ATLAS joining Einstein@home - RFC

Jord
Joined: 26 Jan 05
Posts: 2,952
Credit: 5,766,850
RAC: 352

How about a third option: Not

How about a third option: Not crunch Einstein at all, but attach it to all the other projects out there that need their work done? (As part of a team on its own)

If that's a totally laughable solution, then add me to the no team option.

Is Bruce still switching between random teams with his cluster, or did he stop doing that?

hoarfrost
hoarfrost
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 207
Credit: 53,052,330
RAC: 6,438

Hello! I vote for

Hello!

I vote for ATLAS@"Einstein at work".

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,002
Credit: 211,907,898
RAC: 31,685

RE: How about a third

Message 84856 in response to message 84854

Quote:

How about a third option: Not crunch Einstein at all, but attach it to all the other projects out there that need their work done? (As part of a team on its own)

If that's a totally laughable solution, then add me to the no team option.


Oh, I like the idea. But ATALS was built and funded for data analysis @AEI, which includes Einstein@home as an AEI project, but no other (BOINC) projects.

Quote:
Is Bruce still switching between random teams with his cluster, or did he stop doing that?


As I recently wrote in some other thread the contribution of Bruce/"Nemo" to Einstein@home is negligible by now. I think he (i.e. his account) is still stuck with team "Ireland". He once wanted to write a script that does the team change automatically, but never got around to that. He asked us to do this for ATLAS, but I thought I'd better ask first what people want.

BM

BM

MarkJ
MarkJ
Joined: 28 Feb 08
Posts: 436
Credit: 87,775,545
RAC: 130,799

RE: From what it currently

Message 84857 in response to message 84853

Quote:

From what it currently looks like ATLAS will run as 1342 quad-core machines (and possibly a few more management machines) on a single user account that will join no team at all. I don't think that that "user" will keep the machines hidden.

BM

Berndt,

Doesn't this mean that the current (11,165,000) wu will be processed significantly sooner than the 1 year estimate and the project will all be over in a matter of months?

Are there more runs of data yet to be processed (eg S5R5, S5R6 or S6R1 perhaps)?

Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3,516
Credit: 464,229,441
RAC: 24,578

RE: RE: From what it

Message 84858 in response to message 84857

Quote:
Quote:

From what it currently looks like ATLAS will run as 1342 quad-core machines (and possibly a few more management machines) on a single user account that will join no team at all. I don't think that that "user" will keep the machines hidden.

BM

Berndt,

Doesn't this mean that the current (11,165,000) wu will be processed significantly sooner than the 1 year estimate and the project will all be over in a matter of months?

Are there more runs of data yet to be processed (eg S5R5, S5R6 or S6R1 perhaps)?

While ATLAS is a hell of a machine, teh E@H volunteer network itself is also huge. According to a rough estimate, I'd say that if ATLAS was running 24/7 exclusively for E@H, it would increase the output E@H by a factor of 1.5, which would cut the S5R4 runtime to ca. 8 - 9 month.

But.... "only" some idle time of ATLAS will be used, so the speed-up will be smaller. But I would not be surprised it ATLAS could cut the run short by maybe 2 or 3 month.

There's also some room for further optimization in the Windows app (already implemented in the Linux and OSX apps) that might also shorten the run by a few weeks.

OTOH, it's possible that the current projection of S5R4 length is, however, still too optimistic. At the start of the run (because of the DCF problem), some clients received more work than their fair share and went into EDF / high priority mode. Those hosts will afterwards pause to request E@H work.

So the total duration of S5R4 is still everybody's guess, but if I had to make a bet I'd put my money on something around 12 months, including ATLAS and some more app optimizations.

CU
Bikeman

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,002
Credit: 211,907,898
RAC: 31,685

RE: So the total duration

Message 84859 in response to message 84858

Quote:
So the total duration of S5R4 is still everybody's guess, but if I had to make a bet I'd put my money on something around 12 months, including ATLAS and some more app optimizations.


Ok, I'd bet on ~10 months.

However we recently found that we might be able to increase the sensitivity of the S5R4 search a little further with a new run, so we might not fully complete S5R4 if that turns out to be true (simulations are running right now to investigate this). This would just require a re-design of the workunits, no changes to the Apps needed.

Back to the original topic: ATLAS has been attached to Einstein@home; the user account #342084 will not join any team.

BM

BM

Jord
Joined: 26 Jan 05
Posts: 2,952
Credit: 5,766,850
RAC: 352

RE: Back to the original

Message 84860 in response to message 84859

Quote:
Back to the original topic: ATLAS has been attached to Einstein@home; the user account #342084 will not join any team.


Now go fiddle with the "On multiprocessors, use x % of the processors" and set it to 50 CPUs... see if BOINC can be set to 0.9314456% and if it then indeed uses 50 CPUs only. ;-)

(Posted in jest. I was using ATLAS as an example in an email to David Anderson to compare what is more intuitive to use when you want to set it to use 50 CPUs only... to put in 50 as a number, or to put in that percentage... waiting for an answer. ;-))

David @ TPS
David @ TPS
Joined: 4 Jan 06
Posts: 5
Credit: 5,245,634
RAC: 0

In my opinion, I would agree

Message 84861 in response to message 84858

In my opinion, I would agree with most that ATLAS should remain teamless.

Dave

oops... guess I was a little late!

JoeB
JoeB
Joined: 24 Feb 05
Posts: 124
Credit: 63,259,621
RAC: 38,753

Hi All, My vote is for

Hi All,
My vote is for teamless. Otherwise I bet there would have to be a whole subset of Crunchers Corner devoted to fielding issues arising from "random" selections. I think Bernd's time amongst others would be better spent speeding up wu production than tweaking the ATLAS scoring system.

Joe B

Brian Silvers
Brian Silvers
Joined: 26 Aug 05
Posts: 772
Credit: 282,700
RAC: 0

RE: There's also some room

Message 84863 in response to message 84858

Quote:

There's also some room for further optimization in the Windows app (already implemented in the Linux and OSX apps) that might also shorten the run by a few weeks.

Given the volume of Pentium 4 and newer systems, I'd say there'd be at least a 10% reduction. If expected runtime was 300 days, then that would be 30 days reduced. My anecdotal observations (non-proven / theorized "evidence") based on my Athlon64 system though indicates that there should be around a 20% improvement, and that was without any additional boost that SSE2 might bring.

Anyway, the point you were trying to make is very true...that the systems of the general user base are still very "powerful", and thus the reason for distributed computing in the first place... :-)

Quote:

OTOH, it's possible that the current projection of S5R4 length is, however, still too optimistic. At the start of the run (because of the DCF problem), some clients received more work than their fair share and went into EDF / high priority mode. Those hosts will afterwards pause to request E@H work.

Only if those systems were allocated to other projects. Some people concentrate on a single project. For example, my Pentium 4 is attached to 3 projects now, but it is currently only doing Einstein work, as SETI and Cosmology are both set to not get any new work.

One other thing to remember is that you also have rotating "team project of the month" clubs...and that too could reduce the amount of time.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.