Posts by jedimstr
|
1)
Message boards :
News :
SETI@home 8 released for Raspberry Pi.
(Message 1778402)
Posted 12 Apr 2016 by  jedimstr
Post: Thanks that worked perfectly! |
|
2)
Message boards :
News :
SETI@home 8 released for Raspberry Pi.
(Message 1778311)
Posted 12 Apr 2016 by jedimstr
Post: A.S.a.M - How'd you get it to work on the C2? I have the project attached and boinc seems to be ok according to boinccmd but it won't download any work or show any tasks. I must be missing a step somewhere. |
|
3)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Lunatics Windows Installer v0.44 - new release for v8 (required upgrade)
(Message 1758627)
Posted 23 Jan 2016 by jedimstr
Post: If I understand correctly, these apps are the same as the stock apps, and you expect to be releasing optimized apps later. My shift on the desk. Yes, that's right - but the transition back from Anonymous Platform to stock isn't as easy as in the opposite direction. Just to clarify this point further, does this mean if we are using the stock apps currently with modern GPUs/CPUs, there is no performance advantage going with the Lunatics install at this point in time? |
|
4)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Why pending credit takes so long?
(Message 664615)
Posted 22 Oct 2007 by jedimstr
Post: Between 32.5% and 53% is still a relatively narrow range when you also take into account other individual variables (like number of boxen in your farm, range of speeds, cache settings, etc.). Still... pending is higher on average than when we were on the old trio-quorum. |
|
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Why pending credit takes so long?
(Message 664434)
Posted 22 Oct 2007 by jedimstr
Post: I have over 1,000 "credits" pending, which represents nearly a week of production for me... snip... Man, I'd be happy with 1,000 credits pending. Here's mine: Pending credit: 30,866.48 |
|
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
SETI Enhanced binaries for other Platforms
(Message 542759)
Posted 8 Apr 2007 by jedimstr
Post: And time to make another update... You may want to make another update... Alex has optimized clients for G4, G5, Intel Core and Intel Core2Duo(and Xeons like the MacPros). |
|
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Need help finding lost info
(Message 315358)
Posted 24 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: Upon discovery and confirmation of signals produced by extraterrestrial intelligence, SETI@home will make an announcement in the form of an IAU (International Astronomical Union) telegram. This is a standard way of informing the astronomical community of important discoveries. The telegram contains all of the important information <snip> Didn't Western Union stop sending Telegrams over a year ago? If I'm not mistaken, the were the only ones left sending/receiving them. How are they going to send "I found ET -Exclamation- -stop-" now? I hear there's this new fangled thing called the "Internet," but I bet it's just a fad and won't catch on. |
|
8)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Seti Enhanced Credit Fair?
(Message 309206)
Posted 18 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: ...snip... were calculated on a Sun box that did not reflect the FP characteristics of the most prevalent platforms used in SETI@Home, namely Windows and Intel based PCs (not to alienate Macs or Linux of course, but they also exhibit similar characteristics to the WinTels in this case). The results are credit returns that do not match up with what was intended (optimized or not)....snip... I retract my previous passing of heresay from other threads about the Sun based calculations... based on Eric's new sticky thread this was obviously a false premise. I do still stand-by my opinion that Eric and team should still continue to watch the data rolling in related to the Credits earned/given across the different platforms and adjust the credit calculations accordingly. Even if he did test on multiple platforms, the dataset would never have been as big as the wider project now that the 4.18 WUs have run out. |
|
9)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Seti Enhanced Credit Fair?
(Message 308232)
Posted 17 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: Let's see now........... I don't consider myself to be wholly on either side of this argument, so take my opinions as a central moderate on the issue... but their definitely seems to be a disparity in the pure credit curve used by Eric for the majority of non-optimized users as well. The original plan was to keep the credit/hours work essentially equivalent between 4.18 and 5.12 using the new FP based system even when the WUs would take longer... unfortunately according to some mentions in other threads, the 3.35 multiplier (and the non-linear curve for various AR) were calculated on a Sun box that did not reflect the FP characteristics of the most prevalent platforms used in SETI@Home, namely Windows and Intel based PCs (not to alienate Macs or Linux of course, but they also exhibit similar characteristics to the WinTels in this case). The results are credit returns that do not match up with what was intended (optimized or not). Therefore, even though I don't back up the methods used by those clamoring for more credits...there are some arguments to be made on that side of the fence as well, and I wouldn't take 5.12's credit dolling capability as the "final word" on the issue. The SETI folk just need time to take a look at all the incoming results and over time with the new SETI Enhanced, adjust the granting of credits in the more balanced way they originally intended. For those of you who did decide to stay, your best bet on getting your RAC back up is to stick around, crunch as much as you can, and wait on the next versions once the usual May University hustle and bustle is done (I bet many of the SETI folk are actually away on vacation, studying/taking Final Exams, or otherwise occupied with Graduation/Commencement). 1 Week of actual release time and a few days of completed quorum results are hardly enough to actually get an accurate assessment of how to tweak/adjust the system, especially when short staffed. |
|
10)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
report the results immediately!
(Message 307563)
Posted 16 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post:
Actually it IS off by default (at least it was when I used Trux' client before 5.4.9 came out). Only Calibration was on by default. You had to change the config file to actually turn return_results_immediately ON. Trux' client was much more useful than just for calibration and returning results settings. It allowed automatic CPU Affinity (great for SMP and Dual Cores), Affinity by Project, and assigning Project Priorities specific to that computer. So i wouldn't disparage Truxoft for what is an option and default off "feature"/bug. |
|
11)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Seti Enhanced Credit Fair?
(Message 306787)
Posted 15 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post:
Yes, but who was it that accused you of cheating... not the actual official scientists and administrators of the Seti@Home Project. Very few of the actual Project "People" post here, Eric being one of them. Note that I'm intentionally not including the Volunteer Testers or the Volunteer Developers. Why? Because they do NOT speak for the Seti@Home project officially, nor do they speak for the Berkeley team. They make great contributions, but they do not determine what is "Good Science" or not. You are free to do as you please, but I doubt it's fair in the other direction to hold the Seti@Home administrators and scientists accountable for the opinions (however valid or invalid) of members of this Message Board. |
|
12)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Seti Enhanced Credit Fair?
(Message 306758)
Posted 15 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: I'm one of those who had an RAC above 10k but dropped to the 7k range... I won't get into the debate one way or another about what's the fairest way to calculate credits or not. I do believe however that immediately threatening to leave with your fleet of crunchers unless changes are made is entirely the wrong way of enticing the Berkeley scientists that they should make a change. If you truly believe that the credit situation is too skewed in the other direction as the pendulum swings, then present your stats, evidence, and other information backing your case....then give the Seti folk time to examine, digest, and square things away. I may like credits as much as any other high/mid flyer, but Seti@Home's mission isn't credit giving. I also know that they understand that Credit giving is what makes this fun for the competitors out there or else they wouldn't have implemented a credit system in the first place. I understand that and don't mind that it'll take time for them to figure this out as the transition occurs. One week, especially in May when Universities tend to have graduations, vacations starting, etc. isn't long enough for them to capture the important opinions of all involved. I'm as upset as anyone that my RAC is on a downward spiral...but I know that I'm sticking with the project, continuing to contribute to the science, and hoping that the situation will be normalized by the powers that be over the next month (or however long it takes). |
|
13)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Seti Enhanced Credit Fair?
(Message 306745)
Posted 15 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: I'm one of those who had an RAC above 10k but dropped to the 7k range... I won't get into the debate one way or another about what's the fairest way to calculate credits or not. I do believe however that immediately threatening to leave with your fleet of crunchers unless changes are made is entirely the wrong way of enticing the Berkeley scientists that they should make a change. If you truly believe that the credit situation is too skewed in the other direction as the pendulum swings, then present your stats, evidence, and other information backing your case....then give the Seti folk time to examine, digest, and square things away. I may like credits as much as any other high/mid flyer, but Seti@Home's mission isn't credit giving. I also know that they understand that Credit giving is what makes this fun for the competitors out there or else they wouldn't have implemented a credit system in the first place. I understand that and don't mind that it'll take time for them to figure this out as the transition occurs. One week, especially in May when Universities tend to have graduations, vacations starting, etc. isn't long enough for them to capture the important opinions of all involved. I'm as upset as anyone that my RAC is on a downward spiral...but I know that I'm sticking with the project, continuing to contribute to the science, and hoping that the situation will be normalized by the powers that be over the next month (or however long it takes). |
|
14)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Problem with Athlon X2
(Message 306726)
Posted 15 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: I used to run seti a lot a year or so ago and then stopped. I recently upgraded my PC, went from an Athlon 64 3500+ to a new Athlon 64 X2 4400+. Everything runs fine, seems very much faster to me, all my benchmarks show a much faster computer. However, though I can't remember my old seti stats, I believe it is taking WAY too long to complete work now. It is taking on average about 7 hours for it to complete one. I'm running the latest Boinc Manager, have both cores working so two are running at once, takes about 7 hours for two to get done. This seems really long, I seem to remember it only taking about 2 hours for my old processor to complete one. Any ideas what could be wrong? That's because Seti is transtioning into Seti Enhanced: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_enhanced.php Seti Enhanced WUs take longer on average than the older BOINC Seti WUs. |
|
15)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
BOINC 5.4.9
(Message 303942)
Posted 13 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: Did you try copying the 5.2.13tx3? files over 5.4.9 at some point??? No reason, just diagnosing what could have gone wrong. I was just trying to figure out why your install would have problems when my similar install parameters did not. As for the benchmarks...noticed that too, and not only on P4 based systems. From lowly Coppermine PIII's to my P4s, PentD's, Athlon64's, G4's and a G5 Quad, all the benchmarks were much lower than I remember for the official clients. I'm hoping Truxoft comes out with a new calibrating client based off the new source soon. Even on his beta and alpha release list, his clients are all 5.3.x based. |
|
16)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
BOINC 5.4.9
(Message 303822)
Posted 13 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: hmmm.. what I don't get is what you did different that messed with 5.4.9's install/uninstall routine. I had the Truxoft 5.2.13tx37 files copied over an install of 5.2.13 on 6 different systems so that they would calibrate Crunch3r's 4.11. I was able to install 5.4.9 cleanly over them today without any problems whatsover now that most of my WU's are running on Crunch3r's 5.12. No hiccups, just went straight into the client upgrade messages and re-benchmark. Did you try copying the 5.2.13tx3? files over 5.4.9 at some point??? |
|
17)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
BOINC 5.4.9
(Message 303820)
Posted 13 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: hmmm.. what I don't get is what you did different that messed with 5.4.9's install/uninstall routine. I had the Truxoft 5.2.13tx37 files copied over an install of 5.2.13 on 6 different systems so that they would calibrate Crunch3r's 4.11. I was able to install 5.4.9 cleanly over them today without any problems whatsover now that most of my WU's are running on Crunch3r's 5.12. No hiccups, just went straight into the client upgrade messages and re-benchmark. Did you try copying the 5.2.13tx3? files over 5.4.9 at some point??? |
|
18)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Mac OSX & 5.12e - Oh dear!
(Message 302970)
Posted 11 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: Have any Mac users encountered problems with 5.12 enhanced??? I didn't ask for this version - it got squirted down to my machine the other night - and all I get is errors!!! No processes show up in my process monitors - I continue to download WU's, whichn then get junked! I'm running OS 10.3.8 on a 1GHz iBook. I see you're running the 4.25 boinc client. Try downloading the 5.2.13 version and see if you encounter the same problems. |
|
19)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Best way from Crunch3rs S@H 4.11 to 5.12?
(Message 302755)
Posted 11 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post:
Are 5.13 WU's already in the wild? I thought those were just in the Seti Beta project still. Current Seti Apps page: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/apps.php still shows 5.12 as the current build for the regular Seti Enhanced. |
|
20)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
optimized Enhanced 5.12 app.
(Message 300606)
Posted 9 May 2006 by jedimstr
Post: Is there an app_info floating around somewhere ? Windows Check the other Enhanced threads, especially Running Optimized & Enhanced... there's a bunch of variations of the app_info.xml there.. |
Next 20
©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.