Posts by [BOINCstats] Willy

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Stats (Message 8406)
Posted 5 Jan 2006 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
Each project sets its own intervals based on hardware capacity and true need. CPDN, just went from 2x a day to one because of the load on the database.

The stat sites themselves also are going to soon probably hit a limit also ...


Limit reached on the host stats. The wreck my servers hard drive.....

At the moment calculating host stats takes almost two hours, and increases with about 5 minutes per day.

I already disabled the incremental update for hosts.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : BIG credit problem! User has a zillion credits! (Message 7610)
Posted 25 Dec 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
A better long term thing would be to install some sanity checking to give zero credit for any credit that is misformatted or exceeds some (generous) max plausible figure. That way future problems of a similar nature will not make you have to hack your code on Christmas day!


But what is a plausible figure? This would be different for every user. Of course, this one went a bit over the top. Just a bit.

PS- as a BOINCstats user, thanks for the service in general and for providing Christmas maintenance


They call me 'no-life-Willy'. Well, sometimes they do. Mostly at work.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : BIG credit problem! User has a zillion credits! (Message 7604)
Posted 25 Dec 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
I have changed some update code, and this specific user gets 0 (zero) credits when imported into the BOINCstats DB until his credit is fixed.
4) Message boards : Number crunching : BIG credit problem! User has a zillion credits! (Message 7600)
Posted 25 Dec 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
Take a look at the top participants (http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/top_users.php) and check out number 1. This can't be right. It seems that granting credit is really screwed.

Can this be fixed a.s.a.p. (I suggest deleting the user) because this is messing up both Rosetta and BOINC combined stats.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : code release and redundancy (Message 4595)
Posted 28 Nov 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
when we get to 1,000,000 credits per day, we go to two fold redundancy and give out the code. (Anybody want to place a bet on when we break the 1,000,000 a day mark?)


I don't know who accepted the bet, but if he/she guessed today, he/she is a winner!
6) Message boards : Number crunching : How many new users from FaD and SETI Classic closing? (Message 4532)
Posted 28 Nov 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
Any volunteers for putting together the help guide? If anybody can put together something that people agree is useful, we can post it on the home page. as far as the message boards, we are a bit limited by what BOINC provides; if there are features that the other boinc projects have that we should include here, let us know. thanks, David


You could have a little talk with Rytis from Primegrid. He included emoticons in the BOINC forum.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : How many new users from FaD and SETI Classic closing? (Message 4427)
Posted 27 Nov 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
I think Rosetta is already profiting from the SETI-classic shutdown. Number of users per day is spiking on SETI/BOINC, and the same is showing in the graph for Rosetta, though the actual numbers are lower:

8) Message boards : Number crunching : Saw something funny on boincstats today (Message 1892)
Posted 28 Oct 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
Looking at the time of your post this was probably during the daily update.

I may need to have a look at this :)
9) Message boards : Number crunching : A question to the BOINC community... (Message 897)
Posted 2 Oct 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
- Some parts of the computer may have a shorter lifespan


I use the theory that if you keep computer components roughly the same temperature they will last longer. Some of my systems have been up for five years at 100% with no hardware failures. I only bring them down twice a year for a complete cleaning.



It's not my view, it's the view of the management.
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Times for Celeron CPU's (Message 871)
Posted 1 Oct 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
You can build a faster machine for less money if you'd go with a Sempron socket 754 CPU. The latest version has all the bell en whistles of the AMD64, but with a smaller cache.

The socket754/939 CPU's are very cool CPU's, especialy when compared to P4/Celeron's based on the Prescott core.
11) Message boards : Number crunching : A question to the BOINC community... (Message 862)
Posted 1 Oct 2005 by [BOINCstats] Willy
Post:
I'm a system administrator for a small company, with about 250 systems running windows. I took over the job this year, after running the Technical Department for the same company.

I tried to convince the former system administrator to install SETI and later BOINC, but he wouldn’t. He claimed it was setting the door open for viruses.

When working at the Technical Department, I was responsible for implementing the Windows Preinstallation server and applications. I made a tool that ran SETI on every newly installed system, without actually installing the application (customers wouldn’t like that). This resulted in huge amounts of WU’s crunched. Unfortunately, when the switch came to BOINC, the system administrator wouldn’t open up the URL’s for BOINC or the projects, so I was forced to resign it. A new problem was found: SETI consumed too much bandwidth which the company doesn’t want to pay for.

At the moment, as being the system administrator, I made it possible to run several BOINC projects on the newly installed machines, but not on the machines running in the company itself. I also limited the number of active clients to 8.

Companies may have the following problems with BOINC:
- They do not trust the security of BOINC or the related projects
- Too much bandwidth is used
- Systems running 24/7 cost too much energy, and even a system running only during production hours costs more with BOINC running
- Some parts of the computer may have a shorter lifespan






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