Posts by Keck_Komputers

21) Questions and Answers : Web site : Granted Credit < Claimed Credit (Message 49991)
Posted 24 Dec 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
Because your host is claiming more than the average host. Rosetta averages the claims per model then multiplies that with the number of models in your task to grant credit.
22) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta not downloading new work (Message 49314)
Posted 2 Dec 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
...with your major project (50%) not giving new work, BOINC will have a challenge scheduling work. If LHC should come online tomorrow, BOINC would prefer (based on the debts) to get work for LHC (my guess), and so it's still holding out for that to happen. But, as time goes by and that does not happen, it will be adding to Rosetta debt. So it all balances out.

When you run 5 projects like that, it's normal to not always have work for all of them at the same time. From the sounds of it, once WCG gets work completed, BOINC will request work from Rosetta. Try to resist the temptation to try and force BOINC to do something it doesn't want to do. It will likely only confuse things further.

One thing not mentioned in this reply is CPDN. The long run times there often give the scheduler fits. Their tasks will often go in and out of EDF mode until very near the end. You will likely not get CPDN tasks for awhile after the current one due to the extra time that task will get.
23) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : The math of random numbers (Message 49261)
Posted 1 Dec 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
You may be correct. However the number generated from seed and seed+1 will normally not exhibit a noticable pattern. So the number of seeds should be more important than the relationship between the seeds for producing good results.
24) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Are really low energy structures worth it if the RMSD isn't so good? (Message 48971)
Posted 23 Nov 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
What's prefered, more WU less detailed or less WU more detailed? I guess the longer the WU runs the better you know if the model works well, but probably there is a time after which you mostly know if the model is useful or not. So setting the time too high might waste resources.

The project would probably prefer a longer run time to reduce server traffic. The run time setting has no effect on the science.
25) Message boards : Number crunching : not enough disk space ???? (Message 48939)
Posted 22 Nov 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
There are three disk space parameters, any of the three could be the limiting factor. Make sure you check all of them.
26) Message boards : Number crunching : Merging computers (Message 48938)
Posted 22 Nov 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
Yessss! I finally was able to merge again :)

Odd that it retired my old host, rather than the new duplicate, it looks like I have a box with 440,000 credits in only 3 months :P

The system allways retires the older host. Less chance of problems that way. For example if you copy the BOINC folder to a new host and keep using both the current system works find. If the older host was kept then both would have the same ID and in some projects would crunch the exact same tasks.
27) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Why are there so many turquoise points? (Message 48790)
Posted 18 Nov 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
A green dot is generated each time a configuration is tested. So there are many generated per model.

A red dot represents the best configuration in a model. The protein and your run time preference determine how many models are in a task. So you will see different numbers of red dots in different tasks.

28) Message boards : Number crunching : Requesting 0 seconds of work? (Message 48547)
Posted 11 Nov 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
The queue emptying and refilling is often a sign of too large a queue. The total of the connect every setting and the maintain additional work setting should be less than 40% of the shortest expected deadline. Deadlines here are normally 10 days so any combination greater than 4 days can cause the queue to drain before refilling. Of the two settings the connection interval has more influence on this behavior and making it shorter may help prevent it.
29) Message boards : Number crunching : reserve wu's not downloading (Message 47050)
Posted 26 Sep 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
Hmmm....once again, BOINC let the queue run down until I had an idle core, then it downloaded about 8 days' work. At least I got work, I guess! :P

This behaviour often means "too large cache-size", atleast if you're running with a large "Connect every N days"...

DOH! Why didn't I think of this before. Deadlines here are ~11 days. So any conbination of connect and extra settings totalling more than ~5 days can cause this kind of problem due to the excessive queue length. Total queue length should not be more than 40% of the deadlines for BOINC to work smoothly.
30) Questions and Answers : Preferences : Recent Average Credit (Message 46400)
Posted 17 Sep 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
It takes a while for the RAC to stabilize, usually 2 weeks to 2 months. If it hasn't recovered by that time let us know.
31) Message boards : Number crunching : Credit system not fair (Message 46173)
Posted 14 Sep 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
The thing I think needs to be done to improve the credit system here is a longer baseline. Currently the first few tasks from a new set can get very skewed credit from the later tasks from that same set. I do not know if this would be practical or how many tasks would comprise a good baseline.
32) Questions and Answers : Windows : ScreenSaver on Vista Business x64 (Message 45346)
Posted 24 Aug 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
The screensaver will not work on vista. Look for a fix in the 6.x.x line of clients.
33) Questions and Answers : Web site : CPID Issue between Rosetta and (Message 45224)
Posted 21 Aug 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
The other day I changed my email address and threw a monkey wrench into my boincstats detailed stats page. Now the two new hosts are only showing up for the past couple of days, and my old hosts don't exist. I know this is a CPID issue, so I have a couple of questions:

When will my CPIDs line up for my new hosts on boincstats?

Will my past detailed stats come back?

How do I get back my stats for my old hosts (I would have them churning away while they are waiting to be donated to a worthy cause, but it is impractical)?

It usually takes 2 sucessfull RPC's that get work to each project for the CPIDs to line up. The past detailed stats will probably be messed up forever. Any hosts that are not currently active will not be updated.
34) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Debian 3.1: Install BOINC (Message 44601)
Posted 1 Aug 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
I had to manually resolve dependencies to get the later versions, marked "testing" and "unstable" on that page. The old version marked "stable" worked right off. I was using ubuntu.
35) Message boards : Number crunching : When is "one more project" one too many? (Message 42740)
Posted 27 Jun 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
... or you do it like me: one slow cruncher and many projects. BOINC sorts it out anyway and until next year, I'll have to stick to my laptop.

That's what I do too. The client may not have work from all projects at one time but it will get tasks back in time to be usefull to the project. When you first start up a client it may get too much work, but once that initial overload is processed it will work things out better.

edit: if you look at my sig any project with more than about 70 RAC is on most/all of my hosts. My test hosts have more than 30 projects attached.
36) Message boards : Number crunching : Update BOINC immediately! (Message 42739)
Posted 27 Jun 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
BOINC 5.10.7 is available. Please, update immediately!

5.10.7 is NOT the last recommended any longer.
There must be some kind of bug in it as last recommended now is 5.8.16 again.

Anders n

There is a possible issue with 5.10.7 causing expoler.exe to crash. It looks like most everyone effected had a boincmanager.vbs script at some point though, so it may not effect anyone going straight from 5.8.x.
37) Message boards : Number crunching : Let's stand up to the -1 moron (Message 42738)
Posted 27 Jun 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
sounds like the consensus is to remove the rating option. Any objections?

I like the rating feature, however once it turns into random abuse there is not much left to do. I would like to see the code from the pirates project tested on a real project though. It works fine there but there was not a problem there either.
38) Questions and Answers : Windows : Help Me Seperate The Mess I Have Created (Message 42306)
Posted 19 Jun 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
You would have to get them both connections to the internet, I think. If I am not mistaken while it is sometimes possible to transfer files back and forth to crunch without connecting both, the hostIDs will be confused. Windows internet connection sharing will work for connecting both of them.
39) Questions and Answers : Getting started : team credit (Message 42282)
Posted 18 Jun 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
You can not. Credit earned with a team stays with the team. Only new credits will go to the new team.
40) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Windows 64 (Message 41787)
Posted 3 Jun 2007 by Profile Keck_Komputers
How large are the blocks that you mention?

Larger than 2 gb of memory if I remember correctly. Nothing any of the current projects are close to at this time.

Previous 20 · Next 20

©2023 University of Washington