Index  | Recent Threads  | Unanswered Threads  | Who's Active  | Guidelines  | Search
 

Quick Go »
No member browsing this thread
Thread Status: Active
Total posts in this thread: 16
Posts: 16   Pages: 2   [ Previous Page | 1 2 ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread
Author
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 4602 times and has 15 replies Next Thread
rendition54
Master Cruncher
USA
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Post Count: 2609
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: We should decrease the points granted by ARP by ten percent...

As long as I eventually get credit for the arp WUs I completed, I have no complaints with the current process.
----------------------------------------

[Aug 13, 2021 7:18:15 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Acibant
Advanced Cruncher
USA
Joined: Apr 15, 2020
Post Count: 126
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: We should decrease the points granted by ARP by ten percent...

Keep in mind that my goal was to provide context. To make it clear, my personal thought is that the platform (BOINC) already has a system that the tech, knreed, is adjusting to keep work units from languishing too long. That is, the definition of a "reliable" machine which knreed already adjusted down from one that returns within 2.5 days to one that returns within 2 days.

So in the worst-case scenario where people are hogging a load of work units on their machines and not returning in a timely fashion, once those all time out they will get resent to reliable machines and be likely to get returned within that 36 hours proposed in the OP, especially if the definition was cut to 1.5 days. If that were to continue without further action that would mean you'd be adding a week for that initial timeout to occur for each generation which would be bad for getting ARP done sooner. However, knreed is also prioritizing older generations even for newly-generated work units if they're falling too far behind the head of the pack.

It is stated that they try to have 20% of work units sent out going to reliable machines. With aggressive tweaking of the aforementioned settings they could get that to, say, 80%. But then you would see a backlog appear again as slower machines would not qualify for any eligible work units. So I don't think they will have much interest in modifying points based on return time (if they even could) because they have tools already and have gone as aggressive as they desire at this point.
----------------------------------------

[Aug 13, 2021 7:52:58 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
yoerik
Senior Cruncher
Canada
Joined: Mar 24, 2020
Post Count: 413
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: We should decrease the points granted by ARP by ten percent...

should've clarified that the only part of my post directed at you specifically was just the thanks for the additional context - thanks for this additional context as well.
----------------------------------------

[Aug 13, 2021 9:40:17 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Martin Schnellinger
Advanced Cruncher
Joined: Apr 29, 2007
Post Count: 128
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: We should decrease the points granted by ARP by ten percent...

Hello Fellow Crunchers,
I got two points:
1. I very much doubt, whether the changes proposed would really speed up research, as the overal amount of operations needed to complete a workunit and a project does not change. There maybe less resends, but the number of calculations stays needed to complete a projects stays the same.
2. I fear, that owners of slow machines and cruchers just starting to contribute ("newbees") will be frustrated and bewildered, if they are "punished" for not contributing enough work power in a certain amount of time.

Personally, I would not request this features, but others, more powerful ones.....GPU...old topic....I know. Sorry about it, but I had to say it.

I will keep crunching 24/7, even if it is hot in my room.

Best whishes
Martin
[Aug 14, 2021 11:14:08 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: We should decrease the points granted by ARP by ten percent...

Lots of scary thought here above. Credit does nothing on these heavies, can assure you even if given 10 fold I'd not tolerate the systeem bog down at checkpoint save and uploading to allow more than 1 at the time computi... . I'd like to be able to use my computer without impairment. Via profile I allowed 2 in buffer and via app_config and Total buffer size controle 1 is proccssed, 1 is waiting and always the oldest and first to start when the previous finishes. Upload and download of ARP same time is killing so that wont start until the reports handshake is made with my setup. Just an upload take upwards of 20 minutes, which is the second reason to keep 1 in wait.

Anyway by this setup no single result goes back later than 48 hours.

Begs the questione with this project report of achieving a cycle completion in 4.4 days how I had 8 in PV jail on thursday. That's 8 consecutive days of result return given my computer crunches 1 on average in 24 hours. .If 48 hours tops return puts my machine in reliable than strictly from soonest credit. msybe i should increase the buffer to 4 or more as it anyway takes 8+ days to get credited. Then the wigman gets to wait on me instead if doing quckies.

Selfish me.
[Aug 14, 2021 4:41:40 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher
USA
Joined: Jul 4, 2006
Post Count: 7844
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: We should decrease the points granted by ARP by ten percent...

I complete about 1 per day on my 3770 running Win 7. I do not recall having to wait for any significant amount of time to get another one. For me the supply has been quite dependable. I am running 7 MCM with 1 ARP on a 8 thread machine. I don't see any impact on normal use of the machine. I only have two in pending validation.
Cheers
----------------------------------------
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers*
[Aug 14, 2021 6:01:27 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Posts: 16   Pages: 2   [ Previous Page | 1 2 ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread