Welcome to MilkyWay@home

New App status


Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : New App status
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 7 · 8 · 9 · 10

AuthorMessage
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7709 - Posted: 13 Dec 2008, 13:44:50 UTC

Here's one more:
Check our 11-14, 2,348,137 credits.

http://boincstats.com/stats/host_graph.php?pr=milkyway&id=38259

Host ID "38259"

Owner UL1
Link to users host stats

Commission time 2008-11-13

CPU Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5482 @ 3.20GHz
Number of CPU's (number of (virtual) cores) 4(8)
Operating System and version Linux

Total Credit 2,349,389.18

Yet it doesn't seem to be acknowledged on this persons full page, as in 11-14 only shows 165,768 credits for all projects.
http://boincstats.com/stats/boinc_user_graph.php?pr=bo&id=d7a3d9afaf379c6984d47f1d9672f5e2

------------------------------------------
Here's a second, back to the n/a user again:
It's not possible to get this from a quad.
http://boincstats.com/stats/host_graph.php?pr=milkyway&id=40467
12-9: 1,003,763 credits

Host ID "40467"

Owner n/a
Link to users host stats n/a

Commission time 2008-12-08

CPU Intel(R) Core(tm)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz
Number of CPU's (number of (virtual) cores) 1(4)
Operating System and version Linux

Total Credit 1,010,672.65

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 7709 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilepetros
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 08
Posts: 89
Credit: 255,801
RAC: 0
100 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7721 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 13:13:17 UTC

Good day all!

@banditwolf

Sanger has mentioned somewhere here in MW forum he tested the new wus with an optimized client , well a new optimized client exists ,id like to add , and it can crunch much faster as the stock app.

ID: 7721 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7723 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 13:34:08 UTC - in response to Message 7721.  

Good day all!

@banditwolf

Sanger has mentioned somewhere here in MW forum he tested the new wus with an optimized client , well a new optimized client exists ,id like to add , and it can crunch much faster as the stock app.


But wouldn't the 108 credit/hour limit keep the credits down?
108 x 24 = 2592 per core/per day.

Quad = 10368 not 1,000,000
8core = 20736 not 2,349,000
64 core server = 165888 not 3,145,000

1000000 = 41666 credits per hour
2349000 = 97875
3145000 = 131041

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 7723 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilepetros
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 08
Posts: 89
Credit: 255,801
RAC: 0
100 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7727 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 16:30:31 UTC - in response to Message 7723.  



But wouldn't the 108 credit/hour limit keep the credits down?
108 x 24 = 2592 per core/per day.

Quad = 10368 not 1,000,000
8core = 20736 not 2,349,000
64 core server = 165888 not 3,145,000

1000000 = 41666 credits per hour
2349000 = 97875
3145000 = 131041


Hi banditwolf,

For some reason boincstats plays crazy with the users or hosts results of MW , but Allprojects.com seems to me it delivers the same stats you can find on the MW projects statistics page.

Yesterday i read somewhere that the optimized client can crunch a wu in 300~ seconds, as i checked the stats some of the top quads it looks like its true what i've read. The most crazy of all is that i have the optimized client ,but only the win version. I have Linux 64 and im working to optimize the client for my machine, hope i can optimize the client for my machine.

ID: 7727 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7728 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 16:36:41 UTC - in response to Message 7727.  

Allprojects.com

?? I get nowhere.

Yesterday i read somewhere that the optimized client can crunch a wu in 300~ seconds, as i checked the stats some of the top quads it looks like its true what i've read.



I don't doubt this, but the 108 credits/hour should be a cap right? That means some are getting around this unless it was taken down.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 7728 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilepetros
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 08
Posts: 89
Credit: 255,801
RAC: 0
100 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7729 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 16:53:20 UTC - in response to Message 7728.  

Allprojects.com

?? I get nowhere.

Yesterday i read somewhere that the optimized client can crunch a wu in 300~ seconds, as i checked the stats some of the top quads it looks like its true what i've read.



I don't doubt this, but the 108 credits/hour should be a cap right? That means some are getting around this unless it was taken down.


Im sorry, the correct URL is www.allprojectstats.com .

The 108 cap it's an unproductive limit for the project, this is my viewpoint.

Personally i support all those who can optimize the application of MW ,but to be correct on this matter ,as return the project should not put new limits on the production, or even much more the credits should not be dropped down again.

At my opinion MW have to correct the granted credits to something like 50-55 credits per wu for several reasons.
ID: 7729 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7730 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 17:14:23 UTC - in response to Message 7708.  

Since this was covered before in this topic=

It seems that it should be impossible to get this kind of credit on MW with the credit limit right?

How about 3,145,349 credits in one day?
http://boincstats.com/stats/host_graph.php?pr=milkyway&id=40570

Host ID "40570"

Owner n/a
Link to users host stats n/a

Commission time 2008-12-10

CPU Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X7350 @ 2.93GHz
Number of CPU's (number of (virtual) cores) 32(64)
Operating System and version Microsoft Windows Server 2003

Total Credit 3,162,573.22

Seems to have only run for 1 day.

Travis: Is this when a lot of the errored/odd results were from?




Here's the same results on this site:

http://www.allprojectstats.com/show.php?projekt=61&id=40570
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 7730 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7732 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 18:40:31 UTC

Something to bear in mind is that if stats exports don't happen from the project for multiple days, the stats sites will end up seeing hosts having a "really good day" once the stat export comes through. I don't know if that has anything to do with or not, but what I do know is that far to many people around here have itchy "they're cheating" pointing-fingers... It's ok to bring this up in the context of "Hey Travis and Dave, maybe you have a problem", but I do not have a favorable opinion about accusations of cheating being done in public.
ID: 7732 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
jedirock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Nov 08
Posts: 178
Credit: 6,140,854
RAC: 0
5 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7733 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 19:00:52 UTC - in response to Message 7732.  

It's ok to bring this up in the context of "Hey Travis and Dave, maybe you have a problem", but I do not have a favorable opinion about accusations of cheating being done in public.

Seconded. There's just too many factors to take into account about why some machines have really good credits compared to others.
ID: 7733 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7734 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 19:19:21 UTC - in response to Message 7732.  

Something to bear in mind is that if stats exports don't happen from the project for multiple days, the stats sites will end up seeing hosts having a "really good day" once the stat export comes through. I don't know if that has anything to do with or not, but what I do know is that far to many people around here have itchy "they're cheating" pointing-fingers... It's ok to bring this up in the context of "Hey Travis and Dave, maybe you have a problem", but I do not have a favorable opinion about accusations of cheating being done in public.



Well I have not seen a missed day in exports in awhile. And I Never said anybody was cheating. Just asking how 1 machine can get over 3 million in one day. It should take that server 19 days to hit 3.145 million at 108/hour/core. It was reqisterd 12-10. Even as of now that is 4 days. And if you look I put
Travis: Is this when a lot of the errored/odd results were from?
Since around that time Travis said a lot of bad results were comming in. And around then people weren't getting any work. Travis has yet to reply.

Some have an itchy finger accuising people of calling others cheaters.


Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 7734 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7735 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 19:37:59 UTC - in response to Message 7734.  

And I Never said anybody was cheating. Just asking how 1 machine can get over 3 million in one day. It should take that server 19 days to hit 3.145 million at 108/hour/core. It was reqisterd 12-10. Even as of now that is 4 days. And if you look I put
Travis: Is this when a lot of the errored/odd results were from?
Since around that time Travis said a lot of bad results were comming in. And around then people weren't getting any work. Travis has yet to reply.

Some have an itchy finger accuising people of calling others cheaters.



Again, if one wishes to bring up the question as "Hey Travis and Dave, maybe you have a problem", that doesn't bother me. You are stating that's how you're approaching it, so the second part of what I said should not be bothering you...
ID: 7735 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7738 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 20:01:38 UTC - in response to Message 7735.  


Again, if one wishes to bring up the question as "Hey Travis and Dave, maybe you have a problem", that doesn't bother me. You are stating that's how you're approaching it, so the second part of what I said should not be bothering you...



If you did feel I was saying that someone was cheating, why bring it up again?
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 7738 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7741 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 20:32:12 UTC - in response to Message 7738.  
Last modified: 14 Dec 2008, 20:35:55 UTC


Again, if one wishes to bring up the question as "Hey Travis and Dave, maybe you have a problem", that doesn't bother me. You are stating that's how you're approaching it, so the second part of what I said should not be bothering you...



If you did feel I was saying that someone was cheating, why bring it up again?


If you don't feel that you are, and the post was not directed at you (honestly, I was more leaving it for Saenger, even though he hasn't posted in this specific thread in 3 weeks, but has thrown around the word "cheaters" lately), then why are you taking offense?
ID: 7741 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Alinator

Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 08
Posts: 464
Credit: 56,639,936
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7742 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 20:43:40 UTC - in response to Message 7734.  
Last modified: 14 Dec 2008, 20:48:51 UTC



Well I have not seen a missed day in exports in awhile. And I Never said anybody was cheating. Just asking how 1 machine can get over 3 million in one day. It should take that server 19 days to hit 3.145 million at 108/hour/core. It was reqisterd 12-10. Even as of now that is 4 days. And if you look I put
Travis: Is this when a lot of the errored/odd results were from?
Since around that time Travis said a lot of bad results were comming in. And around then people weren't getting any work. Travis has yet to reply.

Some have an itchy finger accuising people of calling others cheaters.



The most likely explanation is that the current #1 host is the result of HID merge.

If you look at it's history, it was created and the ran a result or two to give a preliminary value for RAC and Credit. Then it was merged with another HID which had the bulk of the credit. Due to the way this is handled by the BOINC server package, this results in the 'surge' in RAC you have observed.

However, it should be noted that it is not sustainable, unless of course the project is not auto-decaying the stats for inactive hosts.

This phenomena has been seen many times in the past on many different projects, and really isn't anything to get too worked up over.

I look at it sort of like the old trick of getting your browser to display the contents of one of your hard drives and then try to represent that as an indication that your computer is infected and you need to pay some cash to someone to get it fixed. ;-)

Not really living up to the spirit of the game, but it's a real stretch to call (or even imply) it's 'cheating'. :-)

Alinator
ID: 7742 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7743 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 21:35:37 UTC - in response to Message 7742.  


I look at it sort of like the old trick of getting your browser to display the contents of one of your hard drives and then try to represent that as an indication that your computer is infected and you need to pay some cash to someone to get it fixed. ;-)


Bluescreen is more fun though...
ID: 7743 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileGalaxyIce
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 08
Posts: 2018
Credit: 100,142,856
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7744 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 22:00:51 UTC - in response to Message 7743.  

Bluescreen is more fun though...

That's really great. It certainly brings back some feelings of dread... :P


ID: 7744 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 7745 - Posted: 14 Dec 2008, 22:07:56 UTC - in response to Message 7744.  

Bluescreen is more fun though...

That's really great. It certainly brings back some feelings of dread... :P


Fear and loathing in [your town]?
ID: 7745 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 . . . 7 · 8 · 9 · 10

Message boards : Number crunching : New App status

©2019 Astroinformatics Group