Krazy Kenzie’s Kredit Krunch

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 8,804
Credit: 925,269,271
RAC: 2,623,634

RE: It would certainly be

Message 90587 in response to message 90586

Quote:
It would certainly be interesting to run the 'parallel' test as well as the 'serial' test, and compare the credit total (sum of all four projects) for the two months. I suspect that BOINC will turn out to be more productive overall running different projects on the different cores (less competition for resources), but that's open for debate/experiment too.

Maybe if we talk really nice to Kenzie she will try it? What do you think Kenzie, try it to satisfy inquiring minds? We really do want to know. See if Boinc is as good as everyone seems to think it is. Personally I think it is good but has some flaws, Gary pointed out one, "BOINC refuses to ask for new work if the number of stuck uploads exceeds 2*cpu cores". I did not know about that one but have probably seen it and didn't put it together. I have had MANY stuck uploads over the years! As have most of us!!

RandyC
RandyC
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 4,357
Credit: 111,139,797
RAC: 0

RE: RE: It would

Message 90588 in response to message 90587

Quote:
Quote:
It would certainly be interesting to run the 'parallel' test as well as the 'serial' test, and compare the credit total (sum of all four projects) for the two months. I suspect that BOINC will turn out to be more productive overall running different projects on the different cores (less competition for resources), but that's open for debate/experiment too.

Maybe if we talk really nice to Kenzie she will try it? What do you think Kenzie, try it to satisfy inquiring minds? We really do want to know. See if Boinc is as good as everyone seems to think it is. Personally I think it is good but has some flaws, Gary pointed out one, "BOINC refuses to ask for new work if the number of stuck uploads exceeds 2*cpu cores". I did not know about that one but have probably seen it and didn't put it together. I have had MANY stuck uploads over the years! As have most of us!!

That's a "feature", not a "bug". Supposedly, it's to prevent your system from increasing the stuck uploads any more than it already is. i.e. Don't make a bad situation worse. YMMV.

Seti Classic Final Total: 11446 WU.

kenzieB
kenzieB
Joined: 10 Apr 07
Posts: 42
Credit: 584,424
RAC: 0

RE: RE: It would

Message 90589 in response to message 90587

Quote:
Quote:
It would certainly be interesting to run the 'parallel' test as well as the 'serial' test, and compare the credit total (sum of all four projects) for the two months. I suspect that BOINC will turn out to be more productive overall running different projects on the different cores (less competition for resources), but that's open for debate/experiment too.

Maybe if we talk really nice to Kenzie she will try it? What do you think Kenzie, try it to satisfy inquiring minds? We really do want to know. See if Boinc is as good as everyone seems to think it is. Personally I think it is good but has some flaws, Gary pointed out one, "BOINC refuses to ask for new work if the number of stuck uploads exceeds 2*cpu cores". I did not know about that one but have probably seen it and didn't put it together. I have had MANY stuck uploads over the years! As have most of us!!


After the month is up tho, I want to do a optimized vs. optimized showdown between SETI and MW so it would be six weeks before I could start.

I am not sure about letting it run without my intervention for two months. A combination of ‘control freak’ personality and a bit of ADD will make that a challenge in itself. ;0)

Your prototypical Generation 'Y' slacker, and damn proud of it.

Help feed the world's hungry. Free Rice.

Alinator
Alinator
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 927
Credit: 9,352,143
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: It would

Message 90590 in response to message 90589

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It would certainly be interesting to run the 'parallel' test as well as the 'serial' test, and compare the credit total (sum of all four projects) for the two months. I suspect that BOINC will turn out to be more productive overall running different projects on the different cores (less competition for resources), but that's open for debate/experiment too.

Maybe if we talk really nice to Kenzie she will try it? What do you think Kenzie, try it to satisfy inquiring minds? We really do want to know. See if Boinc is as good as everyone seems to think it is. Personally I think it is good but has some flaws, Gary pointed out one, "BOINC refuses to ask for new work if the number of stuck uploads exceeds 2*cpu cores". I did not know about that one but have probably seen it and didn't put it together. I have had MANY stuck uploads over the years! As have most of us!!


After the month is up tho, I want to do a optimized vs. optimized showdown between SETI and MW so it would be six weeks before I could start.

I am not sure about letting it run without my intervention for two months. A combination of ‘control freak’ personality and a bit of ADD will make that a challenge in itself. ;0)

LOL...

Agreed, it would be very hard if you are trying to get comparative RAC based metrics without interveneing unless you are talking about a very long term experiment. Especially if SAH, LHC, and/or a couple of other projects are in the mix.

Right now MW is having a little trouble keeping enough work in the scheduler bullpen, but hopefully they can get that squared away quickly. ;-)

Alinator

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5,574
Credit: 82,280,626,101
RAC: 67,246,282

RE: @ Gary Roberts and

Message 90591 in response to message 90583

Quote:
@ Gary Roberts and Alinator sorry that you disapprove of my methods.


I don't "disapprove" of your methods in any way at all, so please don't be sorry :-). It's your experiment so you are free to conduct it in any way you choose. You seemed to be inviting discussion so I was just contributing to that.

I was also just trying to point out that BOINC is actually quite good at managing things like this on its own despite the many claims to the contrary.

Cheers,
Gary.

Gary Roberts
Gary Roberts
Moderator
Joined: 9 Feb 05
Posts: 5,574
Credit: 82,280,626,101
RAC: 67,246,282

RE: If we have patience,

Message 90592 in response to message 90585

Quote:
If we have patience, maybe we can convince a second run using the established parameters as you cite. I agree that BOINC does do well in "fire and forget" mode, but, we only suppose that it does things "fairly" ...

The debt system seems to accurately track each second of CPU time given to each project so if not interfered with and if allowed to run for a reasonable length of time, it's hard to see why it could be anything but "fair" :-).

Cheers,
Gary.

kenzieB
kenzieB
Joined: 10 Apr 07
Posts: 42
Credit: 584,424
RAC: 0

RE: RE: @ Gary Roberts

Message 90593 in response to message 90591

Quote:
Quote:
@ Gary Roberts and Alinator sorry that you disapprove of my methods.

I don't "disapprove" of your methods in any way at all, so please don't be sorry :-). It's your experiment so you are free to conduct it in any way you choose. You seemed to be inviting discussion so I was just contributing to that.

I was also just trying to point out that BOINC is actually quite good at managing things like this on its own despite the many claims to the contrary.


I can be moody sometimes so, I do apologize for that. :o)

And I do invite debate and comments.

Your prototypical Generation 'Y' slacker, and damn proud of it.

Help feed the world's hungry. Free Rice.

kenzieB
kenzieB
Joined: 10 Apr 07
Posts: 42
Credit: 584,424
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: RE: It

Message 90594 in response to message 90590

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It would certainly be interesting to run the 'parallel' test as well as the 'serial' test, and compare the credit total (sum of all four projects) for the two months. I suspect that BOINC will turn out to be more productive overall running different projects on the different cores (less competition for resources), but that's open for debate/experiment too.

Maybe if we talk really nice to Kenzie she will try it? What do you think Kenzie, try it to satisfy inquiring minds? We really do want to know. See if Boinc is as good as everyone seems to think it is. Personally I think it is good but has some flaws, Gary pointed out one, "BOINC refuses to ask for new work if the number of stuck uploads exceeds 2*cpu cores". I did not know about that one but have probably seen it and didn't put it together. I have had MANY stuck uploads over the years! As have most of us!!


After the month is up tho, I want to do a optimized vs. optimized showdown between SETI and MW so it would be six weeks before I could start.

I am not sure about letting it run without my intervention for two months. A combination of ‘control freak’ personality and a bit of ADD will make that a challenge in itself. ;0)

LOL...

Agreed, it would be very hard if you are trying to get comparative RAC based metrics without interveneing unless you are talking about a very long term experiment. Especially if SAH, LHC, and/or a couple of other projects are in the mix.

Right now MW is having a little trouble keeping enough work in the scheduler bullpen, but hopefully they can get that squared away quickly. ;-)

Alinator


Was talking about things with some friends earlier and they all agree that this suggestion is a better, more accurate, test. So, once this little experiment is done, and I’ve done my optimized vs. optimized test, I am going to give it a try. (i.e. 4 projects each with equal share and let BOINC sort things out.)

I am pretty sure that I can stare at it, chew my nails but not touch it for a month. Can’t guarantee two months, tho. :oP

Side Note: I am absolutely going to have to improve the cooling before summer. I suppose that wouldn’t really matter too much since, if I shut it down to install a new heatsink and chipset fans, etc, it would effect each project equally. . .?
Or, depending when my finances imrpoves (aka my tax refund) wait until I’ve done that before starting?

Your prototypical Generation 'Y' slacker, and damn proud of it.

Help feed the world's hungry. Free Rice.

Dagorath
Dagorath
Joined: 22 Apr 06
Posts: 146
Credit: 226,423
RAC: 0

Kenzie, I think what you

Message 90595 in response to message 90594

Kenzie,

I think what you really want to do is just go to your website records for 1 of your computers at each project you crunch and add up all the crunch time and add up all the credits then divide the total credits by total hours to get a credits per hour number for each project... right?

That would take a lot of work if you did it by hand but I have a script that will do it for you and just print out the info you want. Here is what it prints out for my computer, for example:
[pre]
Project credits/hr
======= ==========

AQUA@home 0.0
Einstein@Home 0.0
orbit@home 13.0
climateprediction.net 16.3
QMC@HOME 28.4
ABC@home 52.4
lhcathome 0.0
Milkyway@home 0.0
[/pre]

The script is written in Python so it will run on Linux, Mac and even Windows. You would have to install the Python interpreter but that's easy. If you or anybody else is interested in using the script, download version 2.6.1 for your platform from the Python download page. If anybody is interested, I'll post the script in a separate thread so as not to clutter this one.

Alinator
Alinator
Joined: 8 May 05
Posts: 927
Credit: 9,352,143
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: After the

Message 90596 in response to message 90594

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:


After the month is up tho, I want to do a optimized vs. optimized showdown between SETI and MW so it would be six weeks before I could start.

I am not sure about letting it run without my intervention for two months. A combination of ‘control freak’ personality and a bit of ADD will make that a challenge in itself. ;0)

LOL...

Agreed, it would be very hard if you are trying to get comparative RAC based metrics without interveneing unless you are talking about a very long term experiment. Especially if SAH, LHC, and/or a couple of other projects are in the mix.

Right now MW is having a little trouble keeping enough work in the scheduler bullpen, but hopefully they can get that squared away quickly. ;-)

Alinator


Was talking about things with some friends earlier and they all agree that this suggestion is a better, more accurate, test. So, once this little experiment is done, and I’ve done my optimized vs. optimized test, I am going to give it a try. (i.e. 4 projects each with equal share and let BOINC sort things out.)

I am pretty sure that I can stare at it, chew my nails but not touch it for a month. Can’t guarantee two months, tho. :oP

Side Note: I am absolutely going to have to improve the cooling before summer. I suppose that wouldn’t really matter too much since, if I shut it down to install a new heatsink and chipset fans, etc, it would effect each project equally. . .?
Or, depending when my finances imrpoves (aka my tax refund) wait until I’ve done that before starting?

Hmmmm...

Well, if cash is the problem I'd suggest you try adding an auxiliary case exhaust fan first, if you aren't overclocking too much. Apologies here, if you have already gone that route. I remember seeing you post about getting your Q-Baby online, but didn't really check out what you had for hardware specifics. ;-)

I'd recommend using one of the ones with a builtin thermostatic speed control. I started using them in mine and it made a big difference for almost next to nothing in cash outlay. :-)

BTW, sorry if it seemed like I was dissing your experiment protocol earlier. That was not intended.

There is nothing wrong with using RAC based metrics. It's just that you have to be aware of the variables which are not under direct control and make allowances for them, if necessary, when you draw your conclusions.

Alinator

Comment viewing options

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