| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: Credit where credit is due, please |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 17
|
|
| Author |
|
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
On Uplinger's points system,
This shows that Windows is being awarded .0067/.0040 = 167% of the credit that Linux is for completing the same work. This reflects the fact that Windows was running slower than Linux on the same workunits. Again you highlight why your credit policy is unacceptable. Same task, but Windows users get 67% more credit for being slower!On the 1:1 credit per work unit with no OS type in mind. That would not be fair to the different operating systems. Because of how the science application was compiled members should not be penalized for being told to run a curved route, when another OS was told to run a straight line to the finish line. No, I'm not buying that explanation.If the workunits are the same then the credit for completing the work units should be the same, irrespective of the time spent, compiler used or system crunched on. This is what is known as equality. There is no justification to maintain the present credit inequality. The badge system clearly awards in terms of time spent, so there is no need to re-apply this empty idea to the points system. Bias favouring the slower operating system is fundamentally counterproductive to the project. To award according to CPU time as opposed to performance is simply wrong. That justification is deficient, and to crunchers that optimize towards throughput, somewhat insulting. The present system clearly discriminates against Linux and Mac crunchers, many of whom primarily use their systems to crunch because they know it is faster. Yes, and this despite the dysfunctional implementations of a points system which negatively discriminates against Linux and Mac systems. Rectification has been called for many times to alleviate crunchers from this insanity. The mind boggles at the use of the inadequate compiler excuse. It's totally irrelevant to the objective - task throughput. Windows is slower so you get more points. Eh, no. That’s un-buyable. Clearly the implementation of the points system is broken. If anything the WCG should be positively encouraging the use of faster operating systems, and yet you continue to support it with hollow rhetoric. At least fix it so it's fair and square. After your long enjoyable holiday, of course, and in case you think I have lost perspective, thanks for all the positive contributions you have made over the years. |
||
|
|
knreed
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: Nov 8, 2004 Post Count: 4504 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
skgiven,
----------------------------------------This policy was put in place becuase it granted credit on a users computer roughly in line with the credit they would earn on our other projects for the same amount of cpu time that they contributed. For good or ill, this is what the policy was. The new release for Windows now brings its performance inline with the Linux build. Thus the credit granted will be similar per workunit between the two platforms AND it will be similar to our other applications. Having said all of that, our goal is and continues to be to move to the latest BOINC server code and see if the new points system will work better. We have cleared out a number of tasks that had to be completed before working on that. My next task (after the holidays) will be updating our server code. Completing this is a dependency for some of the other things we will be releasing next year, so it will finally get done. And yes - with the new points system - the hope is that it will let credit be a more accurate reflection of 'work done' and as you note, leaving cpu time as the metric of 'resource time donated'. thanks, Kevin [Edit 1 times, last edit by knreed at Dec 17, 2010 8:27:54 PM] |
||
|
|
Dataman
Ace Cruncher Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 4865 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Having said all of that, our goal is and continues to be to move to the latest BOINC server code and see if the new points system will work better. We have cleared out a number of tasks that had to be completed before working on that. My next task (after the holidays) will be updating our server code. Completing this is a dependency for some of the other things we will be releasing next year, so it will finally get done. And yes - with the new points system - the hope is that it will let credit be a more accurate reflection of 'work done' and as you note, leaving cpu time as the metric of 'resource time donated'. Thanks. This is great news. I understand the BOINC server code issue and happy that it will soon get upgraded. I am a bit confused about "new points system". Are you speaking of the new and long discussed credit calculation algorithims proposed at Berkeley or some new WCG points system? Of one thing I am sure. As long as there are credits, there will be "lively" discussions about them.  Happy Holidays.    |
||
|
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
OK, I’ll buy that excuse, it's Open and CLear. Thanks for the happy info. You have just told crunchers the world will be a better place next year. Hope your server expectations are readily achieved.
Thanks, |
||
|
|
anhhai
Veteran Cruncher Joined: Mar 22, 2005 Post Count: 839 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
can someone clarify this "new" credit policy? Does it mean that they will somehow even out the pts between linux and windows? Anyone got a link?
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Yes, hopefully, but it has not happened yet.
----------------------------------------Next year WCG will install a Boinc-Server upgrade and through it a new credit system will be implemented. A few other projects have already implemented this (Seti for one). It should bring balance to the crunch. [Edit 1 times, last edit by skgiven at Dec 17, 2010 11:26:43 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
It should bring balance to the crunch.    |
||
|
|
TimAndHedy
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 27, 2009 Post Count: 267 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I don't get it.
"This policy was put in place becuase it granted credit on a users computer roughly in line with the credit they would earn on our other projects for the same amount of cpu time that they contributed. For good or ill, this is what the policy was. " If the policy is to down grade linux. How will new code help. It's a political issue and the question is why? |
||
|
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
The recent code changes make the tasks run faster on Windows. The present system ignores speed and balances points across all platforms, based on CPU benchmarks. In effect this discriminated against faster operating systems, and less points were awarded to Linux and Mac users than Windows users. As the Windows code is now faster, the balance will change in favour of the Mac and Linux system, to some extent for that project. For example,
Was Win, 167min, 55pts Mac, 120min, 45pts Linux, 100min, 40pts Now Win, 120min, 48pts Mac, 120min, 48pts Linux, 100min, 44pts Not actual numbers The forthcoming server changes will hopefully introduce cross-project points for performance orientation. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
It's a good thing that the points are meaningless. If they had value and you could actually do something with them and crunchers were getting extra points, some crunchers might get angry and do something outrageous like complain, or call the CAs and techs bad names, or even stomp their feet, like real loudly.
 |
||
|
|
|