Credit adjustment

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

RE: RE: Bruce, I wouldn't

Message 83847 in response to message 83846

Quote:
Quote:
Bruce,
I wouldn't do any comparison's with Seti at the moment. They have not done a stats output for three days, due to server problems. And as they are also doing a credit realignment you will be comparing to out of date data.

I've watched this ratio (Einstein@Home credit per CPU hour/SETI@Home credit per CPU hour) for a number of weeks now. It has not fluctuated much, though it is now slowly decreasing due to the Einstein@Home credit adjustments.

So I think that the comparison to SETI@Home is reasonable, even if their stats are a few days old. Do you know if their credit realignment will increase or decrease the average credit per CPU hour?

The proposal is to decrease it overall by about 15%. Instead of having other projects move up to meet them, they have decided to move down to meet the other projects.

I'd also encourage you to read through Alinator's 64,000 cobblestone questions post... Perhaps you could provide some feedback for points 1 through 3.

Thanks...

Winterknight
Winterknight
Joined: 4 Jun 05
Posts: 656
Credit: 221,480,872
RAC: 40,691

RE: RE: Bruce, I wouldn't

Message 83848 in response to message 83846

Quote:
Quote:
Bruce,
I wouldn't do any comparison's with Seti at the moment. They have not done a stats output for three days, due to server problems. And as they are also doing a credit realignment you will be comparing to out of date data.

I've watched this ratio (Einstein@Home credit per CPU hour/SETI@Home credit per CPU hour) for a number of weeks now. It has not fluctuated much, though it is now slowly decreasing due to the Einstein@Home credit adjustments.

So I think that the comparison to SETI@Home is reasonable, even if their stats are a few days old. Do you know if their credit realignment will increase or decrease the average credit per CPU hour?


As Brian Said Seti is looking to decrease by about 15%.
Eric Korpela's post is here, in which he states the reasons and his method of achieving it.

Bruce Allen
Bruce Allen
Moderator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 1,115
Credit: 172,127,663
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: I wouldn't

Message 83849 in response to message 83848

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I wouldn't do any comparison's with Seti at the moment. They have not done a stats output for three days, due to server problems. And as they are also doing a credit realignment you will be comparing to out of date data.

I've watched this ratio (Einstein@Home credit per CPU hour/SETI@Home credit per CPU hour) for a number of weeks now. It has not fluctuated much, though it is now slowly decreasing due to the Einstein@Home credit adjustments.

So I think that the comparison to SETI@Home is reasonable, even if their stats are a few days old. Do you know if their credit realignment will increase or decrease the average credit per CPU hour?


As Brian Said Seti is looking to decrease by about 15%.
Eric Korpela's post is here, in which he states the reasons and his method of achieving it.

Thanks -- that link is very helpful. I've seen Eric's recent credit adjustment checkins to the BOINC code. I'll have a look at these and talk with Eric if needed, just to be sure that I understand how it works and what the potential impact will be on Einstein@Home.

Cheers,
Bruce

Director, Einstein@Home

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

Well, my P4 has finally

Well, my P4 has finally processed one of the newer tasks and it is now in the 8-9 cr/hr range instead of the 7-8 from before. No surprise. That's what the math indicated should happen from the adjustment.

I do not know if SETI's loophole of the optimized applications still exists. I have not been participating there. When I left this morning, they were still having work generation problems. I may try to see if I can snag a few tasks to process to see if I'm still in the 17-22 cr/hr range there... If so, then the fact that they chose to not include full optimization in their standard-issue apps could be something that attracts credit chasers, and that is what I term a "loophole advantage" over other projects...

Winterknight
Winterknight
Joined: 4 Jun 05
Posts: 656
Credit: 221,480,872
RAC: 40,691

RE: Well, my P4 has finally

Message 83851 in response to message 83850

Quote:

Well, my P4 has finally processed one of the newer tasks and it is now in the 8-9 cr/hr range instead of the 7-8 from before. No surprise. That's what the math indicated should happen from the adjustment.

I do not know if SETI's loophole of the optimized applications still exists. I have not been participating there. When I left this morning, they were still having work generation problems. I may try to see if I can snag a few tasks to process to see if I'm still in the 17-22 cr/hr range there... If so, then the fact that they chose to not include full optimization in their standard-issue apps could be something that attracts credit chasers, and that is what I term a "loophole advantage" over other projects...

But where Einstein has _0, _1 and _2 selected apps Seti would have to issue the equivalent of _3, _s3 and _4.1 apps as well and be preparing _4.2 (Nehalem's or i7 extensions) and of course there would be demands from a certain camp wanting _5 version for their cpu.
Of course this could also happen to any other project that has open source code.

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

RE: RE: Well, my P4 has

Message 83852 in response to message 83851

Quote:
Quote:

Well, my P4 has finally processed one of the newer tasks and it is now in the 8-9 cr/hr range instead of the 7-8 from before. No surprise. That's what the math indicated should happen from the adjustment.

I do not know if SETI's loophole of the optimized applications still exists. I have not been participating there. When I left this morning, they were still having work generation problems. I may try to see if I can snag a few tasks to process to see if I'm still in the 17-22 cr/hr range there... If so, then the fact that they chose to not include full optimization in their standard-issue apps could be something that attracts credit chasers, and that is what I term a "loophole advantage" over other projects...

But where Einstein has _0, _1 and _2 selected apps Seti would have to issue the equivalent of _3, _s3 and _4.1 apps as well and be preparing _4.2 (Nehalem's or i7 extensions) and of course there would be demands from a certain camp wanting _5 version for their cpu.
Of course this could also happen to any other project that has open source code.

"SETI" would not "have to" do anything, other than provide the detection. People like Jason, JD, Joe (why is it all J's???) are responsible enough adults to where I have faith that they'd say "no" to something that didn't have enough "ROI" in it... That way it would be kept as "open source", but support would be upon the volunteer community.

If you want to come up with any number of different "nightmare scenarios" where the volunteer developers abandon ship, all I can really say in return is that having one's cake and eating it too is not exactly "Cross-Project Parity" vis-a-vis the effort that has been put in here and perhaps at other projects as well.

If SETI is "not able to support" things because of "lack of funding", then I would suggest that David Anderson, figurehead or no, stops focusing on things that really aren't problems when so many other problems really do exist..both with the SETI project and with BOINC itself...

Winterknight
Winterknight
Joined: 4 Jun 05
Posts: 656
Credit: 221,480,872
RAC: 40,691

RE: RE: RE: Well, my P4

Message 83853 in response to message 83852

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

Well, my P4 has finally processed one of the newer tasks and it is now in the 8-9 cr/hr range instead of the 7-8 from before. No surprise. That's what the math indicated should happen from the adjustment.

I do not know if SETI's loophole of the optimized applications still exists. I have not been participating there. When I left this morning, they were still having work generation problems. I may try to see if I can snag a few tasks to process to see if I'm still in the 17-22 cr/hr range there... If so, then the fact that they chose to not include full optimization in their standard-issue apps could be something that attracts credit chasers, and that is what I term a "loophole advantage" over other projects...

But where Einstein has _0, _1 and _2 selected apps Seti would have to issue the equivalent of _3, _s3 and _4.1 apps as well and be preparing _4.2 (Nehalem's or i7 extensions) and of course there would be demands from a certain camp wanting _5 version for their cpu.
Of course this could also happen to any other project that has open source code.


Under your suggestion Seti would then have to be the download host for the optimised apps. That I do not think is in Seti's plans at all for several reasons.
Also you might not have noticed but quite a lot of optimisers have left, probably not permanently, but more because other things have happened in their lifes and they can no longer donate the time required. Where is Simon, TMR is still around but not optimising although he does do a little assisting, etc, etc.
"SETI" would not "have to" do anything, other than provide the detection. People like Jason, JD, Joe (why is it all J's???) are responsible enough adults to where I have faith that they'd say "no" to something that didn't have enough "ROI" in it... That way it would be kept as "open source", but support would be upon the volunteer community.

If you want to come up with any number of different "nightmare scenarios" where the volunteer developers abandon ship, all I can really say in return is that having one's cake and eating it too is not exactly "Cross-Project Parity" vis-a-vis the effort that has been put in here and perhaps at other projects as well.

If SETI is "not able to support" things because of "lack of funding", then I would suggest that David Anderson, figurehead or no, stops focusing on things that really aren't problems when so many other problems really do exist..both with the SETI project and with BOINC itself...


Bruce Allen
Bruce Allen
Moderator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 1,115
Credit: 172,127,663
RAC: 0

RE: If SETI is "not able to

Message 83854 in response to message 83852

Quote:
If SETI is "not able to support" things because of "lack of funding", then I would suggest that David Anderson, figurehead or no, stops focusing on things that really aren't problems when so many other problems really do exist..both with the SETI project and with BOINC itself...

I would be interested if you could make an ordered list of what, in your opinion, are the most important problems with BOINC, SETI, and distributed computing projects. The BOINC community will be meeting in France in a couple of weeks and this would be an interesting thing for me to bring to that discussion.

Cheers,
Bruce

Director, Einstein@Home

Jord
Joined: 26 Jan 05
Posts: 2,952
Credit: 5,779,100
RAC: 0

Ran an S5R4 task under the

Ran an S5R4 task under the old credit adjustment.
Ran an S5R4 task under the new credit adjustment.

Time wise it doesn't matter much. 95,000 - 97,000 seconds on this P4 3.0GHz HT.
Credits for the first one, claimed 64.69; granted 188.89
Credits for the second one, claimed 66.18; granted 221.71

Astro
Astro
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 257
Credit: 1,000,560
RAC: 0

RE: snip...The BOINC

Message 83856 in response to message 83854

Quote:

snip...The BOINC community will be meeting in France in a couple of weeks and this would be an interesting thing for me to bring to that discussion.

Cheers,
Bruce


France? I thought it was the University of Delaware on the 29th of August. http://gcl.cis.udel.edu/EastCoast08/

Comment viewing options

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