Is there any optimized einstein app APPROVED for S5 workunits

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6,075
Credit: 116,531,425
RAC: 49,129

RE: Well, I don't care what

Message 41049 in response to message 41041

Quote:

Well, I don't care what you say, I'm using the patched app
and have not had any problems with faulty WUs at all, not even one !

But the credit is still down 28-30% even with this version, but
I suppose it's better than the 50% less than the official version

also I don't care if you say that the official version is optimized in it self.
With a 50% drop in RAC it just can't be optimized ... enough...


This has got to be either humor or trolling, right?! :-)
I was just thinking about this sort of thing the other day.... here, excerpt:

Quote:
- those who care only about the credit should consider the following. Suppose I have a project called IAC@H. This has all the usual BOINC structure, the WU's simply count the number of integers between successive multiples of one hundred. We start at 1 - 100 and continue on to infinity. Call it 'Integer Axiom Concordance At Home' as it verifies that each century interval has precisely one hundred integers ( which would test that multiple successive additions are equivalent to a single block subtraction ). As this is clearly lucidrous you could easily re-title as 'Inane Aimless Computation At Home'. Would any credit focussed participants be satisfied with credit from such a silly activity? If you would, then stop reading here, as I won't affect your view - ever. If you wouldn't, then why? Hopefully it is because the credit, by proxy, means something in the world outside of the computer! Here at E@H it is the ( eventual ) detection of gravity waves.


Your faulty WU's have no science content. If you disagree - please tell us why, and why you think that you are capable of judging that. You've actually got your own IAC@H going here. :-)
As raised in other posts the sociology of distributed computing has got to be important, so I honestly would like to know what motivates you to do this .... your thoughts please? :-)
Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter. Blaise Pascal

Crunch3r
Crunch3r
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 90
Credit: 30,236,616
RAC: 0

RE: RE: Well, I don't

Message 41050 in response to message 41047

Quote:
Quote:
Well, I don't care what you say, I'm using the patched app
and have not had any problems with faulty WUs at all, not even one !

Your app may work perfectly however it's not authorized/recognized by the science team. Hence your workunits will be discarded and resent out. So while you may be building your credit faster you are slowing down the science.

LOL

I'm not quite sure IF the WUs will be discarded. Anyhow as i've said befor... only the bad results returned by SOME patched apps. are causing the problems.

The ones (patched apps) doing valid results are fine.

P.S.

It's just curious that some/most users are babbleing the same here at the E@H board like over at S@H regarding optimized apps. Only some are missing...

But hey renameing yourself like one Mod did over at S@H to "H." is one way to go (who's this "aged" or "less" ;) guy trying to fool ? )... Or am i missing something ? Please correct me if i'm wrong.

P.P.S

I'm missing MMicastro here... to blame Akos...

Crunch3r
Crunch3r
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 90
Credit: 30,236,616
RAC: 0

RE: Your faulty WU's have

Message 41051 in response to message 41049

Quote:

Your faulty WU's have no science content. If you disagree - please tell us why,

Running the apps. in standalone mode and compare the resuls ???

;)

ErichZann
ErichZann
Joined: 11 Feb 05
Posts: 120
Credit: 81,582
RAC: 0

I also think its very hard to

I also think its very hard to discard these WUs. You cant directly filter them by any method, the only difference is in the stderr out, and that one is everytime very different, also between different OS of users etc, so i dont think anyone will look into that. Also under Linux i sometimes get a stderr out like this:

http://einsteinathome.org/task/35524238

so... how important can it be?
And if the results from an optimized are valid i dont think it will be sorted out in any way.

The developers should fast do something in the next days and explain to us, why a perfectly stable version why produces EXACT the same results as the original client shouldnt be used (or make this version the official one if that helps, no clue). But just ignoring all this can't be the right way (in my opinion).

I like to give my CPU time to this project, but i dont want it to be wasted without any need.... so... at least an official statement (not just: "dont use it", better say something how its going on from now) would be helpful....

Barrie
Barrie
Joined: 23 Mar 05
Posts: 219
Credit: 21,449,106
RAC: 0

RE: RE: Your faulty WU's

Message 41053 in response to message 41051

Quote:
Quote:

Your faulty WU's have no science content. If you disagree - please tell us why,

Running the apps. in standalone mode and compare the resuls ???

;)

It's not just about the results being right, it's about them being seen to be right by the people you want to impress. Think of it as a science ISO9002 - a bunch of hoops you have to jump through to be taken seriously.

Dead men don't get the baby washed. HTH

Jord
Joined: 26 Jan 05
Posts: 2,949
Credit: 5,542,312
RAC: 7,576

RE: But hey renameing

Message 41054 in response to message 41050

Quote:
But hey renameing yourself like one Mod did over at S@H to "H." is one way to go (who's this "aged" or "less" ;) guy trying to fool ? )... Or am i missing something ? Please correct me if i'm wrong.


You are wrong. It's not me. I'm still posting with my own account over on Seti. Go check. But thanks for thinking of me. You made me laugh. :-)

Crunch3r
Crunch3r
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 90
Credit: 30,236,616
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: Your

Message 41055 in response to message 41053

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

Your faulty WU's have no science content. If you disagree - please tell us why,

Running the apps. in standalone mode and compare the resuls ???

;)

It's not just about the results being right, it's about them being seen to be right by the people you want to impress. Think of it as a science ISO9002 - a bunch of hoops you have to jump through to be taken seriously.

Please leave the ISO9XXX to where it belongs :D

So what's the point if both apps. come up with the same results ?
Only difference is that the official is way slower.

There's no point you can prove it wrong there. That's a fact.
So why use slower code if both DO generate the SAME result, but one is 30% faster ?

Prove me wrong about that one, the fact is you can't ;)

Barrie
Barrie
Joined: 23 Mar 05
Posts: 219
Credit: 21,449,106
RAC: 0

RE: I also think its very

Message 41056 in response to message 41052

Quote:

I also think its very hard to discard these WUs. You cant directly filter them by any method, the only difference is in the stderr out, and that one is everytime very different, also between different OS of users etc, so i dont think anyone will look into that. Also under Linux i sometimes get a stderr out like this:

http://einsteinathome.org/task/35524238

so... how important can it be?
And if the results from an optimized are valid i dont think it will be sorted out in any way.

The developers should fast do something in the next days and explain to us, why a perfectly stable version why produces EXACT the same results as the original client shouldnt be used (or make this version the official one if that helps, no clue). But just ignoring all this can't be the right way (in my opinion).

I like to give my CPU time to this project, but i dont want it to be wasted without any need.... so... at least an official statement (not just: "dont use it", better say something how its going on from now) would be helpful....

The upshot of all this being that if it is a serious problem, we have to start S5 again, with changes so that results from the existing apps cannot get in.

Dead men don't get the baby washed. HTH

Crunch3r
Crunch3r
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 90
Credit: 30,236,616
RAC: 0

RE: RE: But hey renameing

Message 41057 in response to message 41054

Quote:
Quote:
But hey renameing yourself like one Mod did over at S@H to "H." is one way to go (who's this "aged" or "less" ;) guy trying to fool ? )... Or am i missing something ? Please correct me if i'm wrong.

You are wrong. It's not me. I'm still posting with my own account over on Seti. Go check. But thanks for thinking of me. You made me laugh. :-)

Sorry about that one Ageless,

It was just funny to see reading the S@H board after weeks and seeing you disapear and H. poping up out of the dust right where you left ...

P.S.

Just courious that no one wondered that one guy with less than 1k credit is now a mod over there...

Crunch3r
Crunch3r
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 90
Credit: 30,236,616
RAC: 0

RE: RE: I also think its

Message 41058 in response to message 41056

Quote:
Quote:

I also think its very hard to discard these WUs. You cant directly filter them by any method, the only difference is in the stderr out, and that one is everytime very different, also between different OS of users etc, so i dont think anyone will look into that. Also under Linux i sometimes get a stderr out like this:

http://einsteinathome.org/task/35524238

so... how important can it be?
And if the results from an optimized are valid i dont think it will be sorted out in any way.

The developers should fast do something in the next days and explain to us, why a perfectly stable version why produces EXACT the same results as the original client shouldnt be used (or make this version the official one if that helps, no clue). But just ignoring all this can't be the right way (in my opinion).

I like to give my CPU time to this project, but i dont want it to be wasted without any need.... so... at least an official statement (not just: "dont use it", better say something how its going on from now) would be helpful....

The upshot of all this being that if it is a serious problem, we have to start S5 again, with changes so that results from the existing apps cannot get in.

Well again, the only issue i see there is the "bad result" send back by a minor of the patched apps. and that's the issue.

resending them shouldn't be an issue to the project, although drecreasing the quorum to 2 results might have raised that issue in the first place ...

Going back to 3 valid results would solve those issues.

Comment viewing options

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