dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1694
share rss forum feed


WireHead
I drive to fast
Premium
join:2001-05-09
Muncie, IN

1 recommendation

BOINC I want for christmas

How about a wish list for BOINC..

Maybe not the greatest thread but I think this post is directly related to my boredom:o today.

1. STAND ALONE GUI (so I can run this baby as a service)
2. No more than 1 update a week
3. Core/CLI REV in the HELP dialog
4. Link to site in HELP dialog
5. BBR to be #1 !!!;)

--
Retired BBR Team Starfire Team Q III Host
*Join the SETI project*
Put your unused clock cycles to work!
Live dangerously, run BOINC exclusively!



P Ness
You'Ve Forgotten 9-11 Already
Premium
join:2001-08-29
way way out
Reviews:
·Comcast

would like an auto-updater so i dont have to run around with an extension cord to my monitor to update the remote machines....grrr
--
www.stopfcc.comI do not think the government needs to restrict free speech especially on a device that has an off knob.



72245156
TSWB.org
Premium,ExMod 2000-04
join:2000-07-11
Winnipeg, MB
reply to WireHead

Works for me.


Rattledagger
Premium
join:2002-07-03
Norway
reply to WireHead

1; The stand-alone-gui is being worked on, but not sure how much is left to do with this. But except as screensaver, tools like Boincview can be used to monitor and atleast partially control many computers.
2; Only then some bad bug is detected that screws up for many crunchers is a new client released so fast. V4.12 was fix for many uploads ending in permanent error, effectually wasting many hours crunch-time, while v4.13 was really an easy bug to work around but still no reason to not release it immediately.
3; Help/about says "Boinc Version 4.13" and "Public Release"... is there something missing here?
4; If you means to BOINC-site, not a bad idea, but AFAIK the separate gui have some more directly links to both BOINC & different projects attacked to than current gui so no reason to waste time changing the current gui...
5; Well, for the moment this really is just to get all users still crunching "classic" to start running the BOINC-version instead.



heaphus
Geaux Tigers
Premium
join:2003-04-12
Franklinton, LA
reply to WireHead

said by WireHead:
1. STAND ALONE GUI (so I can run this baby as a service)
Coming soon. In the meantime, why not run as a service and use Boincview to control all of your crunchers graphically. Works beautifully.

said by WireHead:
5. BBR to be #1 !!!
Boy, that's going to be tough if we don't get more Team Starfire members to crankup Boinc, sooner rather than later.
--
Proud member of the Cajun Crunch Team


Logan 5
Enjoying the Cataclysm
Premium,MVM
join:2001-05-25
Austin, TX
kudos:7
reply to WireHead

I'd like to see an upgrade that allows the movement of WU's between machines on a LAN.

I have 2 fast and one slow machines and even at 10 day's worth of work cached in the preferences, the faster boxes always go idle before the slower one.

(btw, I'm talking in 'generic' terms across all the BOINC projects, not just seti)



Crystallize
Premium
join:2003-04-09
brkn' inside
reply to WireHead

Boy I don't even know where to begin in this Boinc wish list but here is some.

1. Credit for all processed WUs !!!!!!!

2. A stand alone CLI version and a equivalent SETISpy/ SETIWatch(csv-file) over viewing system.

3. That they actually starting to get ready with BOINC and releasing it live ones and for all, like SETI classic, where no updates is necessary at all.

4. Yes remote transmit possibility is wanted.

5. Why don't they take the futures from SETI classic and introduce them in BOINC, it's not like they don't know what is needed or wanted.

We have been running this for over 5 years now already, I don't' really get what could be so difficult.

--


Rattledagger
Premium
join:2002-07-03
Norway

1 edit

1; Will never happen, since it's always someone that has overclocked too much or is trying to cheat, and of course doesn't deserve any credit for this garbage. So anyone not passing the validation not getting credit isn't a problem.
BOINC also uses limits on how many errors a wu can have before giving up, and this can lead to an ocassional wu not giving credit. Due to all the server-problems & client-bugs this error-rate have been large, therefore so many wu is not giving any credit. This is unfortunate, but doubtful anything will be done. Then everything is working as it should the error-rate should be much lower, so most likely will not be a noticeable problem.
2; A cli installable as service on NT is already included. Boincview & other similar tools AFAIK already does the monitoring.
3; Well, one of the points of BOINC is to auto-upgrade the science-application as needed, so will never stop upgrading. But the core client will not be upgraded so often then all the bugs is out of the client, the separate gui is added, and some other features added...
4; very difficult to implement due to homogenous redundancy...
5; ??? not sure that you mean here...



Crystallize
Premium
join:2003-04-09
brkn' inside

4 edits

My comment for you in general is that I'm happy that you don't mind crunching loads of WU in wain for nothing as this doesn't concern only me.

And you say that

said by Rattledagger:
1; So anyone not passing the validation not getting credit isn't a problem
Well, I had managed to process 6 WUs and only 3 of them even got up for validation and I don't care what you think.
I mean, I know I haven't been trying to cheat or OC (which by the way I never do, because I think it saves CPU lifetime by leaving it by specs.)

Those who are satisfied with only getting credit for about 50% of their completed WUs must have a screw loose somewhere (IMO) ...

I have checked out Boincview and some other add-ware also but have found them mostly totally insufficient and in many cases non functional in total.

And the rest ... if you don't get what I mean, well, perhaps it's better that way

--

Rattledagger
Premium
join:2002-07-03
Norway

Hmm, looks like my meaning wasn't explained good enough on the credit & validation-issue...

A; "Will never happen, since it's always someone that has overclocked too much or is trying to cheat, and of course doesn't deserve any credit for this garbage. So anyone not passing the validation not getting credit isn't a problem."

This part ends here, and my meaning was results that was tested but wasn't "correct" so failed validation very likely is cheater or hardware-problem, so these not getting credit for this unusable result shouldn't be a problem.
It's also a small chance users crunching correctly will fail validation, but my guess is this error-rate is below 0.1% so therefore isn't a noticeable problem either.

B; "Due to all the server-problems & client-bugs this error-rate have been large, therefore so many wu is not giving any credit. This is unfortunate, but doubtful anything will be done." This should not be interpreted as "satisfied with only getting credit for about 50%"
C; "Then everything is working as it should the error-rate should be much lower, so most likely will not be a noticeable problem." My guess is this error-rate then everything is working is below 0.1%
--
"I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might."



Logan 5
Enjoying the Cataclysm
Premium,MVM
join:2001-05-25
Austin, TX
kudos:7
reply to WireHead

Rattledagger:

Any chance of what I asked for a few posts above ever happening?


Rattledagger
Premium
join:2002-07-03
Norway

Well, since some projects is using "homogenous redundancy", same os/cpu, it's very difficult to implement anything that moves wu after assigned to one computer...

Still, having the ability to send partially crunched wu to another machine is maybe something that will be implemented then more pressing things like server-problems, bugs & separate gui is implemented...

So maybe you can write on the wish-list for Christmas 2005 or something...



WireHead
I drive to fast
Premium
join:2001-05-09
Muncie, IN
reply to WireHead

I understand there are bugs of all sorts and I accept that since it's still technically under development. I also understand and accept that systems OC'd or cheaters will corrupt WU's.

It does seem like that if all the crunchers but 1 who receive a WU return it valid that it might give credit to the valid crunchers and/or resend the WU out to be recrunched. If perhaps that WU contains the signal it seems a shame to trash it because one cruncher was OC'd or worse. I doubt it's that finite but I think you get my point.

Also in "C" there you are saying you have no way to differentiate between a OC'd, cheated or genuine errata (being the WU was solid, the crunch was solid but it kicked out bad anyway.)

Well if you have no way to know the difference and no way to deal with the errata how is it a scientific process?

B. just guessing there will be a WU, guessing it'll crunch and guessing it'll be returned?

I'm not ranting, just asking:D

--
Retired BBR Team Starfire Team Q III Host
*Join the SETI project*
Put your unused clock cycles to work!
Live dangerously, run BOINC exclusively!


Rattledagger
Premium
join:2002-07-03
Norway

1 recommendation

Hmm, then the servers works as they should, the normal progress of wu in seti@home for BOINC is something like this:
1; A wu is sent out to 3 different users.
2; If 1 or more result is reported as download/client-error, or isn't returned before the deadline, an extra copy per error/not returned is given out to yet another user.
3; Then atleast 3 "success"-results is returned, all "success"-results is tried validated.
4; If not atleast 3 of these results is "similar enough", more copies of the wu is distributed.
5; Then atleast 3 results is "similar enough", they passes validation, and one of them is chosen as "canonical result", and all that have passed validation gets the same credit. At the same time the "canonical result" is copied to the seti@home science-database.
Any result that didn't pass this validation is marked invalid, and no credit given.
6; If there's still more copies of a wu currently not returned, and still haven't reached their deadline, BOINC must wait for these results.
Then returned as "success"-result before the deadline, this is only compared to the "canonical result", and credited if similar enough.
7; Then either all results is returned, or all outstanding has passed their deadline, the file_deleter removes all result-files & wu from the BOINC upload/download-directories.
Any after-their-deadline-results that is returned after file_deletion can therefore not be validated, and therefore no credit.

BTW, #6 will only happen in seti@home if a user returned after his deadline, but before the newly distributed copy is returned.

Because of #5 ensuring atleast 3 "similar results", this means also users tested by #6 is indirectly verified against atleast 3 other results. This ensures high probability everyone crunching "correctly" will pass the validation, since being paired off with either 3 cheaters getting the same result or 3 hardware/software-errors managing to get the same wrong result is very unlikely. Therefore point A as mentioned in previous message shouldn't be a problem for normal crunchers.

So for point B & C:
To make sure a wu doesn't have a permanent error so is re-distributed infinitely many times, BOINC is using limits on how many errors is allowed before giving up. There's also limits on #4, and on the total number of results for a wu. Then any of these limits is reached, the wu is terminated and never validated.
Point C is "Then everything is working as it should", and it's unlikely you will successfully crunch a wu that everyone else is having problems with.

Point B is then nothing is working as it should, and another name for this is "the Snap 'snapped' again"...
Well, there's also been some software-bugs crawling around, but AFAIK the server-bugs is fixed and most client-bugs is things like screensaver doesn't work on NT4 so...

BTW, "just guessing there will be a WU, guessing it'll crunch and guessing it'll be returned?" Well, this really isn't any different from any other project like seti@home "classic" have run before so... Especially the months before they got the Cogent-link it was impossible to get wu & return wu. As for the crunching, stumbles over the ocassional "turbo-wu", but AFAIK haven't had any crunching-errors since beta.
--
"I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might."



WireHead
I drive to fast
Premium
join:2001-05-09
Muncie, IN
reply to WireHead

That's pretty clear and easy to understand.

Should also be in the FAQ too.



72245156
TSWB.org
Premium,ExMod 2000-04
join:2000-07-11
Winnipeg, MB

said by WireHead:
Should also be in the FAQ too.

Maybe we should add someone extra to FAQ writing?
--
Join BroadbandReports.com's SETI@Home Team
Don't let your computer's idle time go to waste!


Logan 5
Enjoying the Cataclysm
Premium,MVM
join:2001-05-25
Austin, TX
kudos:7
reply to WireHead

I nominate Naphtha err.... WireHead See Profile to write/update/maintain the team BOINC FAQ....

Who seconds this?

always remember to be careful what you ask for....lolLOLlol



Liontaur
Lets Get Boincing Already
Premium,MVM,ExMod 2004-06
join:2001-11-03
Salmon Arm, BC
reply to 72245156

Sounds good to me



WireHead
I drive to fast
Premium
join:2001-05-09
Muncie, IN
reply to WireHead

done and done..

Now what do I do with it.. lol



WireHead
I drive to fast
Premium
join:2001-05-09
Muncie, IN
reply to WireHead

How about an error counter for the WU's here?

Or maybe see it at your individual pending credit page?

If people knew it would change their counter perhaps they would be discouraged from cheating.
--
Retired BBR Team Starfire Team Q III Host
*Join the SETI project*
Put your unused clock cycles to work!
Live dangerously, run BOINC exclusively!