Information about the new S5 workunits

Pappa
Pappa
Joined: 5 Mar 05
Posts: 6
Credit: 663,870
RAC: 0

Bernd I am attempting to

Message 37547 in response to message 37513

Bernd

I am attempting to do a credit analysis for Eric over on the Seti side, please take a moment to email me al.setiboinc (at) gmail.com

Thank You

Pappa

Quote:
Quote:
broadly speaking, it almost has to be approximately equal to the standard credit rate. If einstien were to offer official credit at a substantially different rate, it would cause problems between it's staff and the staff of other projects for screwing with the credit rate.

The intention is that the average Einstein@Home participant will get the same credit per hour "work" than what he gets on other BOINC projects. However with the large variety of Platforms, Apps and Clients we currently have it requires quite some investigation and testing to find out the average participant configuration, or the "standard credit rate" which you mentioned.

BM


Ed Parker
Ed Parker
Joined: 19 Feb 05
Posts: 11
Credit: 481,732
RAC: 0

I got my S5 unit today as

I got my S5 unit today as well. Crunch time for older stuff was on the order of an hour and ten minutes to two hours. I'm now at 42% progress after 15 hours and seven minutes with 10 hours and 19 minutes to completion. Here is the last of the messages:
6/15/2006 11:30:42 AM|SETI@home|Deferring task 24mr99ab.21115.31938.754822.3.91_2
6/15/2006 11:30:42 AM|Einstein@Home|Resuming task h1_1362.5_S5R1__3411_S5R1a_1 using einstein_S5R1 version 402

Another older, slower machine got S5 units and went wacko, showing 176 hours to completion and several messages showing that it was "overcommitted".

Jayargh
Jayargh
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 64
Credit: 1,205,159
RAC: 0

Will there be any optimized

Will there be any optimized apps coming forth from the project/akos soon? I am refering to platform specific enhancements for say MMX,PIII, sse2,sse3,etc etc...as there are for the S4 search. BM I know you said you plan on improving the speed over the life of the S5.... would be nice to have platform specific enhancements near the start :)

Webmaster Yoda
Webmaster Yoda
Joined: 15 Mar 05
Posts: 17
Credit: 608,427
RAC: 0

Ignoring the issue of credit

Ignoring the issue of credit (which is always a touchy subject), there's another issue which may drive some crunchers away...

I have a strong preference for projects with work units that don't take more than 2-3 hours to compute on a reasonably fast CPU. There are other like me (scary thought?)

SETI massively increased their WU length. It was one of the reasons I stopped my involvement in that project and came back to Einstein. With AKOS apps, my slowest computer would take 2 hours at worst for a "long" work unit (and the fastest would do them in half an hour). Great!

If S5 work units are going to take over 9 hours on one of my fastest computers (Opteron 248), it is a disincentive for me to stay with Einstein when I can get similar credit elsewhere on work units that don't take as long.

Just offering my point of view on work unit length and how it may affect some people's choice of project, driving them away from Einstein.

DarkStar
DarkStar
Joined: 2 Jan 06
Posts: 13
Credit: 73,738
RAC: 0

RE: RE: One think (okay,

Message 37551 in response to message 37545

Quote:
Quote:
One think (okay, should've been "thing") I'm curious about is checkpoint frequency....
The checkpointing frequency is determined by the "write to disk at most every" setting in your general preferences.

Thanks for that! I didn't realize that the app used "at most" as "at least" also.

.

DanNeely
DanNeely
Joined: 4 Sep 05
Posts: 1,314
Credit: 1,752,668,651
RAC: 914,435

We've been promised a

We've been promised a scheduler that will selectively assign work unit lengths based on processor speeds. With the new, much larger WUs this is going to be badly needed. Processor specific asm should get a doubling in peroformance at some point, wether from a new batch of hand tweaked executables or the staff finally getting the combined app that can switch between different cpu optimized apps automatically.

Beyond
Beyond
Joined: 28 Feb 05
Posts: 117
Credit: 148,719,734
RAC: 0

Perhaps a bit early for

Perhaps a bit early for predictions, but it's beginning to look like the mass exodus from Seti may be repeated here also. I hope not.

Like it or not:

longer WUs + lower credit / hour = fewer crunchers

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5,233
Credit: 44,654,336,654
RAC: 39,169,437

RE: RE: RE: 4. Is the

Message 37554 in response to message 37531

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
4. Is the daily quota staying at 32 or changing to something different?

I'll let Bruce have the final word on it.

BM

I didn't plan to change the daily quota, but if you have machines running out of work, please shout and I will bump it up.

No I don't have a problem with machines running out of work. The two strategies I used for any boxes at risk were (i) Use backup projects, and (ii) Use the BoincStudio client to fake the number of CPUs. Most of the machines I have are of PIII and early P4 vintage and were at risk with the Akos S41.07 app. Judging by the early comments in this thread, we'll all be able to forget about the "Curse of 32" in the future. I had wondered if it might be in your thinking to scale it back a bit but I'm certainly not seeking that. Leaving it at 32 seems to be a very good thing to do as I'm guessing that even the fastest of boxes will have difficulty getting up to that level of production for a while yet :).

Cheers,

Cheers,
Gary.

Winterknight
Winterknight
Joined: 4 Jun 05
Posts: 482
Credit: 129,776,334
RAC: 159,108

Even if it does cause an

Message 37555 in response to message 37505

Even if it does cause an arguement I feel I must correct these comments.

Quote:
Quote:
I'm not aware of what's going on at SETI, and we all, I think, have our hands full with E@H. Can you give me a short summary (without initiating a new discussion here) what the trouble or different opinions are there @SETI?

The credit issues was a big problem, as was the fact the application was rushed and had some serious bugs still in it. They lengthened the units with a credit change at the same time. So the credit issued did a nose dive to about 1/3 what it was. This credit dive caused serious issues with the people that compete with them. This has hurt the project on total crunchers that left due to the issues.

The credit problem was only an issue with those credit hounds that refused to accept that the Fpops credit system returned the credits claimed/granted to the levels before optimised applications. I can see this also being a problem here.

Quote:
As far as the Application, it had some serious hang and loop issues that really had people bent out of shape. WU's that would run and get to finish, then restart and run again, things of that nature. They also did a complete stop of the old WU's and issued only new WU's with no real blend over period. So when the Bug issues came up, many crunchers had no way to keep going. Many got mad about the whole issue and left completly.

There were no serious bugs in the application, there was a bug server side that caused a few units to hang up or not error out gracefully. this was fixed fairly quickly. It affected those who run large work cache's the most because they tend to download blocks of units from the same tape, most people who run normal 'connect to network' settings only saw one or two of these units. I only saw one using three computers.

There was a period of over a week from first release of the enhanced application until units for the old application ceased.

Quote:
Quote:
The credit will be granted totally based on the size of the Workunits as determined on the server side, regardless of the time it takes a specific host or App to process it. Maesurements have been incorporated in the Apps so that they should also claim this credit for transparency, but the credit actually granted this way doen't need to have anythig to do with the claimed credit anymore.

It seems the credit system you are changing to may be a better solution than what SETI went to. Which was a flop count method. It seems to be in step with the longer WU's. I hope all goes much smoother here. If it does, it may be a model for SETI to change too.

I think this may work, if it is fixed NN credits for long units and fixed nn credits for short units I can see problems if there is any significant variation in process times, this would have to be less than +/- 5% to stop all complaints.

Andy

Metod, S56RKO
Metod, S56RKO
Joined: 11 Feb 05
Posts: 135
Credit: 771,187,993
RAC: 64,894

RE: RE: RE: The credit

Message 37556 in response to message 37555

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The credit will be granted totally based on the size of the Workunits as determined on the server side, regardless of the time it takes a specific host or App to process it. Maesurements have been incorporated in the Apps so that they should also claim this credit for transparency, but the credit actually granted this way doen't need to have anythig to do with the claimed credit anymore.

It seems the credit system you are changing to may be a better solution than what SETI went to. Which was a flop count method. It seems to be in step with the longer WU's. I hope all goes much smoother here. If it does, it may be a model for SETI to change too.

I think this may work, if it is fixed NN credits for long units and fixed nn credits for short units I can see problems if there is any significant variation in process times, this would have to be less than +/- 5% to stop all complaints.

Basic problem with SETI WUs is that the amount of work to be done for a particular WU is only a rough estimate which is mostly correct but is way off the line for some WUs. SETI came with an idea of measuring exact work done for any particular WU to avoid problems. Wether they succeeded in that or not is another question.
Until a rough analysis of recording data one can not predict how many signal spikes would have to be throughly analysed.

If amount of work can be easily and accurately predicted in advance, then fixing the amount of credit per WU is a way to go. This works perfectly for CPDN and may work fine for EAH S5 ...

[edit] formatting

Metod ...

Comment viewing options

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