Posts by Ricardo

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28903)
Posted 4 Oct 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2237
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Limiting CPU usage (Message 28705)
Posted 29 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
Hi Tomaz

Glad you got Threadmaster working.

You might find reducing the voltage beneficial too - I was in a hurry earlier so didn't explain. The advantages are:
Reduced temperatures
Increased battery life (can be considerable - mine is around 25% longer now)
Faster charging
Reduced power consumption
Reduced strain on hardware (peak temperatures are what's most important here, and my lappy runs Rosetta much cooler than it used to get to without Rosetta!)

The manufacturers have to use conservative settings as they have to run at a voltage that all the CPUs will run at, but in reality almost all will happily run at much lower voltages.

The program I use is RMClock - I don't find the website the easiest to navigate, so the exe is here.

If you need any more info then post back and I'll run you through it.

HTH
Danny


DCDC, Your post was very usefull for me too, one of my computers works at 70C while running Rosetta and only checking "enable termal monitor" the temp is now at 65C, later I will study the matter of reducing the voltage. Thanks a lot!
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Work units with low credit: (Message 28692)
Posted 29 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
I can see that the WU were reported after the dead line, perhaps it´s the reason. One of them has also no granted credit
4) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Suggestions for moderator handles (Message 28075)
Posted 21 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
Mod.est
Mod.esty
Mod.ish
Mod.erator
Mod.iste
Mod.ule
Mod.icum
5) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Image Link 2 (Message 26838)
Posted 15 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
By the way, Casa Blanca is Spanish and means in English: White House



Next.......
6) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Hi all (Message 26824)
Posted 15 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
Hi David!
7) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Image Link 2 (Message 26793)
Posted 15 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
Humphrey Bogart............

8) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Word Link 4 (Message 26770)
Posted 14 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
The Beatles


(In 1963, princess Margarita and Lord Snowdown went to the Royal Variety to see the Beatles. There Lennon said: "Those that are in the cheapest seats, than applaud. The others - talking about to the royalty it is enough that they move his jewels ".)
9) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Image Link 2 (Message 26766)
Posted 14 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
10) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Image Link 2 (Message 26703)
Posted 13 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
11) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : Image Link 2 (Message 26658)
Posted 12 Sep 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
And here a nice High Speed Amphibian



12) Message boards : Number crunching : credit/hour how much is possible?? (Message 25606)
Posted 30 Aug 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
P4 @2.4 Ghz, Memory 512 MB, MFPS: 1225.11, MIS: 2358.67, WIN XP
Credit/Hour: 8.06 - 10.32 (Different WU)

Celeron D @ 2.66 Ghz, Memory 256 MB, MFPS: 1318.08, MIS: 2173.58, WIN XP
Credit/Hour: 9.35 - 10.48 (Different WU)


13) Message boards : Number crunching : All crunchers are equally important (Message 23265)
Posted 18 Aug 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
It seems people is loosing the principal objetive of Rosetta:

Rosetta@home needs your help to determine the 3-dimensional shapes of proteins in research that may ultimately lead to finding cures for some major human diseases. By running the Rosetta program on your computer while you don't need it you will help us speed up and extend our research in ways we couldn't possibly attempt without your help. You will also be helping our efforts at designing new proteins to fight diseases such as HIV, Malaria, Cancer, and Alzheimer's (See our Disease Related Research for more information). Please join us in our efforts! Rosetta@home is not for profit.

The discussions are now focused in credits, blames, troll posts, etc., my RAC reflects how I feel about all the discussions, my best RAC was about 300, now its about 100 or less.

Really i am waiting that all those at XS leave the project at once! but as per I have read in the "other" thread someone of Rosetta staff is negotiating with them........

My total credit for SETI and Rosetta is more or less 30.000 or more (really I dont check them to much) and I want donate all this credits to the people of XS if they feel better with them.

By friends, (Bye only on the forum not in Rosetta), its a great effort for me to write in English (I am from Argentina) and this is by now my last post.

Best to distribute all eggs in different boxes than only in one box, you know why.........

Keep crunching Rosetta
14) Message boards : Number crunching : All crunchers are equally important (Message 23127)
Posted 18 Aug 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
I'm staying out of the credits debate but I'd like to address a related issue.

I've seen some of the big crunchers make comments about how their opinion is more important because they crunch more units. They tell people that crunch less to be quiet based on that fact.

I'm not here to name names or pick a fight with anyone specific.

However, I want to assert that all crunchers are important, whether they contribute 1 computer or 50, be this by choice or by necessity. The importance of one's opinion does not increase with the size of one's farm.


Thanks Matt, I agree with you but......., it seems they really weight more than the others. I post a message in the "other" thread yesterday and today my message dissapeared (the message was not offensive to anyone was only my point of view about the f****ng credits), but I have a life, i crunch Rosetta only to contribute to the science and dont want to be involved in discussions

Ricardo

15) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : the whatever thread (Message 20664)
Posted 19 Jul 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
Hi, here from Argentina - Buenos Aires, now is Winter seasons here, today we had a nice and sunny day.

Greg, I see your OS "Longhorn" but it seems your benchmarks are very low for a 3.4 GHz CPU

MFP: 1,447.79
MIS: 1,750.03

One of my computers is a P4@2.4 GHz and my benchmarks are:

MFP: 1,368.74
MIS: 5,151.07

Regarding gas price, here it is at USD 2.50 per gallon

Nice to meet you too
16) Message boards : Cafe Rosetta : What's playing on the stereo? (Message 20081)
Posted 12 Jul 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
The Supremes, Four Tops, Roy Orbison and with Screamer Radio The EP Express Radio Station (only Elvis Presley)

Showing my age too like John Gann...........

Regards,
Ricardo
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Report Problems with Rosetta Version 5.22 (Message 18307)
Posted 9 Jun 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
I get the following report with the new 5.22:

Result ID 23395831
Name t306__CASP7_JUMPRELAX_SAVE_ALL_OUT_BARCODE_hom001__656_21236_0
Workunit 19711334
Created 8 Jun 2006 22:11:53 UTC
Sent 8 Jun 2006 23:44:52 UTC
Received 9 Jun 2006 11:22:33 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Success
Client state Done
Exit status 0 (0x0)
Computer ID 246538
Report deadline 15 Jun 2006 23:44:52 UTC
CPU time 21089.578125
stderr out <core_client_version>5.3.12.tx36</core_client_version>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 1831515
# cpu_run_time_pref: 21600
# DONE :: 1 starting structures built 21 (nstruct) times
# This process generated 21 decoys from 21 attempts


BOINC :: Watchdog shutting down...
BOINC :: BOINC support services shutting down...

</stderr_txt>


Validate state Valid
Claimed credit 71.993372528454
Granted credit 71.993372528454
application version 5.22

In other post I have see that someone also reported that Watchdog has shutting down the process.

Regards,
Ricardo

This is a normal shutdown for a successfully completed workunit.

The note regarding the watchdog is just to identify that now that the work unit has finished, the watchdog function is being closed down as well.



Noted and thanks Bob for your clarification

Regards
Ricardo
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Report Problems with Rosetta Version 5.22 (Message 18303)
Posted 9 Jun 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
I get the following report with the new 5.22:

Result ID 23395831
Name t306__CASP7_JUMPRELAX_SAVE_ALL_OUT_BARCODE_hom001__656_21236_0
Workunit 19711334
Created 8 Jun 2006 22:11:53 UTC
Sent 8 Jun 2006 23:44:52 UTC
Received 9 Jun 2006 11:22:33 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Success
Client state Done
Exit status 0 (0x0)
Computer ID 246538
Report deadline 15 Jun 2006 23:44:52 UTC
CPU time 21089.578125
stderr out <core_client_version>5.3.12.tx36</core_client_version>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 1831515
# cpu_run_time_pref: 21600
# DONE :: 1 starting structures built 21 (nstruct) times
# This process generated 21 decoys from 21 attempts


BOINC :: Watchdog shutting down...
BOINC :: BOINC support services shutting down...

</stderr_txt>


Validate state Valid
Claimed credit 71.993372528454
Granted credit 71.993372528454
application version 5.22

In other post I have see that someone also reported that Watchdog has shutting down the process.

Regards,
Ricardo
19) Message boards : Number crunching : Runtime preference settings (Message 18300)
Posted 9 Jun 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
"Connect To Server About Every ? Days." is actually a General Preference, not Rosetta.

The preference really gives the user the choice. The project science is in models processed. Whether you process them on 4 WUs per day or 1 really doesn't make much difference... so why not just do 1? I like the 24hr runtimes because it keeps the task list short and reduces the load on their server and my ISP.

The current recommendation is 8hrs. But that's a broad brush statement. If your machine is on 24hrs a day, then that's 3WUs per day... if your machine is one 4 hours each evening... that's two days... so if you run 24hrs a day, going longer than the 8hr guideline is exactly why they give us the choice.

The only exception would be if you happen to be one of the very few that run in to any problems when running for longer periods of time. Obviously if it should introduce any problem for you, then post about the problem and point out what your runtime preference is set to, and see if the answer comes back that a shorter runtime would be a workaround until they get it fixed. ...even if a problem occurs, the successful models are reported and significant to the project, and you get credit for all the time you spent (in a daily credit grant to errored WU reports).

So, set as you wish. But heed Keith's caution, if you have many WUs downloaded already or a larger cache, just beware that BOINC is going to download work assuming your old runtime, and the actual crunch will take the NEW runtime. So, best to make such a change when your cache preference is small and the number of existing WUs is small.


Thanks Feet1st, i was writing my post when you posted yours, thanks again, i have it a bit more clear

Regards
Ricardo
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Runtime preference settings (Message 18299)
Posted 9 Jun 2006 by Ricardo
Post:
Hi Ricardo.

It depends on two things; Machine speed and Report Deadline of the WU's

I have a Dell D3000 2.8G P4 with 1G dual channel ram. So I usually see how many model runs I can get per WU (This varies with proien size and protocol). Then ask yourself "How many models do I wish to run per WU?"

With a target CPU time of 6 hours I usually average 12 models per BIG protien and about 25 per small protien.

If you are running a slower machine then be sure that you give it enough time to run more than three models per WU.

Be careful about your work que. This is controlled by Rosetta Setting "Connect To Server About Every ? Days.

One day will give you 4 WU's. This is so you don't get covered so deep that you start missing deadlines (REDUCED TO ONE WEEK DUE TO CASP 7).

Hope this Helps.


Thanks for the answer Keith. I have 3 computers running Rosetta, 2 Celeron at 2,66G each and 1 P4 at 2,4G the two celeron are working for 6 hours per day and the P4 (at home) can run 12 hours or a bit more per day, its not a matter of deadlines, i am reporting 1 or 2 wu per day on each computer and each computer have only 2 wu (one running and the other waiting), my question is what is better for Rosetta (more models per protein or if its indiferent) or is this setting only to suit volunteers demand

Regards,
Ricardo

P.S. Sorry for my poor English


Next 20



©2022 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org