offensive
Royce Wilkins
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 22 Feb 04
Posts: 10
Credit: 24,977,899
RAC: 566
United States
Message 1599763 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 4:29:20 UTC - in response to Message 1599730.  

Wow, so many wasted words.
ID: 1599763 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 22630
Credit: 37,417,255
RAC: 31,957
United States
Message 1599765 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 4:35:22 UTC

Since everyone is so crazy about money, maybe we should look at money.

http://www.naic.edu/~astro/NSFSR/statement.html wrote:
The observatory operates with a staff of about 125 and a yearly budget of about $12M

Assumption, or wild guess, Seti is on 50% of the time.
There are 7 feed horns, and each produces 2 polarizations.
Each work unit is about 110 seconds of data.
To make sure that a Gaussian that would cross a time slice is detected, there has to an overlapping unit that splits the time slice created.

There are 31536000 seconds in a year. That would be 286690 work unit slices. However due to the overlap we generate twice that many or 573380 slices. There are 14 channels or 8027320 possible work units a year. We have assumed 1/2 of them are not recorded due to maintenance projects at the dish. That gives us 4013660 possible work units. With the $12M budget that results in a cost per work unit of $2.99 per work unit for telescope time.

We (Seti & Crunchers) are glad someone else is paying that REAL cost. I can just imagine say Nez having to buy work units to process at $2.99/each!

Conclusion: Our donations of computer processing and electricity are very important, but by far they are not the largest cost associated with the project. I haven't run the numbers but I doubt if the cost to crunch a work unit is much above $0.01/each. So if we ran each work unit a dozen ways from Sunday trying to extract a signal, compared to the cost of getting that work unit, it is money well spent.
ID: 1599765 · Report as offensive
Royce Wilkins
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 22 Feb 04
Posts: 10
Credit: 24,977,899
RAC: 566
United States
Message 1599767 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 4:40:30 UTC - in response to Message 1599765.  

Guess I should have noted that I did not care about my cost. Just wanted to post my real world costs less hardware.
ID: 1599767 · Report as offensive
TBar
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 22 May 99
Posts: 4044
Credit: 233,118,926
RAC: 203,614
United States
Message 1599790 - Posted: 11 Nov 2014, 6:20:11 UTC - in response to Message 1598792.  

5. Will we run out of data? It depends upon what you mean by that. We may run out of SETI@home data taken by the current data recorder, although there is still plenty of Astropulse data to process. Jeff is prioritizing the GBT data splitter, so we hope to have that on line before too long. It will also be the starting point for the next thing, which will be to use SERENDIP VI as a data recorder. It should be capable of much higher data rates (GBps) than the current recorder, and therefore much higher bandwidths. It should also give us our first taste of the 327MHz Sky Survey data.

Hope that answers some of your questions.

Just a few items for the wish list.
One would think there would be years of Arecibo Data that hasn't been analyzed with AstroPulse. Now that we have a much more efficient AP App, has there been any thought into running that data after the 'current' AP data is exhausted? It seems the AP splitters spend about half their time waiting for the MB data to finish being split. If the older data could be made available to the AP splitters while waiting on the MB data to finish it might speed things up greatly.

It's my understanding Arecibo can't access most of the newly discovered Exoplanets whereas the GBT can. Any idea on how long 'before too long' will be? One would think having data available to work on Exoplanets would be very attractive to a number of people. It will certainly be high on my list.
ID: 1599790 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 9 · Next

Message boards : Technical News : What's happening... (Nov 8, 2014)


 
©2018 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.