mattmag
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-04-09
NW Illinois
clubs:
 ·Mediacom
|  Making the move to F@H...
Well, it's a tough move, as I have been hanging around in the Top 20 on our team for quite awhile, but...
I think I am going to migrate at least 4 machines over to F@H, and keep 1 or 2 working on SETI. Although I believe strongly in both projects, and especially our team, being a Paramedic and EMT for 20+ years, I have a special interest in the F@H research.
Not only can AIDS devastate an individual who has contracted it, but the risk is passed on to healthcare providers such as myself who are just trying to help those who are sick or injured. That is a very costly price to pay for a volunteer EMT.
I hope everyone will understand that.
-Thanks-
-Matt
--
"May the Crunch be with you" |
|
FKrooG2
Working my way back
Premium
join:2000-09-28
Tha Zone
|  Man I completely understand...
The public in general don't know what it is like to be involved with things like AIDS. I had a family member die 3 years back from it... You do what is right for you.....
--
If my laptop crunches in the woods, will anyone hear it? |
|
Misu
Hey, I Saw That
Premium
join:2000-11-28
Orlando, FL
| reply to mattmag
Listen, you do what you can live with. Don't feel bad for leaving - you're not leaving, just shifting your attentions, that's all. Ultimately, it's all for the same goal: to better mankind in some way.
I'm hooking up my linux machine to F@H as soon as we fix it up (motherboard died on us this weekend - merry xmas, hehe)
-Misu
--
I bent my wookie  |
|
Zhen-Xjell
Prolific Bunny
Premium,VIP,ExMod 2001-04
join:2000-10-08
Bordentown, NJ
clubs:
| reply to mattmag
I'd like to make a point clear on F@H. When I ran the console version alone (w/o seti), it took about 4 hours to complete a single WU. I added SETI CLI back in, and now a WU takes about 5 hours to complete. If you wish to continue with SETI you can, as not much hinderance is made upon F@H.
Also, running F@H on linux is not a very good idea at this point. You are better left to running SETI if you wish to complete WUs in a reasonable amount of time. The linux F@H console can take 24 + hours to complete a WU. The reason for this is that the linux version is "older" technology vs. the windows console version.
If time doesn't matter to you, then go for it. I myself took off F@H on linux and put back on SETI because of the technology. Stanford has been promising an upgrade to the linux version for some time now. Once they release the new version, I'll move to it.
Hence, if you are interested in times, use SETI on linux. If you are interested in finding the cure, then goto F@H.
And you can run both SETI & F@H on the same windows box if you so choose, it doesn't affect F@H much (at least with the 3.0 cli).
--
Thanks,
Paul Laudanski |
|
mattmag
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-04-09
NW Illinois
clubs:
·Mediacom
| First, thanks all for the show of support, it means a great deal to me!!
Paul, thanks for the additional comments. I had initially set up both clients on my home machine, but I was surprised to see the enormous difference in memory usage between the two. It looks like F@H uses about 1/2-1/3 the fixed memory that SETI does, and that may help with a significant problem I had on the main office computer at my shop, where it caused hesitations in Outlook 2k.
So, for right now I will probably stick with dedicated machines for each project and see how it goes. The console version of F@H is completing a unit in about 1Hr 50mn, so I guess that is OK. Not sure what the norm is there, but it seems decent enough to make good use of the machine and get some results for the project.
With any luck, perhaps both projects will meet their respective goals in the near future, and we'll be out looking for more CPU work!! 
-Matt
--
"May the Crunch be with you" |
|
Pariah5
join:2000-08-03
clubs:
| Matt
I think what you and others are doing is great, I just learned about F@H in the last week by reading some of Paul's postings on the subject. At the risk of upsetting others I would think it's a bit more worthy a cause than SETI and I plan on migrating two of my computers to F@H.
Paul
I got the following link from another thread
http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/Cosm/
are there other links I might need to know about? Also you mentioned earlier that the Linux client is not as recent as the Windows client and may be rather slow. I'll keep SETI on my Linux machine if that's the case. Would you happen to have any information regarding F@H on a Mac? I have yet to look into the Stanford link so I'm not sure what to expect. Thanks in advance for any information you can provide and I think the idea of a separate F@H forum might not be such a bad idea. |
|
Zhen-Xjell
Prolific Bunny
Premium,VIP,ExMod 2001-04
join:2000-10-08
Bordentown, NJ
clubs:
| Vinnyb,
The link you have is a good one. In reference to the mac, there exists no port yet (check http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/Cosm/faq.html#misc.version ). There are other links that I have at home right now I cannot get to, however, those links are to other F@H team sites (Ars Technica's Team Eggroll). They have inhouse developers working on some F@H apps.
As for running SETI on linux, that is what I am doing. I'm thinking of keeping SETI on my *nix boxes and running F@H on my Windows machines. I enjoy being part of both teams.
Unless someone else provides extra links until tonight, I'll IM them to you tonight.
--
Thanks,
Paul Laudanski
[text was edited by author 2000-12-26 08:31:50] |
|
