Mal wieder ein kleines Rennen?

[Sylvester R]

Hallo Michael H.W. Weber,
Du sprichst mir aus der Seele. Nachdem ich seit 2001 bei Seti@home mitgerechnet habe, ist mir vor ca. 3 Monaten die "Hutschnur geplatzt". Der Umgang mit crunch3R hat mich dazu bewogen, seitdem nicht mehr für Seti zu rechnen.
Bei SIMAP machten der optimierte Boinc client durchaus Sinn, da die Projekt-Software auch optimiert war. Das kann man schon einfach daran erkennen, dass die Original Software nicht auf einem Athlon 1200 lief (der hat namlich kein SSE).
Wenn die Projektverantwortlichen es nicht schaffen, die tollen Möglichkeiten moderner CPUs zu nutzen, geht eine Menge an Rechenpower verloren. Oder um es mal etwas anders auszudrücken:
Der Verbrauch an KWh / WU geht unnötig zu Lasten des SPONSORS in die Höhe.

[Michael H.W. Weber]

Hab's getan.
http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forum ... =220#77472

Michael.

[Rincewind]

Klasse, ich finde es auch gut, dass du mal die Frage nach den Ergebnissen angesprochen hast. Mein Englisch ist leider nicht so ausgereift, sonst hätte ich mich da etwas ausführlicher angeschlossen!

Ach ja, eine Antwort ist auch schon da!

There are a few things to answer here:

Firstly, and most importantly, I want to address your last point about the relationship between WCG and their members. WCG have asked nobody to go out and buy computers. The whole idea is that grid computing uses spare capacity that already exists. It can be argued, in fact, that buying additional computers and running them 24/7 is not only uneconomical, it is also not energy efficient. So, exactly how much computer time you chose to donate, please remember that it is your decision, and WCG only ask for the capacity that would otherwise go to waste. WCG are grateful no matter how much or little you donate.

The issue of optimised clients is a complicated one, and one we have discussed at length before. The summary of the situation is this: some projects are able to optimise their science applications. Optimised clients match up with optimised science. WCG is not able to optimise the science more than the WCG grid techs already have (the code is closed source) so pairing WCG with an optimised client causes grossly inflated claims. Not just a little bit inflated - up to ten times what should be claimed. You can imagine - some people were unhappy about this.

Now, if WCG sent all updates, changes and project launches out by email, you would have floods of email from WCG. Frankly, I think WCG don't want the burden of managing a bulk email list. For every one person annoyed about missing a change without the list, a thousand would be annoyed by getting an update they didn't want. WCG compromise by announcing changes on the website, usually in the forum.

This particular change is one that made itself known fairly quickly to the kind of person that runs optimised clients 24/7 and keeps a close eye on their score. Installing the official client isn't so very burdensome.

Don't worry about the results. Academic research is a slow process, as all the facts need to be checked by many people. As a result, the results will only be published quite a few months after the project has finished running on the grid. Don't expect to see results from projects that are currently running on the grid (although there have been proposals to show work in progress).
----------------------------------------

[magihatfertig]

Also ich find das echt der hammer was da abgeht! Die scheinen echt nicht zu begreifen worums hier geht! Bleib am Ball Michael!

Für alle zum mitlesen (Michaels Antwort):

Firstly, and most importantly, I want to address your last point about the relationship between WCG and their members. WCG have asked nobody to go out and buy computers.

Have I said that? I know what I am doing (sometimes at least) and I buy these computers for the science sake. If you want, you can say I have made my profession a hobby by founding an officially registered association dedicated to DC together with a lot of friends. biggrin The way you answer my concerns (taking side remarks most serious and not really answering what I was talking about), indicates that you are in need of some information about your supporting community. We are not the little kids from the block that mainly like computer games (although these are well-appreciated, be the way... biggrin ). Instead we are a worldwide community of GENEROUS PEOPLE THAT KNOW VERY WELL WHAT THEY ARE DOING. It would be nice if you could simply accept that and treat us accordingly.

The whole idea is that grid computing uses spare capacity that already exists. It can be argued, in fact, that buying additional computers and running them 24/7 is not only uneconomical, it is also not energy efficient. So, exactly how much computer time you chose to donate, please remember that it is your decision, and WCG only ask for the capacity that would otherwise go to waste.

We are well aware of that. But you know, some people like to keep a dog spending a hell of money for that kind of hobby, others just set up computers to support (hopefully) useful science. It is that simple. We have an interest that you guys are successful because it is our effort, too. We have an interest, that our cycles are used most efficiently, because we pay the electricity bills. We have an interest that the data WE generate is made available to the public. That's why we are here. Because, we (the public) have generated that data. We give you the chance to put good scientific ideas into practise. We are not here because we like to check our current positions in an anyway doubtful ranking list every day. Still, it contributes to keeping the people interested by making tough science fun for those that simply cannot understand it. That's why stats are so important!
Talking about uneconomical / not energy efficient you know very well that most certainly NONE of the scientific projects currently running as DC projects would ever be put into practise if we weren't that uneconomical. The world does not spin around economics although a majority of people trys to make me believe that. wink

The issue of optimised clients is a complicated one, and one we have discussed at length before. The summary of the situation is this: some projects are able to optimise their science applications.

...others are not. That's why I said "- where possible -". biggrin

WCG is not able to optimise the science more than the WCG grid techs already have (the code is closed source)

...the rest of the sentence I could not follow, but a suggestion: Make it open source and we will see whether your claim holds true. wink

Now, if WCG sent all updates, changes and project launches out by email, you would have floods of email from WCG.

I did not ask for sending floods of email, but just one about an important topic (see above for why it is important even for those that don't really care about the stats).

This particular change is one that made itself known fairly quickly to the kind of person that runs optimized clients 24/7 and keeps a close eye on their score. Installing the official client isn't so very burdensome.

See, another one of your completely incorrect assumptions. I use the optimized client but never would have got to know about this stats change issue if a colleague had not told me. Simply because I do not have the time to keep up with such website changes of all the projects I support. And even if I would support WCG exclusively (which I will definetely not as long as it is closed source), I would not have known. I am not a stats analyzer. I just get informed as a side-effect when we are going for a fun race with another team.

Don't worry about the results.

Actually, that's all I worry about! That's what I am here for! Generating results! Somehow, you must really believe, we are just the "WCG-stats-gazer", right? Unbelievable!

Academic research is a slow process, as all the facts need to be checked by many people. As a result, the results will only be published quite a few months after the project has finished running on the grid. Don't expect to see results from projects that are currently running on the grid (although there have been proposals to show work in progress).

Well, I am a chemist and therefore I know very well what science is all about. Where are the results of the finished projects? Closed source?

hugs
Michael.

und die nächste Antwort der Betreiber, gerade druckfrisch:

Wow, you seem unhappy.

As a chemist, you will then be able to understand when I tell you that the first HPF paper is in peer review (I believe a draft is available) and the results database will be made public when the paper is published.

I'm afraid you seem to have completely missed my point about "supercrunchers" like yourself. I'm just a volunteer, like you, and I have to confess I run my computers longer and harder than I should in a good cause. But there is a point where doing so becomes uneconomical - not for the project, because they get free computeing however it is derived - but for you. Supercomputers are far more cost efficient in terms of putting together new, dedicated computing resources. So instead of buying dozens of computers, you could donate the money to charities that will spend the money on research.

I'm not telling you that this is what you ought to do, or trying to belittle what you do in any way. I'm just trying to give you some perspective.

The vast majority of WCG members (hundreds of thousands of them!) are average computer users, donating a few spare cycles. Obviously, WCG would like to do everything they can to keep the supercrunchers like yourself happy, but their main focus, and the reasoning behind their policies, must always be dictated by that silent majority.

I think what it comes down to is this: if you are going to go to the effort and expense of donating a large computing resource, you must put that little bit of extra effort in to keep yourself up to date with what is going on, and all your computing resource running smoothly. That makes perfect sense to me. There's no point in half-measures if you are going to invest so much in the project.

Lastly, the source would be open if that were possible. Sadly, the code is usually owned by some scientific institution or other, and it takes a complicated three-way legal agreement just to let WCG optimise and board it for the WCG grid. Making it open source is just too much to ask (but we live in hope).

[Dennis Kautz]

Ich würd trotzdem vorschlagen, dass wir die Sachen WCG betreffend in dem anderen Thread besprechen... der hier geht über das Rennen gegen Heidelberg

http://www.rechenkraft.net/phpBB/viewto ... 8&start=48

[Dennis Kautz]

Wir haben übrigens inzwischen SETI.Germany überholt und nähern uns BOINC.Synergy

[indiana_74]

Wir haben übrigens inzwischen SETI.Germany überholt und nähern uns BOINC.Synergy

langsam schon mal linken Blinker setz

[Michael H.W. Weber]

Wird wohl doch allmählich Zeit, daß ich meinen Maschinenpark mal aufstocke...

Michael.

[Velociraptor]

ich überlege auch noch schnell ne dual core zu kaufen so langs cpus für mienen sockel noch gibt =)

edit: war heute der qmc server down? so zwischen 1630 und 1730 ?

[yoyo]

Erstmal ein herzliches Willkommen an alle die unsere Team diesen Monat beigetreten sind: http://www.boincstats.com/stats/team_me ... r=qmc&id=4

Und so siehts aus:


yoyo

[Schwarzmetaller]

Ich habe die Ehre euch mitteilen zu dürfen, daß P3Dnow soeben an euch vorbeigezogen ist

Und um euch schonmal einen Eindruck von unserem Enthusiasmus zu geben, was Races angeht:
Hier das Video zu unserm Race gegen SETI-USA bei SIMAP
http://www.myvideo.de/watch/335699

MFG
Schwarzmetaller

[frank]

Ich habe die Ehre euch mitteilen zu dürfen, daß P3Dnow soeben an euch vorbeigezogen ist

Grats! Beeindruckend, was ihr innerhalb kürzester Zeit mobilisiert habt.

[edit] nimms mir nicht übel, aber ein 13 Minuten Video tue ich mir echt nicht an . [/edit]