OK... so here we go...

OSX optimized applcations

Have fun :)

Hi Crunch3r,

thanks a lot! Do these apps also work with the Xeons in the MacPro?

Yes. Use the Core 2 (SSSE3) version for the Xeons.

---

OK... so here we go...

OSX optimized applcations

Have fun :)

Hi Crunch3r,

thanks a lot! Do these apps also work with the Xeons in the MacPro?

Yes. Use the Core 2 (SSSE3) version for the Xeons.

Thanks a lot! These results are fantastic!!!! 239 seconds versus 536 seconds before.

---

OK... so here we go...

OSX optimized applcations

Have fun :)

Wowow, x Mas time !

Mac Pro Quad 2.66 (thus Rev 1): 350 vs 688

That is simply great, and only in a couple of days, thanks a lot Crunch3r !!!

:-)))

Wowow, x Mas time !

Mac Pro Quad 2.66 (thus Rev 1): 350 vs 688

That is simply great, and only in a couple of days, thanks a lot Crunch3r !!!

:-)))

Yeah, x-mas was early this year... hope y'all are happy now. especially pdb... :P
(and no need to reply to this if you intent to write a new encyclopedia galactica in a single post... just make it short like an sms !)

---

Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now!

OK... so here we go...

OSX optimized applcations

Have fun :)

Wonderful! :)

Mac Book Pro 2.4 Ghz Core 2 850 seconds down to 450 or so :)

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

---

Dave Przybylo
MilkyWay@home Developer
Department of Computer Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

If you allow optimized apps, who is checking to see that the results are the same as results from the "official" app?

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

If you allow optimized apps, who is checking to see that the results are the same as results from the "official" app?

That's exactly the problem we have. We are working on a way to verify while still allowing optimized apps.

---

Dave Przybylo
MilkyWay@home Developer
Department of Computer Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

If you allow optimized apps, who is checking to see that the results are the same as results from the "official" app?

That's exactly the problem we have. We are working on a way to verify while still allowing optimized apps.

Don't you think the verification process should come before allowing optimized apps?

The project needs to be science, not magic.

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

If you allow optimized apps, who is checking to see that the results are the same as results from the "official" app?

That's exactly the problem we have. We are working on a way to verify while still allowing optimized apps.

Don't you think the verification process should come before allowing optimized apps?

The project needs to be science, not magic.

Well we technically can't disallow optimized apps. In theory, anyone can make an .exe file and install it on their computer and send results in to any BOINC project. I believe this is how it works, and until BOINC makes a more secure environment for executables, we are at a loss. If my understanding is wrong, please correct me.

---

Dave Przybylo
MilkyWay@home Developer
Department of Computer Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

If you allow optimized apps, who is checking to see that the results are the same as results from the "official" app?

That's exactly the problem we have. We are working on a way to verify while still allowing optimized apps.

Don't you think the verification process should come before allowing optimized apps?

The project needs to be science, not magic.

Well we technically can't disallow optimized apps. In theory, anyone can make an .exe file and install it on their computer and send results in to any BOINC project. I believe this is how it works, and until BOINC makes a more secure environment for executables, we are at a loss. If my understanding is wrong, please correct me.

I can't correct you because I don't know the rules on "open" source. I do know that I stop participating in projects that don't "endorse" the optimized apps that they allow as providing correct and accurate results.

I didn't know that the science apps had to be "open" source....I thought it was just the BOINC provided software that was "open" source.

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

If you allow optimized apps, who is checking to see that the results are the same as results from the "official" app?

That's exactly the problem we have. We are working on a way to verify while still allowing optimized apps.

Don't you think the verification process should come before allowing optimized apps?

The project needs to be science, not magic.

Well we technically can't disallow optimized apps. In theory, anyone can make an .exe file and install it on their computer and send results in to any BOINC project. I believe this is how it works, and until BOINC makes a more secure environment for executables, we are at a loss. If my understanding is wrong, please correct me.

I can't correct you because I don't know the rules on "open" source. I do know that I stop participating in projects that don't "endorse" the optimized apps that they allow as providing correct and accurate results.

I didn't know that the science apps had to be "open" source....I thought it was just the BOINC provided software that was "open" source.

You're correct. Not all science apps have to be open source. However, since we're a university, we're all about sharing our ideas and bettering the software as a whole. So, if there's a way to make something better, even if we don't do it, we still like to see it done.

---

Dave Przybylo
MilkyWay@home Developer
Department of Computer Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Well we technically can't disallow optimized apps. In theory, anyone can make an .exe file and install it on their computer and send results in to any BOINC project. I believe this is how it works, and until BOINC makes a more secure environment for executables, we are at a loss. If my understanding is wrong, please correct me.

If the university is using a science application that is "open source" like UCB with SaH then anyone can take that source and use it as they will. It is the responsibility of the university/project to build a validator to make sure that the results that are returned are valid. This is one of the reasons that many projects issue the work 2 or more times. The odds are that most of the work is going to be done by non-optimized applications.

In the case of a project like EaH, the project does NOT release the source, but instead "hand-codes" parts of the application and makes available "optimized" applications.

Here at M-Way, Dave, I believe, is working on the issue of making a faster application available for OS-X machines but because of compiler efficiencies it is likely that the applications provided by Crunch3r will still be faster.

As yet, Dave is correct, there is not a "official" channel for optimized applications another example of how the lack of inter-project cooperation and collaboration affects us all ...

---

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

If you allow optimized apps, who is checking to see that the results are the same as results from the "official" app?

That's exactly the problem we have. We are working on a way to verify while still allowing optimized apps.

Don't you think the verification process should come before allowing optimized apps?

The project needs to be science, not magic.

Well we technically can't disallow optimized apps. In theory, anyone can make an .exe file and install it on their computer and send results in to any BOINC project. I believe this is how it works, and until BOINC makes a more secure environment for executables, we are at a loss. If my understanding is wrong, please correct me.

I can't correct you because I don't know the rules on "open" source. I do know that I stop participating in projects that don't "endorse" the optimized apps that they allow as providing correct and accurate results.

I didn't know that the science apps had to be "open" source....I thought it was just the BOINC provided software that was "open" source.

You're correct. Not all science apps have to be open source. However, since we're a university, we're all about sharing our ideas and bettering the software as a whole. So, if there's a way to make something better, even if we don't do it, we still like to see it done.

I'm all for making it better also, as long as it is still accurate and creates results the project will verify as acceptable. Faster inefficiencies and incorrect results are not better science.

In the case of a project like EaH, the project does NOT release the source, but instead "hand-codes" parts of the application and makes available "optimized" applications.

That's wrong. E@H IS open source and you can download the code. That's been the case for more than one and a half year... it's just that some... uhm let's say didn't tell the truth when someone asks for it ;)

Take alook for yourself here:
EaH CVS

---

Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now!

A couple of questions (very simple). Firstly, are the optimized apps officially endorsed and/or provided by the MilkyWay administration? Secondly, will the project administration notify all project participants that optimized clients are available for use, along with instructions on how to install them? Then there's the question of whether optimized apps give some platforms (ie operating systems and CPUs) advantages over others based on particular optimizations that are being done. Like are the optimizations being done to fully take advantage of each platform's capabilities.

Basically this is what I see it comes down to. Those using non-optimized apps will get less RAC (recent average credit) because the workunits will take longer to complete, while the ones using optimized apps will end up with much more RAC while crunching less. Am I missing something or oversimplifying here?

[EDITED]

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.

I see. I brought up the question of certain optimizations being more advantageous to some platforms more than others because it's known that there can be differences in the efficiency of optimizations across platforms. Though, I'm thinking more of the type of compiler used rather than a 32-bit vs 64-bit system difference. And I was wondering how the Core 2/Core Duo Intel-based Mac optimizations compare to any Core 2/Core Duo Windows-based ones.

On the issue of notifications. If people can't be notified that there are optimized apps via email, than I suppose a sticky "optimizations" thread would be the next best thing.

That's wrong. E@H IS open source and you can download the code. That's been the case for more than one and a half year... it's just that some... uhm let's say didn't tell the truth when someone asks for it ;)

Take alook for yourself here:
EaH CVS

Um, my mistake ...

Two years ago it was "closed" and the intent then, or so the project insisted was that it would remain so in perpetuity ...

I apologize for the error ...

---

The optimized app are not endorsed by the University. However, this project is open source so we will not restrict people from doing this. Also, the administration says we can't "notify" people, but if Cruncher wants to make a thread to list optimized apps, I will be happy to make it a sticky.[quote]

I see. I brought up the question of certain optimizations being more advantageous to some platforms more than others because it's known that there can be differences in the efficiency of optimizations across platforms. Though, I'm thinking more of the type of compiler used rather than a 32-bit vs 64-bit system difference. And I was wondering how the Core 2/Core Duo Intel-based Mac optimizations compare to any Core 2/Core Duo Windows-based ones.

On the issue of notifications. If people can't be notified that there are optimized apps via email, than I suppose a sticky "optimizations" thread would be the next best thing.

On the other side, here we should rather speak of "catching up" than of an optimization that gives an edge over other platforms, since the Mac OS X platform was clearly behind and far behind (as mentionned in the beginning of the present thread and in other threads on this very same forum).

I presume it will not be very long before such optimizations are evaluated and incorporated in the next offcial version; which will be then broadcasted automatically via Boinc.

Beta tester who will use these optimized apps in the meantime and know/dare to type some command lines (what a thrill :-) ) , are not the majority of MW volunteers, far from that.

Thus I'm affraid this discussion, although being conceptually right, is practically speaking of a "non-problem". My 2 cents...

OK... so here we go...

OSX optimized applcations

Have fun :)

Crunch3r: Thanks for the optimized app! My MBP 2.17GHz Core Duo was taking between 758 sec/WU and 916 sec/WU. The first 12 completed with your optimized app took 480 sec/WU.

C

---

Team MacNN