1)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Rosetta adds 100,000th host!
(Message 12961)
Posted 2 Apr 2006 by arcturus Post: # of hosts isn't very important ... the avg # of *active* hosts is. That's prob the reason why Rosetta has twice the production of Predictor even though Predictor shows more hosts. These projects have high mortality. |
2)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Report stuck & aborted WU here please
(Message 10419)
Posted 3 Feb 2006 by arcturus Post: http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=9256801 |
3)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
2 million a day
(Message 9548)
Posted 21 Jan 2006 by arcturus Post: Well we passed the 2.000.000 credits now :) Generous point awards + no validation = no surprise. Very alluring to the point counters who'll turn on a dime and whine if things change or things go awry. We saw a taste of that not long ago. |
4)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Please abort WUs with
(Message 8494)
Posted 6 Jan 2006 by arcturus Post: created 3 Jan 2006 12:04:58 UTC name NO_RAND_WTS_1dtj_230_3427 http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/workunit.php?wuid=4621838 something new perhaps? |
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
No New Work
(Message 7955)
Posted 30 Dec 2005 by arcturus Post: |
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Credit posting screwiness
(Message 6385)
Posted 16 Dec 2005 by arcturus Post: But WHY am I forced to do an 'update_pref' command? |
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Credit posting screwiness
(Message 6382)
Posted 16 Dec 2005 by arcturus Post: This concerns the linux client. Anyone care to tell me what's the difference between the following messages? - 'finished upload' - 'returning X # of results' for it isn't until I see that second message, forced by an 'update_pref' command, that I'm finally awarded points. This is true across 3 different projects incl Rosetta. Obviously I'm trying to avoid this extra command step. Any ideas? |
8)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Linux vs Windows point awards
(Message 2267)
Posted 4 Nov 2005 by arcturus Post: Underclock your pc and benchmark it to increase credit claimed, then crank it up. Actually it's been 24 hours so far since the last benchmark. |
9)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Linux vs Windows point awards
(Message 2224)
Posted 4 Nov 2005 by arcturus Post: Well... if by optimize you mean "complete a WU faster"... then that will not work. If the linux client runs faster it will claim even less credit then it is claiming now. The amount of credit claimed is based on how long the WU took. Underclock your pc and benchmark it to increase credit claimed, then crank it up. The increased number of wu's thanks to optimized Rosetta code produces greater overall point production ... unless there's a proportionate decrease in the benchmark score. |
10)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Linux vs Windows point awards
(Message 2169)
Posted 3 Nov 2005 by arcturus Post: If you have the Rosetta client source code, what would you do with it? Doh ... optimize it maybe? |
11)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Linux vs Windows point awards
(Message 2078)
Posted 2 Nov 2005 by arcturus Post: Get the source here: http://boinc.berkeley.edu/source_code.php How's this going to help without Rosetta client source code? |
12)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Linux vs Windows point awards
(Message 1924)
Posted 29 Oct 2005 by arcturus Post: Same computer, similar work unit. Boinc linux client v5.2.5. 2,240.67 seconds 7.89 points - Windows 2,232.89 seconds 4.28 points - Linux In case anybody cares. |
13)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Can't Upload, Downloads OK
(Message 1503)
Posted 19 Oct 2005 by arcturus Post: Noticed the same thing for the first time on my Windows box as well. Manual update got them uploaded. |
14)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Reissued work
(Message 1438)
Posted 17 Oct 2005 by arcturus Post: Who said anything's strange? Just a plain simple observation. |
15)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Reissued work
(Message 1435)
Posted 17 Oct 2005 by arcturus Post: Last 10 completed work units (successfully done) were previously sent out and all showed client errors. Looks like the project is recycling. |
©2024 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org