Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
![]() |
World Community Grid Forums
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
No member browsing this thread |
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 150
|
![]() |
Author |
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
What Limits? The boss at the distributor assigns a project weight based on controlled supply! So on a mix of HFCC & DDDT, both low weight, I get about 50/50. HCC is a normal weight and that mixed with HFCC is what you see.... ratio of 1 to 4. Now mix HFCC with CEP, lowest weight(supply) and you get 1 in 20.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
TimAndHedy
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 27, 2009 Post Count: 267 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
So there is no delay in the crunching, just the supply. Good!
It looked like that from your chart but thought I would ask. |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
In a nutshell, the tightest bottleneck in a chain determines how much is put into the feeders. e.g. NRW could not handle the large volume due it's own success, so the supply was gaged down. Similar with DDDT and with CEP it is a combination of an entirely new science with learning curve, plus the problems of producing good tasks that generate useful results and it's obvious they're getting there at Harvard.
----------------------------------------At WCG it's that juggling act with soon 8 balls in the air, with members' personal preferences, production hickups and what not... fortunately the growth of the volunteered CPU time is keeping up very well, so it's thought that the 8th ball being inserted in a 2-3 weeks can be handled. WCG on their part is willing to host and support quadruple the size of our current mean contributions, so we can let it rip all we want and have it grow to 1,000 CPU years a day to the point where 6 year grid projects become 1 year projects, or allow even deeper investigations with even greater resolution to our all future benefit.
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
The first 5 weeks running and 2 mini milestones reached, over 1,000 CPU years and in time terms, 5% of the total project, somewhat settled on 37 TeraFlops of volunteered computing power.
----------------------------------------![]() ![]() (progress is always subject to change due alteration of work volume and assigned weight in distribution by WCG)
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
uccizana
Cruncher Joined: Jul 6, 2008 Post Count: 8 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
now there is no picture!
What happened? |
||
|
petehardy
Senior Cruncher USA Joined: May 4, 2007 Post Count: 318 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Hi Sekerob,
----------------------------------------This is from the HFCC page:- This work consists of 9 million virtual chemistry experiments, each of which would take hours to perform on a single computer, totaling over 8,000 years of computer time. World Community Grid is performing these computations in parallel and is thus speeding up the effort dramatically. The project is expected to be completed in two years or less. BUT your amazing graph is only showing 6.19% progress(April 28 2009). I figure 1218/8000% = 15.22 Did I miss something? Could you please explain? Thanks Pete ![]() "Patience is a virtue", I can't wait to learn it! |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Really... well my voodoo box combined with magical sand sprinkler says what you see. If you follow the link printed in the graph, it says 1.5% as off April 14 (and the work having much promise). There's more discussion on this in other threads and what 8000 CPU years are from what reference device I'm completely in the dark about (is this a zero redundancy or quorum 2 number ;>), so I'll stick to my MS Office generated number until having some firmer data some months into this 2 year project.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
petehardy
Senior Cruncher USA Joined: May 4, 2007 Post Count: 318 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Hi Sekerob,
----------------------------------------Thanks for replying. Pete ![]() "Patience is a virtue", I can't wait to learn it! |
||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
why is the progress so low? if the estimated total CPU time is 8,000 years, with over 1,250 years already completed shouldn't we be closer to 16%?
|
||
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
In Sekerob's last post he addressed this with the following
8000 CPU years are from what reference device I'm completely in the dark about (is this a zero redundancy or quorum 2 number Meaning they may have used a very powerful computer and assumed there would only be 1 run for each task (WCG is doing 2 to make sure the results are valid) as their baseline for calculating 8000 years. |
||
|
|
![]() |