These versions ran, they just had performance fluctuations due to architectural differences (something I can't test very well considering our somewhat limited hardware).

What do you need?

You have an entire group of participants here that can test for you... set up a test environment, and let us test it out before implementing it.

Also, arguments that we're just trying to keep Dave Anderson happy are probably directed at the wrong person, because he's on my PhD thesis committee :P

Ahhh..,.. the big DA has your nuts in his hand. No wonder - got to play nice with him or he may just squeeezzzeee..... Dude, you are DA whipped!!

---

.

You guys here complaining about MWs Credit reduction seem to be a little crazy (mildly put).

Soon there'll be an opt. appl., which will calculate the WU for windows in less than 6 Minutes again.

Then the credits are again at 35s/cr on my q6600 which will be the highest credit ratio in whole Boinc.

No opt. appl. at seti can compete with this.

---

Dragons can fly because they don't fit into pirate ships!

Please, for the future of the humanity, don't be IT developer...

As a developer, I can assure you that for a project that is classified as "alpha", they are doing it as it should be.

The general concept of "alpha" is that you make sure that the code runs on your box and then you give it to some people to see if it will run on theirs. At the alpha stage, anyone who participates should expect there to be problems with the possibility that some of those problems are severe.

Once adequate feedback comes in that major bugs have been worked out, the application would be elevated to "beta" status, which means that the application should be more stable, but still may have bugs, although typically not severe / major bugs.

As I mentioned in another thread, if you are unwilling or unable to keep up with potentially rapidly changing versions, then you should wait for the beta phase...

My question is why this insane push to lower credit awards. Perhaps it is not that MilkyWay is too high, but the other projects are too low ... As SaH increased the speed of the applications they kept reducing the award per hour ...

Are all project managers Republicans? Cut the wages of the working stiffs ...

---

These versions ran, they just had performance fluctuations due to architectural differences (something I can't test very well considering our somewhat limited hardware).

What do you need?

You have an entire group of participants here that can test for you... set up a test environment, and let us test it out before implementing it.

I don't know if they have a "test environment". They might could consider marking versions as "test applications" and then people can go to their BOINC preferences and check the box authorizing / enabling running test applications.

However, like I just said in my other post, if the project is stated as "alpha", then people should be expecting potential problems, some of them severe, and the potential for rapidly changing versions. If anyone is unwilling or unable to deal with that scenario, they should consider waiting until the application / project is moved out of alpha and into beta or to GA.

These versions ran, they just had performance fluctuations due to architectural differences (something I can't test very well considering our somewhat limited hardware).

What do you need?

You have an entire group of participants here that can test for you... set up a test environment, and let us test it out before implementing it.

I don't know if they have a "test environment". They might could consider marking versions as "test applications" and then people can go to their BOINC preferences and check the box authorizing / enabling running test applications.

However, like I just said in my other post, if the project is stated as "alpha", then people should be expecting potential problems, some of them severe, and the potential for rapidly changing versions. If anyone is unwilling or unable to deal with that scenario, they should consider waiting until the application / project is moved out of alpha and into beta or to GA.

Don't esitate, Brian. Only was a joke...

---

Logan.

BOINC FAQ Service (Ahora, también disponible en Español/Now available in Spanish)

My question is why this insane push to lower credit awards. Perhaps it is not that MilkyWay is too high, but the other projects are too low ... As SaH increased the speed of the applications they kept reducing the award per hour ...

Are all project managers Republicans? Cut the wages of the working stiffs ...

Seems to be a question of relativity. Is one project too high, or are 54 projects too low?
You probably assume the 54 to adjust their credits?

---

Dragons can fly because they don't fit into pirate ships!

AND QUIT TESTING on the production side!

That's what the people who came up with the last bunch of opti apps got ripped for not testing. Yet as I mentioned before travis did not test any of the versions before releasing .08-.14 and they kept messing computers up for a couple versions.

These versions ran, they just had performance fluctuations due to architectural differences (something I can't test very well considering our somewhat limited hardware).

If you can't test it, how you can decide what results are fine and what are wrong....?

:D :D :D :D :D

If you was working for a company, enterprise or how you named it, now you was fired...

Please, for the future of the humanity, don't be IT developer...

They were giving correct results (apart from the current checkpoint bug we're working on), the only difference was in the time it took for them to return those results (depending on the architecture -- in fact some users reported faster crunch times for those versions).

---

My question is why this insane push to lower credit awards. Perhaps it is not that MilkyWay is too high, but the other projects are too low ... As SaH increased the speed of the applications they kept reducing the award per hour ...

Are all project managers Republicans? Cut the wages of the working stiffs ...

Seems to be a question of relativity. Is one project too high, or are 54 projects too low?
You probably assume the 54 to adjust their credits?

Id say at least 34 are WAY to low if comparing them to a supposed SETI standard. (That lowers itself all the time)

---

It is not so difficult to set up a testing environment.

If you recall, this is what caused this entire problem in the first place.

There was an optimized app that had been running since mid December putting out bad data.

Many projects have testing sites. Even permanent testing sites, so people can optimize and test. Project programmers can program and test, and particpants can join in and help test. Without causing all these freaking problems that we have been having on this project due to bad applications being released.

You can even set it up to test your validator against different scenarios. Go figure. Running a test on things before they go into production?

I kept mentioning about testing even only 100-200 wu runs, but Travis claims the single server can't handle it. Wasn't there supposed to be a 2nd by now?

---

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

Complaint: There should be more cheese on my pizza.

Cheese is cut to half too due the high cholesterol. :D

But I can only afford a $1 pizza with a cheese analog topping, and now I'm being punished for it.

---

The new credit system...

Is this going to be going back to a fixed credit per WU like it was before ? I can live with that. In fact, I like that much better! As long as the credit is equal for the amount of work done. This credit speed limit is like paying on the curve. - and is not fair.

Who gives a rats ass if it compares to SETI,(or other BOINC projects) what is SETI anyway? the all defacto standard? Bunk.

If credit is adjusted to compete in an environment like distributed computing or BOINC, then it should be adjusted to the needs of the project. Need more participants, give out more credit, fewer participants wanted, less credit.

Open markets work, so does open computing. Let the project managers decide how much work they want done using these standards. And let DA try to continue to be King.

In my company I get to decide how much I pay for my employees to work for me. I pay to little and get either crappy workers or get too few dedicated employees.. I pay too much and I get just the greedy types but the good ones. And I don't care what the company down the street is paying, as long as I am getting done what I need to get done. Simple as that.

---

.

Soon there'll be an opt. appl., which will calculate the WU for windows in less than 6 Minutes again.

And you know this for a fact?

The linux people got their act together and have come good. The Windoze people, well I have no idea.

Does anyone know what is required to compile for Win?

---

Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

I kept mentioning about testing even only 100-200 wu runs, but Travis claims the single server can't handle it. Wasn't there supposed to be a 2nd by now?

No, there won't be a 2nd server for awhile, and I never said there would be. I said if we could get a 2nd server we could probably handle that. I could bring this up with the professors and see how much money we have remaining in our current grant and if we can afford one or not. Chances are with the next iteration of that (which should be in this coming year) we'll be able to add some more server and testing hardware, but since we're nearing the end of the current grant and funds are limited I don't think we can add one right now.

And do remember, this project is alpha, so it's not going to run perfectly smooth. There will be changes in how the credit is awarded as the application gets faster and awarded credit gets out of whack. There might be releases that have problems with certain operating systems and architectures. Thats the nature of the project right now and if that's not acceptable then you might want to wait until we go beta.

---

Seems to be a question of relativity. Is one project too high, or are 54 projects too low?
You probably assume the 54 to adjust their credits?

Since no two projects are issuing credit at the same rate, I would say that 54 are too low... in part because if they adjusted to SaH, they lowered the rate per hour because they change the application and started to get the work done faster.

In that the benchmarks are unstable and poor predictors of capabilities, and in that we proposed any number of changes back in BOINC Beta when these issues first arose and were told, in essence, that we did not know what we were talking about when we predicted that NOT fixing the cross-project credit issue would lead to no end of trouble ... well, Dr. Anderson got what he deserved ... a badly broken system and lots of discord ...

Many don't recall, but that was supposed to be one of the MAIN design goals of BOINC. A fair, equitable, standardized credit system so that you would be paid the same amount of Cobblestones for doing work on MW as you would doing work on SaH ... that there would be one currency and that the payment per hour (or second, whatever) would be a constant to a high degree ...

When we were coming out of BOINC Beta there were only 5 projects; CPDN, SaH, Einstein, LHC, and PPAH ... the problem was small, and fixable ... but ... nope ... not important to the developers even though it was, as I said, a major design goal of BOINC ... and of critical importance to participants.

Our credit score is the only way we have to show that we have indeed contributed to a project ...

One of the funniest aspects of this is that the projects complain that one of the biggest wastes of their time is dealing with the credit issues ... and yet, are they putting pressure on the developers to fix the issue? Nope ... not a peep on the dev list ...

---

Complaint: There should be more cheese on my pizza.

Cheese is cut to half too due the high cholesterol. :D

But I can only afford a $1 pizza with a cheese analog topping, and now I'm being punished for it.

You'll pay higher prices at the used car tent sale.

---

me@rescam.org

I had the same problem in my shop. A few people paid me with counterfeit money. I stead of implementing a way to stop this I doubled my prices. I did not listen to my honest customers complaints now I lost them all!

---

A BLAST FROM YOUR PAST

I had the same problem in my shop. A few people paid me with counterfeit money. I stead of implementing a way to stop this I doubled my prices. I did not listen to my honest customers complaints now I lost them all!

Your restocking fee was also outrageous.

---

me@rescam.org

Here are some novel ideas...You the project want my computing power..
I want the max credits that I can get for my donated time and money to you for credits that don't cost you anything and are worthless for anything but bragging rights....Some give the project optimized applications and help with the code.


Now here is our reward for making more science information being done sooner...

1. You lower my credits to keep me and others in line with othere projects that have nothing in common with your project.

2. You cut my credits in half in the name of credit comparison because DA gets pissed.

3. You change the application code on me 4 times in one week while I am out of town and have no way to change my computers over to use the new application and they run for 3 days idle.

4. When you get help with the new optimized applications, you reward us by still cutting our credits or changing the application again.


I don't know about you folks but this looks kind of like how some forms of government treats its folks.. Not good.



Now I must ask this one question... What else but high credits and Science would make me want to stay on this project?

DD,

i agree with D.D. i spend my money to pay for the power to run my pc's to aide this project. just to turn around in the last week change the stock app 4 times. an then get slapped in the face with a cut in credits per w/u. im a retire mechanic, i got paid for work done. an if i logged more work in less time. i still got paid for the full job. I.E. if the book call for a water pump to removed an replaced 8hrs an. i did it in 2and a half hrs . i still got paid for that 8hrs. i would work 40hrs aweek but i got paid for 56-60hrs. because would do my work to opt my time an the job would be done right the first time.an if the customer got there care back faster. they were happy that there cars was returned sooner than. was promised. an they didnt say so it was done sooner. im only pay you for the 2 hrs it took. they paid the full price. an that is what you guys should do. an dont be punish me because my pc is working smarter an not harder.

The linux people got their act together and have come good. The Windoze people, well I have no idea.

Does anyone know what is required to compile for Win?

Travis, do you know how the applications are compiled for Windows? Is Visual Studio used? MinGW? Intel's compiler? Something else I've never heard of? If so, I have a Windows 7 machine now that I could use to at least try and optimize somewhat.

---