Posts by TomaszPawel

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta's credit granting compared to others (Message 69945)
Posted 4 Apr 2011 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Very interesting statement Chilean.

Personally I don't know how ones points can be better than other...
2) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : rah_publications dead links (Message 67790)
Posted 23 Sep 2010 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Hi

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_publications.php

Assessment of the optimization of affinity and specificity at protein-DNA interfaces.

http://depts.washington.edu/bakerpg/single_pub.php?ID=381

etc...

dead links...
3) Message boards : Number crunching : When will cuda support be ready ? (Message 66673)
Posted 24 Jun 2010 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Don't bother my friends, soon you will be folding under BOINC.

Rosetta doesn't want to do app on gpu's and must not.

Other projects will draw the application up in order to exploit the enormous computing power of GPU's.

Be patient!
4) Message boards : Number crunching : minirosetta 2.05 (Message 65250)
Posted 9 Feb 2010 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Walid, but with errors!?... and "great" score...
5) Message boards : Number crunching : minirosetta 2.05 (Message 65068)
Posted 22 Jan 2010 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Error
Error
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit for WU - Joke of the month! (Message 65067)
Posted 22 Jan 2010 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Thank You for the explanation.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit for WU - Joke of the month! (Message 65062)
Posted 22 Jan 2010 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Hi!

NO COMMENT just link...:

0.26 for 12,585s
1.22 for 9,565s.
3.56 for 5,911s
8.95 for 11,077s
14.07 for 21,950s.

OMG...
8) Message boards : Number crunching : When will cuda support be ready ? (Message 64845)
Posted 7 Jan 2010 by TomaszPawel
Post:
I think a programmer familiar with the Rosetta code should first look With the introduction of double-precision floating point in newer video cards, precision should no longer be an issue with GPU processing.

DP in new ATI RADEON HD58xx is very fast!

ATI Stream Software Development Kit (SDK) v2.0 is available

Nothing is standing in the way in order to write applications for GPU.

Only Administrators must want it.
9) Message boards : Number crunching : How many people are crunching Rosetta? (Message 62855)
Posted 9 Aug 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
The question is... why Rosetta is not able to increase the CPU power for the project?

R@H is not able to maintain volunteers. The new volunteers incorporated to the project has more CPU power but they spend less time with the project


I am fan of R@H, I was crunching this project on all my host's.

But, I also like to have good RAC....

And when I see for 10,182.08s of work 54.44c .... I am SAD AND P@OFF...

When I run MW@H for 10,182.08s of work I have 225c....

NO COMENT

You have your answer!

THANK YOU ROSETTA.
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Minirosetta 1.80 (Message 61945)
Posted 25 Jun 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
I found "bug".

This WU make only 84.37 credit but was runing 22,555.02sec....

This WU make 84.34 credit and was runing 10652.67sec....

So it is bug or it is normal that for WU runing 2x longer I get the same credit?
11) Message boards : Number crunching : What? I thought this had stopped (Team Founder Change) (Message 61922)
Posted 24 Jun 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Hi! I am founder of TomaszPawelTeam!

I would like to reserve so that nobody can never take control of my squad. How I can do this? Even if for some reasons I won't be active for long time?



Sorry, you can't do that. If you're inactive for a long time and someone wants to take over the foundership duties, I think it's fair for that person, particularly if the founder cannot be contacted.


Long time - how long?

How many times you try to contact with founder?

If you use only email are you not afraid that for some reasons someone adds you to spam filter without the knowledge of owner of email, and you email won't reach the addressee.
12) Message boards : Number crunching : What? I thought this had stopped (Team Founder Change) (Message 61920)
Posted 24 Jun 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Hi! I am founder of TomaszPawelTeam!

I would like to reserve so that nobody can never take control of my squad. How I can do this? Even if for some reasons I won't be active for long time?
13) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Team Thread (Ads only, not for discussions) (Message 61655)
Posted 10 Jun 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
TOMASZPAWELTEAM



May the CrunchForce be with you, always!
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Minirosetta Version 1.67 (Message 61142)
Posted 12 May 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=250780868

iRp40_S_3d85_ip40_1zzo.pdb.gz_00000010_fa_dock.xml_score12_pert38_DOCK_11891_476_1


"The validator error has been found: Our data format was changed and the validator was not updated. We're doing that now. "

More details please?
15) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Personal Milestones (Message 61045)
Posted 7 May 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:


Alleluja!


1 000 000

:)




I am very happy!

Many greetings to ALL crunchers :)
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Single vs. Dual Channel DDR2 (Message 61038)
Posted 6 May 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
From my own testing using a system with exactly the same components, just changing the memory speed, it has no effect on R@H.

Tested on a Phenom 9850 at 800MHz and 667MHz. There was no drop in the average credit granted between the two.

What does affect R@H pretty significantly however, is the amount of L2/3 cache your CPU has. My 9850 (RIP) only had of 4MB L2/3 cache total. I swapped it out for an Intel Q9450 which has a slower clock speed but a massive 12MB of L2 cache (4MB per core!) and the amount of decoys I was able to generate per work unit shot up resulting in a much higher RAC :)


Yes it looks very good when you compare Q8200 vs Q9550 - 4 MB L2 vs 12MB L2 ...

Maby RAM CL also have some imact on speed.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Recent average credit (RAC) (Message 61037)
Posted 6 May 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
I'm looking into this. Don't really know what is going on.



it is very strange...
18) Message boards : Number crunching : 100 Teraflops (Message 61036)
Posted 6 May 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Now:

TeraFLOPS estimate: 95.676

crunch crunch crunch :)
19) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Minirosetta Version 1.64/1.65 (Message 61035)
Posted 6 May 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
Hi

I have first error of 1.65

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=248333213

<core_client_version>6.6.20</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741680 (0xc0000090)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
[2009- 5- 6 18: 7: 0:] :: BOINC:: Initializing ... ok.
[2009- 5- 6 18: 7: 0:] :: BOINC :: boinc_init()
BOINC:: Setting up shared resources ... ok.
BOINC:: Setting up semaphores ... ok.
BOINC:: Updating status ... ok.
BOINC:: Registering timer callback... ok.
BOINC:: Worker initialized successfully.
Registering options..
Registered extra options.
Initializing broker options ...
Registered extra options.
Initializing core...
Initializing options.... ok
Options::initialize()
Options::adding_options()
Options::initialize() Check specs.
Options::initialize() End reached
Loaded options.... ok
Processed options.... ok
Initializing random generators... ok
Initialization complete.
Setting WU description ...
Unpacking zip data: ../../projects/boinc.bakerlab.org_rosetta/minirosetta_database_rev29025.zip
Setting database description ...
Setting up checkpointing ...
Setting up folding (abrelax) ...
Beginning folding (abrelax) ...
BOINC:: Worker startup.
Starting watchdog...
Watchdog active.
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00001
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00002
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00003
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00004
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00005
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00006
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00007
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00008
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00009
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00010
Starting work on structure: _U18X26X_00011


Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Float Invalid Operation (0xc0000090) at address 0x0050A2B9

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...


</stderr_txt>
]]>


2,2 h lost....


and for 1.64

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=247697671

<core_client_version>6.6.20</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741680 (0xc0000090)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
[2009- 5- 4 20:20:35:] :: BOINC:: Initializing ... ok.
[2009- 5- 4 20:20:35:] :: BOINC :: boinc_init()
BOINC:: Setting up shared resources ... ok.
BOINC:: Setting up semaphores ... ok.
BOINC:: Updating status ... ok.
BOINC:: Registering timer callback... ok.
BOINC:: Worker initialized successfully.
Registering options..
Registered extra options.
Initializing broker options ...
Registered extra options.
Initializing core...
Initializing options.... ok
Options::initialize()
Options::adding_options()
Options::initialize() Check specs.
Options::initialize() End reached
Loaded options.... ok
Processed options.... ok
Initializing random generators... ok
Initialization complete.
Setting WU description ...
Unpacking zip data: ../../projects/boinc.bakerlab.org_rosetta/minirosetta_database_rev29025.zip
Setting database description ...
Setting up checkpointing ...
Setting up folding (abrelax) ...
Beginning folding (abrelax) ...
BOINC:: Worker startup.
Starting watchdog...
Watchdog active.
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00001
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00002
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00003
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00004
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00005
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00006
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00007
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00008
Starting work on structure: _U23X25X_00009


Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Float Invalid Operation (0xc0000090) at address 0x0050AEE9

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...


</stderr_txt>
]]>

almost 2h lost...
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Recent average credit (RAC) (Message 60979)
Posted 4 May 2009 by TomaszPawel
Post:
You can EMail me the details on the link. Thanks in advance for reporting it.

As for RAC, RAC is based on credit history, and credit was not issued as quickly as results were being reported during that timeframe. This is why the estimate project teraFLOPs dropped during that time as well. But then you see a spike, and then the normal trendline. Please post again in a couple of days if your figures don't look back to normal by then.


I have the same to my team....

Big RAC drop. (Smaller credit for WU... about 15%)


Next 20



©2023 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org