Welcome to MilkyWay@home

WU abuse

Message boards : Number crunching : WU abuse
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 . . . 10 · Next

AuthorMessage
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
Message 16482 - Posted: 21 Mar 2009, 23:29:29 UTC - in response to Message 16474.  
Last modified: 21 Mar 2009, 23:50:54 UTC


My quad on the other hand is running out very frequently regardless of the cache setting. It may be contacting the server less but that's not helping out on my end a bit. The server knows how much work you have on hand to be done. Why would it send no work when your cache is gone and there's no work in progress If your cache is gone and you're requesting work you should get work not a back off unless the server is out of work to send. I look at the server status page and see hundreds of tasks to send but I get the big 0 and another back off.
<---not very happy camper


The problem with using the status page as a guide is that it is a one-time snapshot taken at a specific moment in time. If it says, like it does now, the following:

Results ready to send 465

...one also has to bear in mind that the 465 is a static number reflecting the number at the moment the snapshot was taken, which is reflected above and to the left with the line:

[As of 21 Mar 2009 23:24:46 UTC]

As I'm typing this, it is about 3 minutes after that update. What I do not know is if it is still 465, or if it has gone above 500, or perhaps dropped down to 100, or even 0. The only thing one can tell is that as of 23:24:46 UTC, the system reported 465 available. We can hope that the figure was right as of that specific instant in time, but we cannot assume that there are tasks available once that time has passed, nor can we assume that tasks are not available.

To try to illustrate the problem with scripts, 465 tasks being distributed to a set of quad core machines that are completely empty would only require 465/24 computers, or 20 computers (the 20th would only get 9). Throw on top of that the GPU apps which churn through results even quicker, then all the thousands of other hosts out there, and you can have all the tasks taken up just as fast as the wu generator can create them.

As I said in PM, what I asked you to do was specifically designed to have your system run out of work before asking for the next set of work. What I was trying to reduce was the scheduler connects and reduce the number of lengthy backoffs that you might encounter.

Adding in a script to try to ask for more work more frequently is just simply going to make things worse for everyone. I know it's tough to get people to understand that, but hopefully this illustration will help. If nothing else, if your system is no worse at a 3-day cache than it was with the update script running, it should demostrate that the script is not the only way to accomplish the same goal.
ID: 16482 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile The Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
Message 16509 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 0:21:49 UTC

I have never, ever seen the ready to send number at 0 and yet I regularly get 0 new tasks.
ID: 16509 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile banditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
Message 16512 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 0:27:48 UTC - in response to Message 16509.  

I have never, ever seen the ready to send number at 0 and yet I regularly get 0 new tasks.

I keep thinking that is due to too many requests at a given time and it can't spit out enough new tasks to satisfy all of the requests.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 16512 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
Message 16537 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 4:46:04 UTC - in response to Message 16512.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2009, 4:47:27 UTC

I have never, ever seen the ready to send number at 0 and yet I regularly get 0 new tasks.

I keep thinking that is due to too many requests at a given time and it can't spit out enough new tasks to satisfy all of the requests.


I think what a lot of people have trouble conceptualizing is that there can be hundreds or even thousands of requests per second. If there are 500 tasks available and 300 requests for an average of 2 tasks per second, some are going to be told that there aren't any available, while others get their 2 that they requested. That's just simple math.

The other thing is, the ready to send is a static number, not a real-time number. As I said, after that instant in time has passed, one cannot assume that tasks are available, nor can one assume that tasks are not available. The snapshot is just that, a snapshot.

What is needed to be known is the creation rate in addition to the Ready To Send number. Also it would be good to know how frequently the feeder is updated. Finally, what would be good to know is what the work request per second values are, which means not only how many hosts are requesting work per second, but how many tasks each host requests, averaged out probably over 4-6 hours would be nice...
ID: 16537 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile caferace
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Aug 08
Posts: 46
Credit: 8,255,900
RAC: 0
Message 16543 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 8:17:55 UTC - in response to Message 16537.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2009, 8:18:35 UTC

I think what a lot of people have trouble conceptualizing is that there can be hundreds or even thousands of requests per second. If there are 500 tasks available and 300 requests for an average of 2 tasks per second, some are going to be told that there aren't any available, while others get their 2 that they requested. That's just simple math.

Brian, perhaps if you had a system and and a current BOINC client that would fall into the parameters you seem to enjoy theorizing about things might be far more clear to you. As it is, I can tell you that much faster machines than your AMD 3700+ have issues that are exponentially outside your experience with BOINC and MW.

Theory chasing is an admirable thing. But actually testing ones own theories with real-world HW/SW can lead to greater insight. It would also lead to a lessening of conjecture.

best,

-jim
ID: 16543 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
Message 16544 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 8:41:51 UTC - in response to Message 16543.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2009, 8:45:55 UTC


Theory chasing is an admirable thing. But actually testing ones own theories with real-world HW/SW can lead to greater insight. It would also lead to a lessening of conjecture.


Theorizing upon someone else's theory... Would that be conjecture as well?

Like I said before, this is something that is difficult to get across to people, and people get all bent out of shape trying to scoff at the idea.

To give another example, it is like some of you that are loudly complaining about running out of tasks to work on here are like drivers of vehicles that have a wheel stuck in mud or snow. Many drivers will punch the gas and end up spinning and getting nowhere rather than try to ease off some and try a different method...

Finally, it does not matter if I have a single core system or a 8 or 16 core system, math is math. If there are 500 tasks available and the sum of all the requests equal more than 500, then someone will end up being told that they can't have any...and no project can, should, or does guarantee 100% availability of work to 100% of participants 100% of the time...
ID: 16544 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile The Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
Message 16549 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 10:06:50 UTC

Yes. I don't believe there is any doubt that at the point in time a computer asks for more work and it receives none that there was none to give. We need to understand why there was none to give. Until Travis tells us why, it is all conjecture....

Live long and BOINC.
ID: 16549 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile nickth
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Oct 07
Posts: 33
Credit: 3,189,992
RAC: 0
Message 16550 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 10:11:38 UTC

For as start i think most people in this thread have shot themselves in the foot and should read the forum more then they would understand what the problem is and to why there are few work units and to why poeple would run the updater script.

First of all the project is still in ALPHA testing.

Secondly from front page
Reducing the WU Queue
February 27, 2009
I'm reducing the workunit queue to 6 per core. Increasing it to 20 seemed to make the work availability problem worse. I'm thinking that with a smaller number it will take more work requests to clear out the scheduler's work queue. This is just a temporary fix so don't get too worked up about it. Once we get the scheduler's queue increased we'll up the WU queue again.


which is still is on going has has not really worked because of

Message 15663 - Posted 16 Mar 2009 17:33:37 UTC

1. Is the server a dedicated sever or is it used for something else as well?

2. Is the server at the moment getting hammered by?

A. Someone like that has 2 computers with 2 duo cores who is running an updater script say every 20 mins.
B. Someone that has a farm of computer?
C. Someone that has a farm of computers with ATI cards that complete work units in about 1.30 min?

nickth


Message 15668 - Posted 16 Mar 2009 19:18:15 UTC - in response to Message 15663.

The server is dedicated to specifically the milkyway project. It can handle quite a bit but C is probably stressing it the most currently because the workunits complete so quickly.

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


and

Message 16375 - Posted 21 Mar 2009 5:06:47 UTC
However, everything seems to be running fairly smoothy except for the workunit distribution issue. But I'm almost certain that the server can't keep up with all the requests from the users with graphics cards.

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


But there is a way to solve the whole problem but with Travis not around at the moment

Message 16375 - Posted 21 Mar 2009 5:06:47 UTC

I'm not sure where Travis is. I haven't talked to him in days but have seen emails pass by that he wrote to various people that I was copied on.

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


And solving the problem would be with this

Message 15713 - Posted 16 Mar 2009 22:49:39 UTC - in response to Message 15712.

I think we may need to separate the database from the actual server software. They're both on the same hard disk. The server hardware is excellent. We have 8gb of ram. I think a new hard drive would greatly increase the speed however I'm not sure what type it is. I'm almost positive it's SCSI but don't know the details.

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


As for the updater script as mentioned before its not illegal and is talked about here and here at all what was illegal was optimized apps that were not true to the project and that all happened on Seti@home a long time ago.

You could also say is Overclocking illegal to a project becasue that makes the work units finish quicker to. So should we ban all users that Overclock thier computers and GPU cards.
NO i don't think so because it is thier own choice to Overclock or not

The updater script is an aid to getting work if you are away from your computer as i am becase i work 40 hours a week need sleep and can't aford to let my computers run dry as i have seen before the updater script for 36+ hours because the options for updating in BOINC are very weak.
And before you say it "Why don't you run another project?" because i don't want to i like running ALPHA projects and i have a free will to which projects i run or dont run.


So really it all boils down to this. There is no WU Abuse because the project is as i have mention before in ALPA Phase and is not really upto GPU work unit finishing so fast. But hopefully it will get sorted out when Travis gets back to us and can build longer work units, and sort the server out by maybe adding another hard drive so that it works better.

So if you are not happy with your computers sitting idle for so long either run the updater scripe as that little script dose not seem to hammer the server OR go and find another project to crunch for there is 60 projects to choice from



Smoke me a kipper ill be back for breakfast


ID: 16550 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Thamir Ghaslan

Send message
Joined: 31 Mar 08
Posts: 61
Credit: 18,325,284
RAC: 0
Message 16551 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 10:26:48 UTC - in response to Message 16550.  



what was illegal was optimized apps that were not true to the project and that all happened on Seti@home a long time ago.



I remember those days and what I remember most was the claims that these apps were not calculating as correctly as the non optimized apps.
ID: 16551 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 21 Aug 08
Posts: 625
Credit: 558,425
RAC: 0
Message 16612 - Posted: 22 Mar 2009, 20:05:46 UTC - in response to Message 16550.  


And solving the problem would be with this

Message 15713 - Posted 16 Mar 2009 22:49:39 UTC - in response to Message 15712.

I think we may need to separate the database from the actual server software. They're both on the same hard disk. The server hardware is excellent. We have 8gb of ram. I think a new hard drive would greatly increase the speed however I'm not sure what type it is. I'm almost positive it's SCSI but don't know the details.

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


I tend to doubt just a second hard disk will alleviate enough issues to get it to where people are not clamoring about not having work, but I could be wrong. I actually hope I am wrong, but personally I think they need a whole separate system for the wu generator and file handlers (uploader / downloader), known in BOINC server-side terms as a "Data Server".



The updater script is an aid to getting work if you are away from your computer as i am becase i work 40 hours a week need sleep and can't aford to let my computers run dry as i have seen before the updater script for 36+ hours because the options for updating in BOINC are very weak.


The update script is not neccessarily the only way to accomplish what you want to accomplish. The workunit generator, feeder, and scheduler need some time to breathe. If people are making requests for more work, but less often, things could get better. It will take a group of people doing that though. However, even a single individual doing it should note that they are not in any worse shape, which is an indication that the update script and allowing a system to completely run out of work before requesting more work are both equivalent.


So if you are not happy with your computers sitting idle for so long either run the updater scripe as that little script dose not seem to hammer the server OR go and find another project to crunch for there is 60 projects to choice from


Alternatively, try taking a leap of faith and set your cache up to 3 days or more, which will make your computers run dry of work and then request their full allotment all at once rather than in several smaller chunks. This will decrease the number of scheduler contacts, thus minimizing the chances of running into the longer backoffs on communication.
ID: 16612 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Clank [MM]
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Nov 08
Posts: 24
Credit: 100,139,707
RAC: 0
Message 16736 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 3:25:40 UTC
Last modified: 24 Mar 2009, 3:31:40 UTC

You need some help nickth. Sell that garbage all you want you missed one big point. IT'S SHARED COMPUTING! overclocking, opt apps, stronger machines, gpu's,. None of that compares to what is going on here. Your script only helps YOU, while taking work away from the pool that is shared with everybody. It is like jumping ahead in line. Yes, gpu's have created a feeding frenzy for points, that's what's driving this. YOU can't afford to let your machines run dry? why? try explaining to me the " can't afford " part. YOU,YOU,YOU....oh my god get a life. Also what the heck does "alpha" have to do with no abuse. There is no relation. Are you just picking words at random and going "hey there's my argument, oh boy, oh boy". how about pickle or car or fuzzy bunny. Those are great arguments in your mind. The fact is there is a shortage compared to what can be absorbed. It should be shared evenly without YOU getting special treatment. Oh and one last thought, YOU DON'T know what the actual root problem is, none of us do. Gpu's are probably a good part of it, increased users rushing for quick points, idiots with scripts putting themselves first, opt apps and unforseen issues that the admins have to deal with. You made my day with the "can't afford" part I'm still laughing at it. By the way I have a gpu, was getting 98k, now 60k. The difference between you and I is I am actually here for the project. If I'm driving down the road, highways are faster than city streets and I'll use the highway but I'm smart enough to know it's not my highway, it belongs to everyone and your not first. Patrick
ID: 16736 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
MontagsMeeting

Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 09
Posts: 61
Credit: 9,214,340
RAC: 0
Message 16745 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 9:33:04 UTC

Don't tell someone to get a life when you waste your time and energy with something that won't change and that's simple reality

And don't tell people that you are here for the project if you were here for the project you were happy when it's saturated with FLOPS. But you aren't, you're here to be against others who are happy with the project.

You're so negativ - keep it at yourself - no one needs it

The project isn't there to feed you, you're here to feed the project. Do it or not but don't complain if others do.
ID: 16745 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Lord Tedric
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Nov 07
Posts: 151
Credit: 8,391,608
RAC: 0
Message 16751 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 10:49:48 UTC - in response to Message 16745.  
Last modified: 24 Mar 2009, 10:53:23 UTC

The project isn't there to feed you, you're here to feed the project.


This is what users are complaining about, isn't it? Not being fed!

It's like Old Mother Hubbard who went to the cupboard. No matter how many times she looked it was always bare ;)
ID: 16751 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Extra Ball

Send message
Joined: 31 Mar 08
Posts: 4
Credit: 57,065,095
RAC: 0
Message 16756 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 11:24:41 UTC - in response to Message 16736.  

By the way I have a gpu, was getting 98k, now 60k. The difference between you and I is I am actually here for the project

So basically, you started a thread to get back a better RAC? Another 'me me me' behavior, nope?
You ain't here for the project imo since MW has more CPU/GPU power than required to complete the available job. You are just one of those sad users crying because they don't have the biggest...
ID: 16756 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile nickth
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Oct 07
Posts: 33
Credit: 3,189,992
RAC: 0
Message 16757 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 11:39:32 UTC - in response to Message 16736.  

You need some help nickth. Sell that garbage all you want you missed one big point. IT'S SHARED COMPUTING! overclocking, opt apps, stronger machines, gpu's.


I think you should get back in your pram before you fall out and hurt yourself again.
My post was aboput ideas of what the problem was.

Your script only helps YOU


No it dose not just help me it helps everyone else that wants to use it thats why its PUBLICLY shown in the forum.

while taking work away from the pool that is shared with everybody. It is like jumping ahead in line. Yes, gpu's have created a feeding frenzy for points, that's what's driving this. YOU can't afford to let your machines run dry? why? try explaining to me the " can't afford " part. YOU,YOU,YOU....oh my god get a life.


And you are so wrong there to

Your computer request calls
32106629 31529032 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:15:17 UTC Over Success Done 17.66 0.10 27.77
32106628 31529031 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:14:12 UTC Over Success Done 18.50 0.11 27.77
32106615 31529018 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:14:12 UTC Over Success Done 17.88 0.10 27.77
32106614 31529017 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:13:06 UTC Over Success Done 21.14 0.12 27.77
32106613 31529016 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:13:06 UTC Over Success Done 21.16 0.12 27.77
32106612 31529015 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:12:51 UTC Over Success Done 20.73 0.12 27.77
32106611 31529014 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:12:51 UTC Over Success Done 20.83 0.12 27.77
32106610 31529013 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:11:45 UTC Over Success Done 20.86 0.12 27.77
32106609 31529012 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:11:45 UTC Over Success Done 20.77 0.12 27.77
32106608 31529011 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:11:31 UTC Over Success Done 21.00 0.12 27.77
32106607 31529010 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:11:31 UTC Over Success Done 21.00 0.12 27.77
32106606 31529009 24 Mar 2009 11:07:10 UTC 24 Mar 2009 11:11:31 UTC Over Success Done 21.06 0.12 27.77

My computer request calls

32066173 31489056 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:56:31 UTC Over Success Done 773.34 3.34 27.77
32066172 31489055 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:56:31 UTC Over Success Done 769.70 3.32 27.77
32066171 31489054 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:56:31 UTC Over Success Done 772.97 3.34 27.77
32066170 31489053 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:56:31 UTC Over Success Done 773.95 3.34 27.77
32066169 31489052 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:30:50 UTC Over Success Done 776.53 3.35 27.77
32066168 31489051 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:30:50 UTC Over Success Done 775.69 3.35 27.77
32066167 31489050 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:16:19 UTC Over Success Done 777.84 3.36 27.77
32066166 31489049 24 Mar 2009 9:59:32 UTC 24 Mar 2009 10:16:19 UTC Over Success Done 778.84 3.36 27.77
31970484 31394122 24 Mar 2009 7:19:39 UTC 24 Mar 2009 8:39:37 UTC Over Success Done 473.30 2.04 18.41
31970483 31394121 24 Mar 2009 7:19:39 UTC 24 Mar 2009 8:19:37 UTC Over Success Done 476.94 2.06 18.41
31970482 31394120 24 Mar 2009 7:19:39 UTC 24 Mar 2009 8:19:37 UTC Over Success Done 476.48 2.06 18.41
31970481 31394119 24 Mar 2009 7:19:39 UTC 24 Mar 2009 8:19:37 UTC Over Success Done 477.00 2.06 18.41
31970480 31394118 24 Mar 2009 7:19:39 UTC 24 Mar 2009 8:19:37 UTC Over Success Done 478.73 2.07 18.41
31970479 31394117 24 Mar 2009 7:19:39 UTC 24 Mar 2009 7:59:42 UTC Over Success Done 477.45 2.06 18.41


By the way I have a gpu, was getting 98k, now 60k.


OH MY GOD i though this project was about the science not the credit. God your so worried that you have lost 38K I would be so happy to if i even got 10k on my two computers but that not going to happen am i bother no..

I think it you who should be getting a life and asking yourself wether your here just for those wonderfully high credits or here for the sciense
Smoke me a kipper ill be back for breakfast


ID: 16757 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
STE\/E

Send message
Joined: 29 Aug 07
Posts: 486
Credit: 576,522,279
RAC: 34,821
Message 16762 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 12:01:10 UTC

I'm reporting you all for Abusing WU's :P
ID: 16762 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Lord Tedric
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Nov 07
Posts: 151
Credit: 8,391,608
RAC: 0
Message 16763 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 12:22:37 UTC - in response to Message 16757.  

OH MY GOD i though this project was about the science not the credit.


The users Dedicated to science are the one's who crunch for those projects which award a pittance for the hours spent crunching.

As far as Crunchers are concerned, most projects are about credits, that's why they complain about it!
ID: 16763 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Paul D. Buck

Send message
Joined: 12 Apr 08
Posts: 621
Credit: 161,934,067
RAC: 0
Message 16771 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 13:53:30 UTC - in response to Message 16763.  

OH MY GOD i though this project was about the science not the credit.


The users Dedicated to science are the one's who crunch for those projects which award a pittance for the hours spent crunching.

As far as Crunchers are concerned, most projects are about credits, that's why they complain about it!

Why can't it be both?

I am here as with the other 30 or so projects I give time to for the science. Credit is my proof that I was here... and that I did do the work.

I complain because the credit system is flawed and the payment is inherently unfair ...
ID: 16771 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile [KWSN]John Galt 007
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Dec 08
Posts: 56
Credit: 269,889,439
RAC: 0
Message 16774 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 14:12:51 UTC

I wonder what would happen if the per core limit was dropped from 5k a day to someplace around 500..an i7 would still get 4k WU per day, at an average of 25cr/WU, 100k a day, Q6600 about 50k a day...(with using s GPU)

Seems fair to me...
Click to help Seti City.




ID: 16774 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Kevint
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Nov 07
Posts: 285
Credit: 1,076,786,368
RAC: 0
Message 16775 - Posted: 24 Mar 2009, 14:16:35 UTC - in response to Message 16774.  

I wonder what would happen if the per core limit was dropped from 5k a day to someplace around 500..an i7 would still get 4k WU per day, at an average of 25cr/WU, 100k a day, Q6600 about 50k a day...(with using s GPU)

Seems fair to me...


Might as well just put the speed limit back in place if these sorts of policies are implemented.



.
ID: 16775 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 . . . 10 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : WU abuse

©2024 Astroinformatics Group