More Science with Longer CPU Times?

Questions and Answers : Preferences : More Science with Longer CPU Times?

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Uncle Mike

Send message
Joined: 29 May 16
Posts: 1
Credit: 1,776,798
RAC: 0
Message 80303 - Posted: 27 Jun 2016, 15:56:49 UTC

I know that the subject of setting \'Target CPU Run Time\' has been beaten to death, but I have never found an answer to this question: If I increase my CPU run time, does that give better science to R@H? If I increase this from its current 8 hours up to the max, am I doing good? ...or does it not make that much difference in the results I send to R@H?
ID: 80303 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mod.Sense
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator

Send message
Joined: 22 Aug 06
Posts: 3537
Credit: 0
RAC: 0
Message 80313 - Posted: 29 Jun 2016, 13:01:07 UTC

More time yields more completed models that use a given level of science. So you don\'t crunch a given model any longer, or with any different logic. You just crunch more of them per downloaded task.

Longer runtimes are a good way to reduce the load on the servers, and your download bandwidth, if your usage patterns make longer runtimes easy for you.
Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense
ID: 80313 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote

Questions and Answers : Preferences : More Science with Longer CPU Times?



©2019 University of Washington
http://www.bakerlab.org