Posts by paulcsteiner

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Scheduling request completed: got 0 new tasks (Message 64729)
Posted 2 Jan 2010 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Eggnog@home~!! I love it, and don't forget the sister program, Hangover@home, currently crunching on my systems as we speak...


Blimey! Calm down ladies and gents, it's only a temporary lack of WUs over the holiday period! I get less hassle at work when there's a lack of overtime on offer! (Though the suggestion that R@H may _never_ come back is gloriously over the top, I agree).

Personally I will be devoting all my resources toward eggnog@home just as soon as I find out what it is. Happy New Year! ;)

2) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with web site (Message 57354)
Posted 29 Nov 2008 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Say, the "Technical News" section (http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_technical_news.php) is quite interesting, will it start being updated again someday?
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Report long-running models here (Message 57239)
Posted 26 Nov 2008 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
This one went 263,622.40 which is a bit longer that the 24 hour RT I have set. Also no credit,..


http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/workunit.php?wuid=188279776
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Mini and ESET NOD32 Virus Sanner (Message 52795)
Posted 30 Apr 2008 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Or consider a different A/V vendor, perhaps AVG. It's available in a free edition too,..


*bakerlab.org* is not good as an URL mask. Consider:

http://www.malware.com/bakerlab.org/malware.js

It would be excluded from protection. A security risk.

As a rule of thumb, URL addresses must not contain leading asterisks. Change it to:

srv?.bakerlab.org*

Cheers.

5) Message boards : Number crunching : Longer target CPU settings?? (Message 42218)
Posted 16 Jun 2007 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
HAHAAA~!
Yes perfect. I keep hoping to make POTD.


How about this:

4 hrs... 24 models;
12 hrs... 72 models;

... making predictor of the day,
... priceless!

You see Rosetta needs 10,000-100,000 models crunched for most proteins and methods of study in order to have meaningful results. If you crunch 3 tasks in 12 hours, or 1, you are still going to have about 72 models (all other things being equal as to type of protein you are crunching etc.).

6) Message boards : Number crunching : Longer target CPU settings?? (Message 42160)
Posted 14 Jun 2007 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Hi Hugo,

Thanks very much for the info. I'm starting to wrap my head around the concept. It just seemed to me that longer run times should generate more decoys, more decoys, the better?. I dunno, I gotta do some reading ands catch up to you's guys in the know!, Cheers and happy crunching.


G'day paulcsteiner

here

There used to be a 4 day limit, but they changed it to 1 day as they were getting the 1% stuck bug, which was causing a lot of trouble.

As for the difference between the amount of hours per WU and science done, minuscule if anything at all, it would only help with bandwidth.

More WU's less time or more time less WU's it adds up to the same amount of models/decoys (science) done*.

Even if they implemented an algorithm that took your last models/decoys into account in the search space, it's such a big search space, one computer can't effectively do enough to make any meaningful difference (I'm guessing).

Edit: spelling, and a bit more spelling, and to try to make it readable.
Edit: *this isn't exactly accurate, as different WU's have different calculation times per model/decoy but it's the best I could do, without going into the different credits for different WU's etc... I hope it helps anyway.

7) Message boards : Number crunching : Longer target CPU settings?? (Message 42130)
Posted 13 Jun 2007 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Hi MattDavis,
Right, so the science in a theoretical 48 hour WU would be greater? or just more?(either way seems good)
I'm set at 24 for all my machines, including everything from some really "old school" hardware, to a fairly sweet dual-dual core Xeon. I noticed that the amount of decoys generated by my machines vary significantly from machine to machine in relation to the computing potential of each machine. For the high end machines, I wonder if a 24 hour WU is limiting?
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Longer target CPU settings?? (Message 42128)
Posted 13 Jun 2007 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
So I,m up very late (or early as the case may be) drinking coffee and eating chocolate, surfing the Forum and I start thinking what would happen if the setting for target CPU usage increased from a max of 24 hours to maybe 48 or longer?
Would this be of any use to Dr. Baker & Co.? Would the longer run time produce better results,or perhaps a higher resolution on the folding predictions? Would there be anybody that would want to have a work unit with a two day(or longer) work unit?
9) Message boards : Number crunching : 'Hiding' Rosetta/BOINC? (Message 38460)
Posted 27 Mar 2007 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Ah, my apologies for asking this in the wrong place. I didn't realize there was a better place for my question.


Edit: Wow, I just looked at my results for the first time. I didn't realize I was erroring on so many WUs. Any idea what's going on?


Hi Zifnab, Not necessarily the wrong place to post.
These types of errors are sometimes caused by repeated interruption of the client.
Although because you've got so many in a short time span with machine #448935 I'm thinking maybe a possible thermal issue? (the Rosetta cognoscenti will post here soon to clarify)Or is there some other process running thats pegged out the machine?
Also, for the same machine, if you look at the error message you will see the following text: :Too many restarts with no progress. Keep application in memory while preempted."
I believe the second bit can be solved by changing your "General preferences" for BOINC to YES for this option "Leave applications in memory while suspended?
(suspended applications will consume swap space if 'yes')"


10) Message boards : Number crunching : Comparing Claimed vs. Granted Credit. (Message 38249)
Posted 24 Mar 2007 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
"The Boinc benchmarks under Linux give results that are about 50% of the same hardware running the Boinc benchmarks for Windows."

Given this statement, does a Linux machine actually preform slower than the exact same machine running whatever flavor of Windows?
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with Rosetta version 5.43 (Message 35323)
Posted 22 Jan 2007 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Ditto, I've gotten 15 client errors just today all with this message:

<core_client_version>5.4.11</core_client_version>
<message>
Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 2035473
ERROR:: Exit at: .fragments.cc line:459

For this machine: 401324
12) Message boards : Number crunching : How much has your RAC Dropped Since 12/6/06 (Message 33738)
Posted 30 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
So much for my RAC. A power transformer right at the end of my block just went up in a very nice display of smoke an fire, now, Mr. Rock Steady P3, may it rest in peace, boots no more,...Oy, it's always something.
13) Message boards : Number crunching : My PC RAC > 3000 (Message 33666)
Posted 29 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Mmmmm Beer,...
14) Message boards : Number crunching : How much has your RAC Dropped Since 12/6/06 (Message 33665)
Posted 29 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Hey Thanks Feet1st. I've got to read that FAQ about 3 more times~! Per your suggestion, I've checked the settings for my machines. I belive I have them set for 24/7.
15) Message boards : Number crunching : My PC RAC > 3000 (Message 33635)
Posted 28 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
[/quote]


so happpy! I am in the Top 20 contributor using only 4 machines :)

As Hothardware.com said it, "the Core 2 Extreme QX6700 is easily the fastest processor on the planet in today's multithreaded applications and is well poised to retain that title with the multitude of multithreaded applications on the horizon. Although expensive, there is no other processor on the planet which can match this product's speed. If you have the cash, accept no substitutes."

Easily ... I guess the FSB is really not saturating ;-)

who?[/quote]

Amazing, congrats to who? They must be paying you well to afford that hotrod~!
Have you thought about having flames painted on the sides of the case, or maybe some racing stripes? Question for you though, is this monster fitted with heatsink and fan combo? or is there some liquid cooling going on? I'm one for standing around looking at what’s under the hood, so post a pic if could, I’ll provide the beer.
Rock on who?
PCS
16) Message boards : Number crunching : How much has your RAC Dropped Since 12/6/06 (Message 33632)
Posted 28 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Hey, 3rd post ever, apologies in advance for being about as green as they come.
I've noticed that starting on Dec 22, that my WU's went from taking on average 10K+ CPU time to 85K CPU time. I though it was my rig(s) but I looked around at a few others crunchers computers (I apologize if looking at other peoples computers is in bad form) and have seen the same thing. Wouldn’t a drop in RAC be the result of ones computer simply taking longer to process these massive WU?
Or am I talking out of the back of the ship?
Happy Holidays all,
PCS
17) Questions and Answers : Windows : Rosetta STOPS Running! (Message 33070)
Posted 21 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Something similar happening here too. The machine is a P4 3gig HT, 512M ram, WinXP Pro. If I reboot and re-launch BOINC Mngr it will list Rosetta as the project and will load up the tasks it was working on. But when I leave it for the night, at some point the client will just stop.
Screensaver is set to blank (not the BIONC saver, the Windows screensaver) and power off monitor after 2min. The machine is not ging into hibernaton and HD's are set to never power off.
When I go to check the machine, the BOINC client comes up blank. No messages, no tasks, nothing listed in projects, definitely no activity. If I exit the app and re-launch it, it will then show project and tasks that have some processing done, and some that are pending.
Any help is greatly appreciated as this was my best producer.
18) Questions and Answers : Windows : Computer Summary page question (Message 32836)
Posted 18 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Hi Paul,

although I am at best a novice and far from wise or great: Yes, it refers to one single core. So you have to multiply with the number of cores/cpus to get the overall performance of your machine.

Regards,

Christoph



Christoph, Thank you so much for answering my question~! I thought that might be the case, but just wasnt sure.

Thanks again,

PCS
19) Questions and Answers : Windows : Computer Summary page question (Message 32811)
Posted 17 Dec 2006 by Profile paulcsteiner
Post:
Hello, first post, here it goes,

Pardon the interruption folks,(I did search the forums, came up empty) but a quick question about the benchmark results displayed on the "Computer Summary" page.
For the "measures floating point speed" and "measured integer speed" do those numbers relate to a single core CPU? i.e.: I have one P4 HT machine. The Summary page shows two processors, but the results on FLOPS and Integer are less than the AMD Athlon Mobile 64/3000 machine I also have. So I'm thinking that the benchmark FLOP=1306.63 million ops/sec and Integer=1598.36 million ops/sec should be doubled to give me the combined benchmark for the P4HT proc as a whole.
O Great Forum Monks, what say ye..






©2021 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org