I know for a fact that Bikeman is correct on this and that the IR does increase during the life of a WU just as he has described. Here is my assessment of what has actually happened in this particular (and very interesting!!) case:-
*Initial two results issued on June 11 - IR=2
*2nd result failed with client error 12 hours later & was replaced on June 12 - IR still =2
*1st & 3rd results completed on June 13 but "no consensus". 4th result issued June 14 - IR now =3
*4th result passed deadline on June 28 and 5th result issued just 4 mins later
*IR is still =3 as 4th result is considered "dead" and so there are still just 3 "live" results in circulation
*It's still possible for 4th result to resurrect itself - if so IR would change to 4
I've seen many examples of this type of behaviour. The interesting thing is that it's all mixed together in the one WU here which makes it more difficult to see exactly when the IR value changes. IR doesn't change when a replacement is issued for a blown deadline. IR does increment when a "decider" is sent out for a "no consensus" deadlock.
Hmmm...
I looked at this closer, and your analysis seems to be correct. The IR goes to 3 or more only for the case of a CBNC, although I don't see why it would be necessary to do that per se. A quirk in the BOINC backend I guess.
The only reason I was concerned at all was if it was going to be general policy for all WU's for the reasons I mentioned before.
I'm hoping they get things straightened out soon. Einstein is my "project of choice", but I've pulled 8 of 9 cores I had running it because of the problems. It isn't worth paying the electric bill for 24 hours worth of wasted time that won't validate.
It's really impressive (should I say frightening) when you extrapolate the electricity bill for the whole Einstein@Home project. My guesstimation is that E@H consumes a low one digit Mega Watt of electricity. If you assume german end-user prices for electricity (I think I pay about 0.17 Euro per kilo Watt hour), this means that volunteers make a yearly donation to E@H in the form of electricity worth several million (!) Euros.
I'm hoping they get things straightened out soon. Einstein is my "project of choice", but I've pulled 8 of 9 cores I had running it because of the problems. It isn't worth paying the electric bill for 24 hours worth of wasted time that won't validate.
It's really impressive (should I say frightening) when you extrapolate the electricity bill for the whole Einstein@Home project. My guesstimation is that E@H consumes a low one digit Mega Watt of electricity. If you assume german end-user prices for electricity (I think I pay about 0.17 Euro per kilo Watt hour), this means that volunteers make a yearly donation to E@H in the form of electricity worth several million (!) Euros.
CU
BRM
I am paying 0.19 euro in Italy per kWh. But since adopting energy efficient light bulbs and LCD monitor on my PC my electricity consumption decreased from 7 kWh/day to 4 kWh/day, even running Einstein, SETI and QMC on my 400 MHz PII Deschutes 24/7.
Tullio
I'm hoping they get things straightened out soon. Einstein is my "project of choice", but I've pulled 8 of 9 cores I had running it because of the problems. It isn't worth paying the electric bill for 24 hours worth of wasted time that won't validate.
It's really impressive (should I say frightening) when you extrapolate the electricity bill for the whole Einstein@Home project. My guesstimation is that E@H consumes a low one digit Mega Watt of electricity. If you assume german end-user prices for electricity (I think I pay about 0.17 Euro per kilo Watt hour), this means that volunteers make a yearly donation to E@H in the form of electricity worth several million (!) Euros.
CU
BRM
I am paying 0.19 euro in Italy per kWh. But since adopting energy efficient light bulbs and LCD monitor on my PC my electricity consumption decreased from 7 kWh/day to 4 kWh/day, even running Einstein, SETI and QMC on my 400 MHz PII Deschutes 24/7.
Tullio
That's pretty good, I'm currently at ca. 15 kWh / day (shame on me).
CU
It's really impressive (should I say frightening) when you extrapolate the electricity bill for the whole Einstein@Home project. My guesstimation is that E@H consumes a low one digit Mega Watt of electricity.
Theoretically, these are supposed to be unused cycles, then your machine would otherwise be running an idle. In which case, no additional power is being consumed to run this project. In theory... =;^)
Theoretically, these are supposed to be unused cycles, then your machine would otherwise be running an idle. In which case, no additional power is being consumed to run this project. In theory... =;^)
Yup, in theory :-)
But even if only idle time was used (which is difficult given the current 2 week deadline), modern CPUs consume a lot less power when in idle mode than under full load, so the work done to get the approx. 6 million credits awarded by E@H daily does require some very real additional Watt, and additional € & $.
Even if you assume that an average PC with (say) ca. 300 credits per day when running 24/7 requires only 25 Watt more because of E@H , for 6 M credits this still means half a Mega Watt electrical power for the whole E@H network, or ca 0.75 Million Euros per year in additional electricity bills.
So what would it cost for dedicated, project-owned machines? More? Less? For fun, one option would be to consider the extra power consumed to manufacture those extra machines. Yes, some of the "donor" machines currently used are equally "dedicated", but probably not the majority.
Whilst the initial replication is still 2, I have a WU that has now been issued 6 times and about to go to 7 as of the 4/7.
I have been waiting since the 9/5/07 for it to validate, I just hope I don't get the validation error which will mean another WU to be sent out and flip a coin to see who gets the money.
Whilst the initial replication is still 2, I have a WU that has now been issued 6 times and about to go to 7 as of the 4/7.
I have been waiting since the 9/5/07 for it to validate, I just hope I don't get the validation error which will mean another WU to be sent out and flip a coin to see who gets the money.
Whilst the initial replication is still 2, I have a WU that has now been issued 6 times and about to go to 7 as of the 4/7.
I have been waiting since the 9/5/07 for it to validate, I just hope I don't get the validation error which will mean another WU to be sent out and flip a coin to see who gets the money.
The ironic thing is that the first machine with the Client Error due to disk usage limits, belongs to Bruce Allen...
Cool. This might be a case where the allocated disk quota is eaten up by the fact that some data files (those starting with "l1_") never seem to get deleted, something Gary reported here lately. Bernd is informed and the scheduler people are working on fixing it, I guess, igf not already done.
RE: I know for a fact that
)
Hmmm...
I looked at this closer, and your analysis seems to be correct. The IR goes to 3 or more only for the case of a CBNC, although I don't see why it would be necessary to do that per se. A quirk in the BOINC backend I guess.
The only reason I was concerned at all was if it was going to be general policy for all WU's for the reasons I mentioned before.
Alinator
RE: I'm hoping they get
)
It's really impressive (should I say frightening) when you extrapolate the electricity bill for the whole Einstein@Home project. My guesstimation is that E@H consumes a low one digit Mega Watt of electricity. If you assume german end-user prices for electricity (I think I pay about 0.17 Euro per kilo Watt hour), this means that volunteers make a yearly donation to E@H in the form of electricity worth several million (!) Euros.
CU
BRM
RE: RE: I'm hoping they
)
I am paying 0.19 euro in Italy per kWh. But since adopting energy efficient light bulbs and LCD monitor on my PC my electricity consumption decreased from 7 kWh/day to 4 kWh/day, even running Einstein, SETI and QMC on my 400 MHz PII Deschutes 24/7.
Tullio
RE: RE: RE: I'm hoping
)
That's pretty good, I'm currently at ca. 15 kWh / day (shame on me).
CU
BRM
RE: It's really impressive
)
Theoretically, these are supposed to be unused cycles, then your machine would otherwise be running an idle. In which case, no additional power is being consumed to run this project. In theory... =;^)
Reno, NV Team: SETI.USA
RE: Theoretically, these
)
Yup, in theory :-)
But even if only idle time was used (which is difficult given the current 2 week deadline), modern CPUs consume a lot less power when in idle mode than under full load, so the work done to get the approx. 6 million credits awarded by E@H daily does require some very real additional Watt, and additional € & $.
Even if you assume that an average PC with (say) ca. 300 credits per day when running 24/7 requires only 25 Watt more because of E@H , for 6 M credits this still means half a Mega Watt electrical power for the whole E@H network, or ca 0.75 Million Euros per year in additional electricity bills.
CU
BRM
So what would it cost for
)
So what would it cost for dedicated, project-owned machines? More? Less? For fun, one option would be to consider the extra power consumed to manufacture those extra machines. Yes, some of the "donor" machines currently used are equally "dedicated", but probably not the majority.
Reno, NV Team: SETI.USA
Whilst the initial
)
Whilst the initial replication is still 2, I have a WU that has now been issued 6 times and about to go to 7 as of the 4/7.
I have been waiting since the 9/5/07 for it to validate, I just hope I don't get the validation error which will mean another WU to be sent out and flip a coin to see who gets the money.
WU 33586504
RE: Whilst the initial
)
The ironic thing is that the first machine with the Client Error due to disk usage limits, belongs to Bruce Allen...
RE: RE: Whilst the
)
Cool. This might be a case where the allocated disk quota is eaten up by the fact that some data files (those starting with "l1_") never seem to get deleted, something Gary reported here lately. Bernd is informed and the scheduler people are working on fixing it, I guess, igf not already done.
CU
BRM