Posts by Atomic Booty
|
1)
Message boards : Number crunching : zero credits for valid result?? ( Message 1808 )Posted 3887 days ago by 
Atomic Booty
Thanks Memo! :) |
|
2)
Message boards : Number crunching : zero credits for valid result?? ( Message 1771 )Posted 3891 days ago by
Atomic Booty
After over a week of waiting for pending results, it seems that the P3 solution for Windows is not did not do the trick. This workunit here was sent to my P3 (host 1070) and matched with 2 AMD hosts, just as planned, but my successful result was yet again deemed invalid. I have 5 or 6 results still pending, and I will let you know if any of those validate, however, I'm not very optimistic. I have looked at a few P3s running Linux and they appear to be doing fine, so at least there's some good news! Atomic |
|
3)
Message boards : Wish list : Screensaver ( Message 1765 )Posted 3892 days ago by
Atomic Booty
Yes suguruhirahara, I have done some progress in the screen saver. So far, I have been looking at the source code to understand how it works so that we can implement a screen saver with our own drawing and logo. Hopefully, a simple screen saver with a shape moving around will be ready by January. Karina, Let me know if there's anything I can do to help you out with this, whether its for the simple upcoming one in January, or a more complex later version. My graphics programs are at your disposal ;) Atomic |
|
4)
Message boards : Unix/Linux : Helping Users with Linux WU problems. ( Message 1696 )Posted 3902 days ago by
Atomic Booty
Andre, I am thrilled to hear that you are planning a newsletter style update! Personally, I love receiving info about projects in my mailbox! And as I mentioned in another related thread, I think there should be an automatic notification sent out to new users when they first sign up, so that people are informed of the issues (and expectations) from the start. Otherwise, as more people join the same problems will begin to compound themselves, and we will end up with the same troubles all over again. Atomic |
|
5)
Message boards : Number crunching : zero credits for valid result?? ( Message 1695 )Posted 3902 days ago by
Atomic Booty
I have just reattatched one of my P3's ( host 1070 )to the project, and from what I'm seeing already, I am pretty convinced that this issue has not been fixed. Of the 9 WUs that I received, several of them have not been matched up with other hosts yet, and I will keep a watchful (and hopeful) eye on them to see what type of systems those resuts get sent to; however, of the 3 that have so far filled the initial quorum replication, my P3 host has been matched with other non P3 Intel hosts as seen here , here , and here . That last one was an older WU, created a week before the HR changes were announced, but all the rest were created Dec, 2nd and 3rd. I have already aborted those 3 so that new results could be sent out. And now that I check again, I am seeing that even in a WU where my P3 was the first host to recieve work in a quorum, the other replications are still being sent to non P2/P3/AMD systems, as evidenced here . For now I am letting one just run through, but it seems to me that it will in all liklihood be in vain. Please advise whether you think I should just abort them all until this situation is fully resolved. Thanks, Atomic |
|
6)
Message boards : Cafe Docking : So many pending results of linux! ( Message 1651 )Posted 3906 days ago by
Atomic Booty
In the future, it also might not be a bad idea to automatically send this info to new users when they first sign up. PS - When I finally get around to installing Linux on my system, I'll take that SuSE comment under advisement ;) From looking at these workunits it seems that many of our new users that got accounts by accident haven't put in the ulimit fix and that causes them to fail with code 1 anytime they are crunching a docking. I will put out a news item asking everybody to put this on their machines if they can. That's all we can do for now I'm afraid. |
|
7)
Message boards : Unix/Linux : Helping Users with Linux WU problems. ( Message 1644 )Posted 3906 days ago by
Atomic Booty
I thought Conan's idea about contacting this group of testers was a good one when I first read it; and in the weeks since, I've only come to agree more. It is clear that there are a good many Linux users who are unaware of the ulimit fix, but are still crunching these WUs. The fact that they're still attatched and crunching them shows that they are interested in this project. More than likely, they believe that they are helping the project by faithfully continuing to send in their errored results; when in fact they are actually causing a backlog of pending results, (possibly) contributing to the HR issue, and ABSOLUTELY wasting their CPU cycles needlessly. I am willing to bet that they would rather be getting credit for their time. I don't run Linux myself (yet!), which is why I didn't comment on this thread earlier, but I do read all the threads here, even if the subject doesn't directly apply to me. It's still an issue for the project as a whole; and until all the problems are solved project-wide (OS-specific bugs, the P3 problem, the HR redundancy quandary, etc.) we cannot achieve our main goal of moving out of Alpha. That said, it appears to me that the ulimit fix is relatively simple to implement on most platforms, and there has been a wide enough variety of some of the more stubborn or exotic breeds tested by now that there are workarounds posted for many of them already. Moreover, the support here has been fantastic - the devs and other Linux masterminds lurking in the forum have been quick to help fellow users troubleshoot their systems and patiently walk them through the steps to get them going - and they have been happy to do it. I recommend doing one of two things: 1. Do as Conan suggested and notify all the Linux users here of the current status of the situation. Show them the basic ulimit fix, include links to the FAQ (and perhaps even to some of the applicable threads on the subject), let them know your best guess on when you might have a permanent fix (if you can), and tell them you'll send notification again when it's ready. This information will offer them a choice: Either they will try the workaround and begin producing valid results on their machines, or they will decide it's not worth the trouble and detach from the project. Personally, I believe that there will be many more that opt for the former, especially those who are still consistently sending in (0x1) errors. After all, why crunch for no reason? For those that can't or won't do the fix, at least they will know what is going on, and can reallocate their resources elsewhere. Regardless of what they decide, the project will benefit from a leaner, more efficient test group. And, as a strong believer in communication, I think that by being open and direct about this, you will build a foundation of trust and increase your chances of regaining any users that may leave. 2. This brings me to my second (and preferred) recommendation, which would be to do all of the above, and go a step farther by sending a more comprehensive assessment of the project. This would be sent to ALL Docking users, and include not only the Linux fix, but info on the P3's, the HR , and a brief rundown on any other progress the team is making (or has already made!). This not only would bring everyone up to speed on everything, but you would also save yourselves the trouble of sifting through the userlist to find the individual Linux users you want to email about the ulimit fix. Being an Alpha project, it is generally assumed that volunteers are going to be more involved than in a full release; however, in reality we know this is not always the case. Did some people rush to sign up for this project to get another notch in their "BOINC Belt"? Sure, that's always going to happen, but I don't think that is what's really lying at the heart of this matter. Very often, people just don't have the time, or feel the inclination to cruise the forums of all their projects, even though they mean well. Does D@H have an obligation to spell it all out neatly for everyone who isn't paying attention? No, but choosing to do so will help both the project, and its volunteers - active and inactive. Just my $.02 Atomic |
|
8)
Message boards : Number crunching : No windows work? ( Message 1596 )Posted 3912 days ago by
Atomic Booty
I can certainly understand the need for some breathing room between downloads and deadlines, especially considering some of our beloved BOINC bugs. Also, as Suguru pointed out, many users do not have their systems on all the time, or only have an intermittent internet connection. I don't think that the deadlines should be TOO long though, as that can lead to other issues, like the "forever and a day" waiting period for validation that so many of our Mac (and some Linux) testers are familiar with. Not only can this be annoying, it can delay the observation, notification, and response to problems that may crop up. Personally, I think 10 days is a little too generous for a 6 hr WU, I feel that 7 days would be more than sufficient to account for the circumstances listed above. I know that a lot of users (particularly avid ones like me who are drawn to new projects!) tend to run multiple projects on the same host, and that is one of the beautiful things about BOINC - but it is a personal choice, and I don't believe that is a good enough reason on its own to push back deadlines for an entire project, especially one that's still in Alpha. At this stage, we need to get results as quickly as possible; and increasing the time that the WUs are "out to pasture" will undoubtledly lead people to have even more of them sitting in their cache. Just some food for thought! Atomic I agree and I think this is really an issue that has to be discussed on the boinc email lists. If people are connected to multiple projects and are not connected all the time, the client should be 'smart' enough not to download work to fill all the way up to the deadline, because the chances that all the results will be crunched in that time are not very good... |
|
9)
Message boards : Number crunching : invitation code for new members? ( Message 1592 )Posted 3912 days ago by
Atomic Booty
I was under the impression that this had been D@H policy for quite some time; however, I have noticed that a vast number of the latest influx of new users are running Windows boxes. Doesn't this create an even larger imbalance for the existing HR issue? At the moment we only accept linux boxes and macs; more than enough windoze aboard. |
|
10)
Message boards : Number crunching : Shorter work units or BOINC gone silly? ( Message 1591 )Posted 3912 days ago by
Atomic Booty
This was a problem for many of us when Docking first opened alpha stage. My computer downloaded 300 WU's in the first few minutes after attatching to the project. BOINC (or my system, or some code in the app, whatever is responsible for making this judgement) initially interpreted the WUs to be 5 minutes long to crunch, as opposed to their more accurate time of 3 hours. Even though my "connect every _" was set to 0.1 days, the WUs just poured in to the point that my system was lagging (which is when I noticed it and shut it down). Most of us had no choice but to abort a lot of work. The quota was set to 50/day after that, to prevent such a massive scale of downloads, but I am unaware of any other steps that devs may have taken to address this problem. Again, I'm not altogether sure where it stems from (server vs. client side, BOINC app, project app, etc.). Since this has only been an issue for first time users (after crunching a WU, the DCF normalizes and makes a more reliable estimation of the time it will take to complete the next one), and this project has been more or less closed to new users since the beginning, this problem has not crept up in awhile. You can read more about it in the Too Many WUs! thread. Atomic |
Next 10 posts