Posts by mscharmack

21) Message boards : Number crunching : Increase in number of Computational Errors (Message 7251) Posted 2 Dec 2008 by mscharmack Post: It seems since the big change in Milkyway@Home that my computational error rate has gone from 0% to about 20% of the work units. It appears that when the computer is turned off for the night or simply restarted that the current work unit comes up with a computational error. Has anyone else seen this problem yet? Can you look into this? Here are two examples: 56889489 57108829 1 Dec 2008 12:30:51 UTC 2 Dec 2008 18:49:38 UTC Over Client error Compute error 1,230.28 3.97 --- 56884657 57105019 1 Dec 2008 11:04:10 UTC 2 Dec 2008 15:38:21 UTC Over Client error Compute error 1,256.52 4.05 --- This has never happened in the past. Thanks
22) Message boards : Number crunching : I'm not getting a single WU (Message 7199) Posted 1 Dec 2008 by mscharmack Post: Try detaching from milkyway@home and then reattach. That may help out with the new apps. Astronomy 1.22 V3 does not work now.
23) Message boards : Number crunching : No further Support for Milkyway at this time! (Message 6186) Posted 15 Nov 2008 by mscharmack Post: I'm OK with making the MW app the standard app just so long as SETI and Einstein do the same. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Oh, that's right. SETI doesn't complain when projects award too little credit because that means more people will continue looking for little green men. I digress... Types of crunchers: 1. Science lovers 2. Credit lovers 3. Credit lovers who like doing science as well (so long as the credit is good) If you are in group 1, stop complaining since more science is getting done with the opt app. If you are in group 2, there is plenty of credit. If you are in group 3, like me, you are doing more science and getting good credit. The best of both worlds. Since that doesn't appear to cover everyone, I can only guess there must also be a group 4 which believes that projects must make everything equal. If that's the case, please take it to the next level. Don't stop with credits. Send me your money. I wouldn't want you to have more money than me just because you work harder, are smarter, take on more responsibility, work longer hours, have more experience, etc. No? How about giving everyone who crunches the same credit regardless of how many computers they have or how fast they are? That kind of defeats the purpose of having a team and competing and having stats pages doesn't it? Oh well. Leave if you like. I'll just have to fund a way to add more machines on MW so that I can make up for the science you won't be doing (and reap the benefits of the credits as well). You can put me in group 3. I like the science and the credit. Don't let SETI or any other project set the standard for the credit system. If you keep your's up there maybe they'll come around and increase theirs too. Again don't bow down to the pressure to realign your credit system. I continue to do other projects along with MW.
24) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit limits apparently exist ... (Message 5902) Posted 4 Nov 2008 by mscharmack Post: Crunch3r Right on the money...... I don't have a massive number of computers like some users do nor do I have ones that are really that fast, nor do I keep them going 24/7, so I value every credit that I can get. The more the better. Oh yeah, I still do SETI along with many other projects (56 in total when they are up and running).
25) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit limits apparently exist ... (Message 5855) Posted 3 Nov 2008 by mscharmack Post: Why bow down to SETI@HOME on the credit issue. If they (and any other project were worried about crunchers, then why don't they raise their credit system to the level of Milkyway@home. I liked the credit Milkyway was giving, but that didn't stop me from working on other projects. It was like a pick-me-up since I don't leave my computers on 24/7. Now I will have to rely on ABC for it. At least they have not bowed yet.
26) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Calculations. (Message 4540) Posted 30 Jul 2008 by mscharmack Post: The project operators should always have the power over their projects and this includes the granting of credits. I like the credits granted here (And I really liked them in the past), but this is not the only project that I crunch for. I currently have one on climate prediction.net that is currently over 6 million seconds completed and is at only 77% done. They grant only 311 credits per timestep (25920) which takes my computer about 13.5 hours to complete. The higher credit offered here at M@H makes up for that lost on other projects. I could have my dual core process only M@H and rake in almost 2400 credits per day, but I like doing other projects. Leave the credit system alone and let the projects get by on the merit of the project. By the way, does anyone know what is going on at the RieselSieve project. I haven't been able to get in contact with them for a couple of months.
27) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit Calculations. (Message 4405) Posted 23 Jul 2008 by mscharmack Post: If you don't like the credit here, there are other projects that would enjoy your computer time. Stop the complaining about credit. The amount of credit assigned was voted upon by the users just after the project started up. He got rid of the highs and the lows and settled upon one about in the middle. The current credits are a reflection of that. Stop the crying and crunch along.
28) Message boards : Number crunching : New WU Length? (Message 4249) Posted 19 Jul 2008 by mscharmack Post: Here's what I've been getting Athlon 64 5600 dual core Short WU ~2.5 hours and Long WU ~5.0 hrs (used to be 5.0 min) Athlon XP 3000, 2800, and 2600 single core Short ~ 3.5 hrs and Long ~7.0 hrs (used to be 7.0 min) Still get a spread of the old 5 or 7 min WU's too. My Athlon 2600 seems to process faster then the 2800 and the 3000. ???? I don't know.
29) Message boards : Number crunching : New WU Length? (Message 4111) Posted 15 Jul 2008 by mscharmack Post: I too have had a wu that was working on 55 min at only 5% done. I checked my other computers and found nothing funny about the work units they were working on, so I reset the project and I am now waiting for new WUs. I let each of the WUs run for a few minutes and found they all were going to run long before I reset them. This was not the fact on the other computers that have downloaded and uploaded WUs in the same number range. Maybe they were simply bad WUs.
30) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2766) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: That's right. But I don't want to discuss to death ;-) I only find curious (stupid?) that for the same amount of work you get x from one project, y from another and z from another. It's as curious as you have three guys doing the same job in the same company. The first like white shirts and he gets $50,000 pert year, the second $60,000 because of its blue shirts and the third $70,000 because of its green shirts. Not very constructive. And I would prefer see people interested in a project because of the subject instead of intereted by the local higher credits. Be careful throwing around the word stupid! I and my team mates could get very offended by that reference. What does it matter why someone crunches a project. You do it for the science (or so you say) and I do it for the credits. We both accomplish the same thing and the science gets done. If it were not for the credits, just how much science do you think would get done? There are many more who crunch for the credits than those who do it only for the science and they are usually the ones who have the large farms. If this were not true then there would be no need for credits. I would be willing to bet that if all projects quit giving credits they would very quickly die from lack of participation. SO credits are much more important than you think. SargeD@SETI.USA hit the proverbial "nail on the head" The farmers who do it for the credit far out weighs those who do it strictly for the science. Why else keep score. How many people would go to their favorite sporting event if no score was kept. There is nothing better than a little competition. I will run those projects that I can get the most credit out of. And I tell you, I've tried most of them.
31) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2724) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: Oh yes, we have to. Its not like everyone had the same computer....
32) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2721) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: Statistics! They are a wonderful thing. The only problem is that they can be manipulated in any way. Sure Riesel Sieve grants 27 credits per work unit, however they grant 27 credits no matter how long it takes to complete the WU (30 min, 1 hr, 2 hrs, etc). Cosmo does the same with their 100 credits per WU. Faster computers may be able to get 50 - 54 credits per hour, but those with slower computers may get less than 15 per hour. The same goes for many projects. We have to put these stats in perspective or otherwise they are just meaningless. 15 hours of crunch time on any of my machines will give me 1000 credits at ABC@home. Why not grant 0 credits per work unit and see who stays only for the science.
33) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2696) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: Why change it at all. 6.5/WU attracts more volunteers. Any attempt to change it will drastically reduce your volunteers as you have already seen. Maybe the other projects will step up to the plate too.
34) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2645) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: I think 6.5 credits/WU was perfectly reasonable. Think out of the box, don't crawl inside it. Go back to 6.5. I have 17 work units left split on three other machines, then its back to ABC@home 100%. What use is the science if you only have a handfull of people doing it. Look at the Near Earth Astroid (NEA) program. Boy are we doomed! Remember, we are your customers.
35) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2626) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: I'm on my last WU on my dual core athlon 5600 and ABC@home has resumed. My other machines are still counting down from 20 or less.
36) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2622) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: I second that, Dr. Dan T. Morris @ SETI.USA.... All my computers just went to no new work. However, I will finish what is currently on them. Dave and Travis, Don't lower your standards, let the other projects raise theirs.
37) Message boards : Number crunching : updated granted credit (Message 2619) Posted 24 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: Well, what can I say. The credit here was good for a while. With the reduction in credits, I think I'll go back to ABC@home as the primary source of crunching and Milkyway will be put on the back burner. When the credit returns as being profitable again, then I shall return. Think of crunching as a bank.... "The more interest you give, the more money you will have invested, and the more customers you'll have." Wake me up when the credit does up again. I don't really care what the other projects give as credit. Maybe if you kept yours high, the other projects will have to rethink what they give to lure crunchers back. If you're going to grant your credit more inline with other projects why should I volunteer my computer time to your project????? Why settle for hamburger when you can have steak. The credit here is now hamburger instead of steak now. I am reducing or stopping the work an all my computers for this project. Remember --- Hamburger (like all the others) or Steak (unique).
38) Message boards : Number crunching : 20 workunit limit (Message 2279) Posted 16 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: Good info to know on how our returns are actually used. I can see why wu's are kept down... That's okay with me.
39) Message boards : Number crunching : 20 workunit limit (Message 2253) Posted 14 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: I think what people are really looking for is a steady amount of work coming from the project. I understand Milkyway is going through some growing pains, what project hasn't, but I've been crunching for various projects since 2001 with SETI@Home with the original SETI Classic. Keep the work units flowing and we'llkeep returning them. By the way, I kind of like the short return times. Keep up the good work.
40) Message boards : Number crunching : How about more than 20 workunits at a time. (Message 2160) Posted 11 Mar 2008 by mscharmack Post: Can we get more then 20 workunits at a time. How about 250 or more. It may help keep peoples computer(s) busy when the server goes out. It can always be readjusted later.

Previous 20