to admins: do u plan to integrate the "new" optimalization in to the standard aplication? how about the workunits, will they be longer - more work would
be done.

That's really absurd.

I wonder what their reasoning is.

Why would a 35000 credit/day machine only get 10500.

The reasoning is that 'TOO' many credits were being given out. And DA was complaining since that was more than seti standard is putting out.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

to admins: do u plan to integrate the "new" optimalization in to the standard aplication? how about the workunits, will they be longer - more work would
be done.

Agree.

Longer workunits would also remove some of the load off the server.
Perhaps then you would be able to remove the 108 credit/core/hour limit.

to admins: do u plan to integrate the "new" optimalization in to the standard aplication? how about the workunits, will they be longer - more work would
be done.

Agree.

Longer workunits would also remove some of the load off the server.
Perhaps then you would be able to remove the 108 credit/core/hour limit.

Longer units worked the last time the app changed this much. Dropped the load down a lot. The s_79's & s_82's are a tad shorter to start with. I would say a 6-10x increase in work length to give them a little room for an even better app.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

That's really absurd.

I wonder what their reasoning is.

Why would a 35000 credit/day machine only get 10500.

The reasoning is that 'TOO' many credits were being given out. And DA was complaining since that was more than seti standard is putting out.

I still think it is not right, for two reasons:

- I was planning to upgrade one of my machines just for BOINC. What's the reason now?

- Milkyway got an optimization that seti didn't. From 45 minutes to 7 minutes it's 650% faster. What is wrong with that?

Personally, I like credit. It's something to have in the place of VERY valuable
scientific results that I am not going to see or have for the foreseeable future.

Not to forget.

Congrats for the optimized apps.


I mean, WOW!!!!!!!!

I'm very impressed.

Here are a couple topics on credits:

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=508#7153

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=484#6585

There is more through out other topics. May give you a sense of how the admin feel about credits.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

Yes, giving out candy should solve the problem!!!!!!!!!!


Funny!!!

What's all the fuss about?
MW is handing out more credits than any other (CPU-) project (in my case nearly 2x more compared to seti optimized).

---

mic.

What's all the fuss about?
MW is handing out more credits than any other (CPU-) project (in my case nearly 2x more compared to seti optimized).

Well, seti gets an optimization speedup of ~60%
MW is 650%

Credit for that 650% is lost, which I think is unfair to MW and its users.

What's all the fuss about?
MW is handing out more credits than any other (CPU-) project (in my case nearly 2x more compared to seti optimized).

Well, seti gets an optimization speedup of ~60%
MW is 650%

Credit for that 650% is lost, which I think is unfair to MW and its users.

So you want to say two crunchers setting up to equal rigs, one runnin seti and getting 1000RAC, and one runnin MW getting 6500RAC is fair???

The one running MW must be ashamed looking at BOINCstats and see his rig storming through the ranks.

That's like celebrating a win over Ben Johnson - when he is 100m and the other just 20...

---

mic.

It's not exactly like that. I sure don't mean that.

Suppose two projects start. At 1 credit/hour in the beginning (I suppose MW calibrated with SETI at their beginning, am I right?).

Then project 2 got optimized to reach so many times the calculations they were getting at the beginning. Why wouldn't they get their credit?

Unless of course the projects didn't start at the same level of optimization, which could be the case.

If MW was a LOT less optimised than SETI when they started, then that's a way to get such a high optimization "rate" and thus credit.

What has really happened here?

I'm certainly NOT talking about shame.

Each time MW has been optimized it has been ~ 6x faster. This I believe is the 3rd of this sort.

The begining code from my knowledge was just basic coding to get started on since none of the staff are code experts. If you look at the real early posts they asked for someone to help with optimizing it since none of them know how. I don't know how adept they are now.

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

Each time MW has been optimized it has been ~ 6x faster. This I believe is the 3rd of this sort.

The begining code from my knowledge was just basic coding to get started on since none of the staff are code experts. If you look at the real early posts they asked for someone to help with optimizing it since none of them know how. I don't know how adept they are now.

I believe SETI was like that in their beginning.
Just the science and only enough of the programming to run. Sounds logical.
Why spend resources on something that might not have a future?

I wonder what seti is going to do now with their cuda app. Will they cap it?

I wonder what seti is going to do now with their cuda app. Will they cap it?

What has a GPU to do with a CPU ? Its like saying a 3 GHz Quad core shouldnt be alowed to get more credits then a P II...

And it doesnt matter how much a project improves over the time, and certainly not compared to other project. How you gonna compare or value the science output from 2 totaly different projects? exactly, you cant.

And if MW stock app gets update to a new, faster level, admins might lower the credits again, like they did in the past, then youll be even far away from the numbers you are pulling now - so what? Im happy that I can run WUs so much faster now, and help the project getting to their goals a lot faster. Why dont see it this way? Its much more rewarding then pressing F5 on a statspage every 10mins looking how a stupid number keeps increasing.

I wonder what seti is going to do now with their cuda app. Will they cap it?

The real question is will they analyze it. Years of data and so far no analysis of it. Now they're working on crunching non-analyzed data even faster. They are putting the cart before the horse.

---

me@rescam.org

to admins: do u plan to integrate the "new" optimalization in to the standard aplication? how about the workunits, will they be longer - more work would
be done.

I would like to, however the code (or compiler flags) hasn't been shared with us, so there's not much I can do until that happens.

---

I wonder what seti is going to do now with their cuda app. Will they cap it?

What has a GPU to do with a CPU ? Its like saying a 3 GHz Quad core shouldnt be alowed to get more credits then a P II...

And it doesnt matter how much a project improves over the time, and certainly not compared to other project. How you gonna compare or value the science output from 2 totaly different projects? exactly, you cant.

And if MW stock app gets update to a new, faster level, admins might lower the credits again, like they did in the past, then youll be even far away from the numbers you are pulling now - so what? Im happy that I can run WUs so much faster now, and help the project getting to their goals a lot faster. Why dont see it this way? Its much more rewarding then pressing F5 on a statspage every 10mins looking how a stupid number keeps increasing.

I don't understand what you are saying. Should a faster processing (on GPU or CPU) get more credit or not?

I'm not comparing the value of science either. How can I? My only point is that more work should give more credit, which is not the case in MW currently.

About that stupid number, credit, I like it (that's me). I like looking at what I've done over the years processing for scientific projects. Plus, it's fun to play with this number and compare to countries, teams, people, computer technology over time, programming evolution over time etc. It's a good pastime. Gives me a better understanding of the world around me. But if it's capped or otherwise manipulated...

200th post! Wow these new apps are faster!

The admins have set a credits limit of 108 credits per core/hour.

7 min a wu on my system. 60/7*12.5(aprox)=107. Ooooh. :D

---

me@rescam.org