Actually there are a number of dates that are pertinent depending on the catagory of CASP in which a project submits its results. The dates you are seeing are for server predictions. The predictions that Rosetta is working on are in a different category. The reporting dates they are using have already taken into account the dates the project needs in order to meet the CASP deadlines for the category in which they will submit their results.

Are you shure? The CASP-website says the release date for the structure will be at the 4th of June.

Norbert

Edit: Just saw the answer of David Baker.

---

The stats you cite are only adversely effected to the extent that individual machine statics are the focus of the information desired. The vast majority of the stats are in fact collective, and not dependent on a view of a specific machine. All of the stats that depend on your total credit are still as accurate as ever, even the rac for a particular machine will reflect the proper contribution if allowed to do so. The only stats significantly affected by this issue are those relating to the total credit for a particular machine.

True, it doesn't affect the project as such. I was primarily interested in the proportions of different CPUs when I was looking at the stats yesterday; it was then that it occurred to me that the numbers were probably out by a large margin. This in turn affects the credit/RAC averages per processor type, which are also interesting.

Just a way of deleting "false start" instances of machines would be a good place to be - I have several with zero credit; one took 3 "false-starts" before it kicked into life last time, so the credit of one machine is read as that of 4.

It's pointless jeopardising the data in it's entirety while trying to fix it - I'll wait until the bugs are out, thanks. :)

The stats you cite are only adversely effected to the extent that individual machine statics are the focus of the information desired. The vast majority of the stats are in fact collective, and not dependent on a view of a specific machine. All of the stats that depend on your total credit are still as accurate as ever, even the rac for a particular machine will reflect the proper contribution if allowed to do so. The only stats significantly affected by this issue are those relating to the total credit for a particular machine.

True, it doesn't affect the project as such. I was primarily interested in the proportions of different CPUs when I was looking at the stats yesterday; it was then that it occurred to me that the numbers were probably out by a large margin. This in turn affects the credit/RAC averages per processor type, which are also interesting.

Just a way of deleting "false start" instances of machines would be a good place to be - I have several with zero credit; one took 3 "false-starts" before it kicked into life last time, so the credit of one machine is read as that of 4.

It's pointless jeopardising the data in it's entirety while trying to fix it - I'll wait until the bugs are out, thanks. :)

Thank you for your understanding. Please believe me when I say a day does not go by when I don't mention this issue to them. It also adversely affects the ability to help people with problems because I cannot find the offending machine. There will be a rather large announcement when this is fixed so please stay tuned

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

Why is Rosetta eating most of my resources even though I have the resource share set at 10%?

---

PEACE

Why is Rosetta eating most of my resources even though I have the resource share set at 10%?

*BUMP* Any ideas or HEeeelllp?
Rosetta seems to IGNORE my BOINC settings.

---

PEACE

Jim, you used the term "resource share". This is a setting which allows you to define to BOINC how to allocate your machine's time across all of the projects you are attached to. If you are concerned because SETI is no longer running, it's not a problem. It's just more efficient to run one project on a machine at a time, and so BOINC rotates over the course of time between the projects and over time will spend the configured time on each project.

If you really only wanted BOINC to use 10% of your CPU time, there is a setting in your General Preferences which says "use at most ___ % of CPU". It most certainly is your choice, but I'd suggest that you either give BOINC at least 50%, or perhaps set it up to run only at night or during hours of the day when you aren't using the machine (these settings are on the same configuration page).

One you change the setting for the location of the machine in question, then just go back to your BOINC manager and update to the project for it to bring down these new configuration changes.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Hey Jim, I wanted to share some of my thoughts about BOINC using processor time. I've found that it does not cause any noticeable slowness in machines where I have it set to 100% CPU. The reason this is, is because BOINC is set to the "LOWEST" priority so whenever the computer needs the CPU for something else, BOINC will temporarily get out of the way. I don't even turn it off for gaming.

I do turn it off for spyware and virus sweeping.

---

Hey Jim, I wanted to share some of my thoughts about BOINC using processor time. I've found that it does not cause any noticeable slowness in machines where I have it set to 100% CPU. The reason this is, is because BOINC is set to the "LOWEST" priority so whenever the computer needs the CPU for something else, BOINC will temporarily get out of the way. I don't even turn it off for gaming.

I do turn it off for spyware and virus sweeping.

Depending on your Spyware/Virus program you could raise the priority a notch to save you having to stop boinc on the big sweeps. I know mine is for manual sweeps by default. Though if you run them as scheduled searches you could just alter teh schedule (assuming it uses windows built in scheduler and not it's own) to stop boinc and restart it for you.

Another thing to do for this is to restrict the run times of boinc, say don't let it run all of Friday night (can be set in the advanced preferences of newer boinc clients). That way anything BOINC stops working, like Google, Windows Desktop Searches/Indexing, Diskkeeper or other defragmenters get a chance to kick in. The reason these do not work with boinc is the look for inactivity of the computer rather than priority (boinc now does similar for it's in use/not in use memory etc setting, but does it as it was intended to be done afaik).


Anyway, that also gives another reason why people do not use BOINC, it interferes with Defragmenters, Virus scanners (though not so much here) and defragmenters (Diskkeeper do know about this and do have a solution). That is when using BOINC 'out of the box' and needs tinkering to get it to work nicely.

---

Team mauisun.org

I have a question to project organizators. Why you don't use more effective algorithms of compression of WU. At last time i've recieved WU more then 3 Mb.
I've analized compression degree on some archivators and got 50-100% more effective compression then Gzip curruntly used in project. It's really expensive to pay for such huge internet traffic. I think many other member will agree with me. For Example:
aat001_09_05.200_v1_3.gz - 3 264 952 b
aat000_09_05.cab - 1 864 416 b
aat001_09_05.uha - 1 313 822 b

This has been pointed out some year + back when i first started, they did manage to trim the file sizes down on a few of the target they gave out, not sure if they still use that philosophy as sizes seem to have creapt back up.
But they (Rosetta) reads from the files directly and gzip is what BOINC provides to do this.
BOINC can also do ZIP compression, but not sure if that can use it in the same way. It may have to be expanded out first (like CPDN do/did). Not a problem for me as I would prefer that over the large downloads.

They could of course recompress the .gz's with another program. But they would need to put it into the Rosetta client and be Windowsx32/64, Mac OS-X and Linux compatable. But you get the best of both worlds then.

For BOINC to include it, normally they would need to have the source to make it to more platforms.

---

Team mauisun.org