Posts by Coleslaw
log in
1) Message boards : Number crunching : Monkeys - CPU (Message 1488)
Posted 14 Feb 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
The issue JLDun is that currently some users are noticing the NCI reserving a full CPU core while not fully using it. Thus preventing other work units or processes from utilizing the resources. It is a "bug".
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Daily Quota of 1? (Message 1384)
Posted 1 Feb 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Google purchased Motorola, kept the patents, then sold Motorola off. IIRC
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Moto Phones Erring Out (Message 1381)
Posted 30 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Sorry for the late reply. My Moto E's (Gen 1 and Gen 2)seem to work just fine.

My Gen 2's

My Gen 1's
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Moto Phones Erring Out (Message 1376)
Posted 21 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Are you talking about Moto E Gen 1 or Gen 2? I have both in my home. I've not watched them closely but could maybe take a look to see if I'm experiencing it or not.

I would normally suggest QCN but Gen 2's have Android 5+ and they don't have PIE capable work units. I honestly don't recall if Gen 1's worked ok there or not. I would have to check that as well.

Which version of Android is on the Moto X Gen 1? They came with a wide variety. If it is pre-5 go ahead and add QCN as it may be able to use it. If you aren't familiar with QCN, read up in the forums because it credits a bit different. Their validator doesn't work in the traditional sense and so they run a script every few weeks to give credits. Some work units will show error status when they are valid and still credit. You will know if it is working if the device gets
5) Message boards : Number crunching : New App soon? (Message 1375)
Posted 21 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Well.. I was basically simplifying the numbers as I'm seeing 8-10MB for each BOINC client + ~2MB each work unit. On the low end that will mean ~16MB for each instance. 18MB on the upper end. And then you will want a bit of a cushion just in case something spikes a bit or the OS wants a little more breathing room. I also don't recommend running CPU intensive within the same VM if you run several instances for Goofy. But that is just a recommendation. I would suggest running them int heir own VM or outside the VM's if you do it. I've had better results that way.
6) Message boards : Number crunching : New App soon? (Message 1371)
Posted 19 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw

I was wondering if there will be a new app along anytime soon? I love the 4 that are going, but there's no such thing as too many NCI apps ;) I'd love to do as much work as I can for the project as well as earning credits, so more apps would be nice :).

EDIT: To aid the project's progression and to allow users to gain more points, could you even subdivide each app? By this, I mean have Monkeys V1 and Monkeys V1.1 (for example) doing exactly the same project, but so the computer can have 2 WUs for it at once? (I think that makes sense...)

UBT - Chris

Of course I can create Monkeys 1.1 ... Monkeys 1.1000 but it doesn't have any sense for now <- it's why I stopped ban multi instances hosts.

Even I tested some small grid for monkeys <- 8x virtualbox (2xVCPU, 2GB ram, 10GB disk on debian 8.6 x64) and 275 instances on each, but performance were awfull.
I have to try do it directly on my host system not in VM <- but right now I don't have time :(

Well if each work unit used ~4MB Ram then you would need 4.4GB RAM just for work units plus the RAM for the host OS. Try upping the memory for the VM and see if it improves.

On a side note, VM's I had working in the past with multiple clients just fine seem to be a lot more sensitive now. Not sure what changed from then to now but it certainly is more fickle now. I was using Windows XP, 7 Pro x64, and 10 Pro x64.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : New App soon? (Message 1368)
Posted 18 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Don't forget the use of docker in Linux as well.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : New App soon? (Message 1364)
Posted 18 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Your edit question is already an option if you just run multiple clients on the same machine.

Quite frankly it is still my opinion that each work unit is way over credit for the resources used. Many bitched and complained about how Bitcoin Utopia scored and it was based on traditional metric comparisons. Once people start adopting multiple clients more, you will find people complaining more about the points awarded. Just food for thought.
9) Message boards : Number crunching : How much network traffic? (Message 1355)
Posted 6 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Thanks for your help on this as it will help those of us with data usage limits to be able to contribute more.
10) Message boards : Number crunching : How much network traffic? (Message 1353)
Posted 6 Jan 2017 by Profile Coleslaw
Will the usage of gzip put additional load on the system?
11) Message boards : Number crunching : How much network traffic? (Message 1283)
Posted 21 Dec 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
Do you have stats for v3 and v4 apps?
12) Message boards : Number crunching : High Credit (Message 1280)
Posted 20 Dec 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
Hi Admin, thanks for the reply and the unbanning of accounts. To assure that anyone who has the wish and the capability to run multiple instances can participate without having the feeling that others are "cheating", it would be a nice idea to configure a setting in the Goofy@home preferences where you can select the amount of concurrent instances you want to run.\r\nTo prevent errors, this could be capped at max 150 instances per machine.\r\n\r\nThis would give the project a very nice boost and will terminate the accusations related to unfair use of VM's / running multiple instances outside the BOINC app, etc.
\r\n\r\nThe "unfair" portion will only go away if there is a max per user. Otherwise people will continue to run more VM's as each will be counted as a separate host. Just my $.02. I say leave it alone and let people contribute as much as they want as long as the results are valid. Then the only problem is the points total and well... that has been discussed already.
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Mac app (Message 1141)
Posted 30 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
That's a pretty big assumption. You can install Windows or ESX onto Apple hardware and still run Mac OS from a VM. It is allowed in the EULA because it is still on Apple hardware. Porting it to non-Apple hardware is the violation.\r\n\r\nThis is why Mac clone companies get shut down.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
I. Other Use Restrictions. The grants set forth in this License do not permit you to, and you agree not to, install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so. Except as otherwise permitted by the terms of this License or otherwise licensed by Apple: (i) only one user may use the Apple Software at a time, and (ii) you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be run or used by multiple computers at the same time. You may not rent, lease, lend, sell, redistribute or sublicense the Apple Software.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Mac app (Message 1128)
Posted 29 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
Looks like you've removed the OS X app for V1 and V2\r\n\r\nWhy?
\r\nI imagine it has to do with their lack of environment to build new MAC apps.
\r\nYes. I have no MAC to compile apps :(\r\nWhen I create v1 and v2 for MacOS I had access to MAC for 2-3 hours and I did it.\r\n\r\nMaybe someone know how to install Mac on virtualbox ?
\r\nI can try to make an image on my VMware server. Then maybe you could run it in the free VMware player and compile apps? I have installs for 10.6.3, 10.7.2, 10.8, 10.9, 10.10, 10.11.1. Is there a preference?\r\nI can try sometime during the weekend, probably on Sunday, and see how it goes.
\r\nI just gave it a try and it seems the hardware in my VMware server is to old to support running MAX OS. :(
\r\n\r\nIsn't this against the Mac OS EULA and thus illegal? I thought the only legal way to run it was on Apple hardware. Some may consider this "cheating". I would be careful offering up VM's like that.\r\n- The assumption is that if you have the Apple hardware that you could just install the Mac OS...
15) Message boards : News : New apps monkeys_v3 and monkeys_v4 (Message 1094)
Posted 27 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
New app version for V3 and V4 released <- sorry for the confusion.\r\n\r\nI wonder on reducing the score for each application (from 10 to 5) in order to maintain the level of 20 credits per hour. What do you think about it?
\r\n\r\nThat would mean that either you would have to adjust all of the credits needed for each badge otherwise it make getting the higher level badges really difficult and in order to maintain the badges that we all have now you would have to cut everyone's current credit in half. Probably best to leave it at 10 IMHO.\r\n\r\nPete
\r\n\r\nOr it would just mean the early supporters were rewarded for doing so and all future production will be at the new rate. Once there is an official rule put out about multiple clients, resources really shouldn't be too much of a problem and then people whom want more points will still just run more instances. I see no problem with reducing current value but reducing past scores can cause a much bigger stir.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : High Credit (Message 1019)
Posted 12 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
So don't use docker. I used a process under Windows from the command prompt. All you needed was dotnet (I believe 4+) to work the way I used and that was posted from another source. So, even old Windows XP had like 100 instances running easily from a command prompt command that you could copy from a text file and paste into it each time you wanted to start it up. Didn't even have to remember the long drawn out command. You could then close all the clients down from the same command prompt. A lot easier than learning Linux enough to start learning docker. Windows 7 hosts easily handled more than 100 in a single setup for me. I think it took me like 5 minutes to set the whole thing up on one install.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : High Credit (Message 1015)
Posted 11 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
Actually, that only shows that they are running an excess number. The rules should apply to all including those just running 1 or 2 extra instances. At least until there are actual posted rules indicating a limit. I've known people with data centers that had a lot of hosts identical. So, until they go into the thousands, it can be quite difficult for some to be proven by that list. \r\n\r\nHidden machines isn't a hint. It is an accusation. Many honest contributors run with hidden devices. It is just one less thing you as a viewer have to actually support a cheating accusation. That is all. I'm not typically a fan either, but at this project I have done it while I was testing multiple instances. I did the hidden hosts not because it is cheating but rather because I wanted to avoid accusations from those that have nothing to base it on. Like those mentioned above and elsewhere.
18) Message boards : Number crunching : High Credit (Message 1013)
Posted 11 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
How do you enforce multiple instances rule? How do you prove how many hosts they have? That was Tobias' problem at FreeHAL. He reserved the right to demand proof of said systems, but don't recall anyone being publicly outed. And that once again goes back to the admin policing it. And if you are just going to limit it with a hard limit... that is kinda pointless to do as well. You might as well just go back to saying just the 2 applications on a single physical host and just try and guess at whom is "cheating". And that will more than likely cut a large amount of the resources being given to the project. It is nice to have NCI applications, but there has to be some strategy implemented along with it. The points are the problem. The lack of rules governing how the donors are allowed to contribute is a bigger problem.
19) Message boards : Number crunching : High Credit (Message 1011)
Posted 11 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
Actually this began before DC-Vault inclusion. It was added to Formula-BOINC first. And the admin approved inclusion knowing it would increase contribution in a competitive nature. So, this didn't spawn directly from DC-Vault.\r\n\r\nAlso, your suggestion doesn't fix this issue. It will only amplify it. The setting FreeHAL had would apply to all hosts and therefore people could still run multiple instances and get an insane amount. Like other suggestions...probably best to release a CPU intensive version and then adjust credits according to the amount of work being done.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : High Credit (Message 1009)
Posted 11 Oct 2016 by Profile Coleslaw
Beyond, I am aware of the projects that are GPU capable and that most don't mind. That isn't the debate. The debate is whether something is fair or is cheating. What we have is a scenario where people are capable of running more instances of an application on a given piece of hardware to better utilize it. That is what we do with GPU's using app_configs and that is what we CAN do with NCI projects with VM's and multiple clients. The concept is EXACTLY the same. Some want more utilization of their resources. This admin has no rules posted saying otherwise because the admin actively pulled those rules from the project. The admin asked for ways to get more resources and got them. Now people are complaining because of points not because people are actually better utilizing their hardware. Unfortunately, the admin didn't think things through very well and IMO is over crediting work units. But that is up to the admin to determine. So, as we have agreed above, the admin just needs to decide on a fair set of rules and let everyone decide how much resources to put towards the project.

Next 20

Main page · Your account · Message boards

Copyright © 2020 Goofyx

Generated 8 Apr 2020, 19:01:49 UTC