1) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : lowering memory speed (Message 37443)
Posted 1 day ago by Profile skgiven
Tasks will take longer if you reduce the GPU memory speed. How much longer depends on how much you reduce the rate by, but there are other factors (GPU model, WU, GPU rate). Look at your run-times from same type of WU's to see.
It's still a good way to keep the heat, energy use and fail rate down.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37435)
Posted 2 days ago by Profile skgiven
I was happy just using my CPU's to run worth while Projects, but I'm not going to sit by, complain & watch other's run me over in a few weeks what took me over 12 Years to attain.

That's what I call a bad message for the old crunchers.

???

Sorry for I wasn't clear. Not your reaction is the bad message, but the fact that the impact of this project on science is way below its impact on the balance of the credits (while the impact of the GPUs in scientific use is nearly in direct ratio of credit difference between GPUs and CPUs). I think BU's impact on the BOINC community (science - if you like) could be even adverse in the long term, despite the profitability in the short term if they keep on awarding this amount of credits (that is the present projects cannot substitute the crunchers they will possibly loose in the future from the funding they receive in the present - there is only one such project at the moment).

However ASICs' impact on science could be as big as the GPUs impact if they'd be used directly for research. I think that the algorithm Collatz and DistRTG is using can be put more easily on ASICs, than GPUGrid's or MilkyWay's or PrimeGrid's. Furthermore I think that an advanced ASIC could do the same reverse engineering as rainbow tables are used for, making the whole DirstRTgen project obsolete. Still, in my opinion, they won't have such a device, as there's no one who would finance its development. The only reason for the existence of the BitCoin miner ASICs is that their development was financed by the present use of them.

I knew what you meant Zoltan, however this isn't just a tetchy subject, it's a defining one for Boinc and those associated with it (which especially means high end crunchers), so if you say anything that could be misinterpreted it will be latched onto - the crowds are amassing...

To clarify, and in my opinion, you were saying that crunchers who have been around for many years, who purchased high end products, upgraded and ran expensive hardware for many years are being replaced by noobs with USB sticks who get crazy credits for unworthy BitCoin mining, and that is a bad message to send out to long-standing crunchers.

If ASIC's actually cost less (TCO) than they generated I would be all for them, but they don't. At best you're buying into a bubble and we all know what happens to bubbles.

While I'm all for ingenuity, creative thinking, trailblazing, entrepreneurialism and self-funding research, the reality is that ASIC's represent a controlled market and those who buy into them are the product!

GPU's were and are primarily designed for gaming. When they were viably used for mining, they represented a regulating factor; they were designed for another purpose and controlled by parties with no ties to BitCoin mining.
This outside factor has now been acquired by ASIC developers. So, regulation is now owned by the ASIC developers. Forget any nonsense about needing 50% of the global pool to control the markets, it's already controlled!

The only way Boinc credits can be regulated is by dismissing all mining project credits or awarding credit per actual cost...

In my opinion, and I agree with Zoltans analysis on this, people are being over-rewarded for mining and are now purposely buying mining equipment rather that crunching equipment for scientific purposes or making donations.
What is the true value of a mining project, if it rewards more than it's worth?

If you spend £1000/year on IT equipment to crunch for worthy causes and someone with a couple of USB sticks (£10 to buy and £10 to run per year) replaces you on the credit leader-board then the credit system is flawed.
The chances of the slowest (330MHz) USB stick finding a BitCoin are infidecimally small, yet the Boinc credit system accepts that because it can do one useless thing extremely fast that it's fine to reward stupid-credits - seriously >1M Boinc credits/day for a USB stick?!?
3) Message boards : Number crunching : WU TAG : NOELIA_SH2 (Message 37433)
Posted 2 days ago by Profile skgiven
Noelia will probably reply in her own time.
IIRC this is old work revisited.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SH2_domain
4) Message boards : Number crunching : -226 (0xffffffffffffff1e) ERR_TOO_MANY_EXITS (Message 37397)
Posted 4 days ago by Profile skgiven
As you are getting consecutive failures I suggest you perform a clean boot - shut down, turn off at the wall, leave it a minute, turn everything on and restart.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Problem - Tasks error when exiting/resuming using 334.67 drivers (Message 37396)
Posted 4 days ago by Profile skgiven
Despite having a primary SSD and secondary Boinc data drive on my main Win7 system, I still use a 30sec cc_config start delay,

    <options>
    <start_delay>30</start_delay>
    </options>


After system installations or updates, followed by a system restart, there is still a bit to be done, so if Boinc immediately tries to start loading and running numerous tasks the WU's are competing for resources with each other and the system. If you restart within 30sec of a previous restart tasks might be forcibly shut down even before they start running never mind checkpoint.

6) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37336)
Posted 7 days ago by Profile skgiven
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/calculator

I filled in the data for the new (July) AntMiner S3. It would never come close to breaking even mining Bitcoins. Probably wouldn't even pay for half it's cost and within 6months or so it would yield less than what the electric costs.

It begs the question, are any mining devices profitable?
If not then as a funding project, donations would be better.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37326)
Posted 8 days ago by Profile skgiven
You could have a lot more than that if you used a USB hub, and some of them daisy-chain!

If also attached to WUPROP, some stats are collected. Other previous and potential NCI projects could be attached too...


The credit is still skewed though; while it might reflect some relative performances it neglects the fact that a USB device needs to be attached to a computer!


Well, you can have four of the critters on a single Raspberry Pi...

It's such a shame that Cryptocoin proof-of-work functions aren't comuting anything useful as a side effect.

Matt

8) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37323)
Posted 8 days ago by Profile skgiven
The project is fairly new (about a year old).
While many people have participated on CPU's and GPU's this was ineffective - the yield was low.
However, attention to the project has grown in the last month or so due to the credit awarded to ASIC's. Recently, the number of ASICs attached has significantly increased and will inevitably continue to increase. To boot, the project might yet facilitate more ASIC models, so as a funding project it might turn out to be quite fruitful (if enough high end ASIC's can be attached)...

The credit is still skewed though; while it might reflect some relative performances it neglects the fact that a USB device needs to be attached to a computer!
9) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37317)
Posted 8 days ago by Profile skgiven
We should remember that this idea (of funding through mining) was first actuated in the form of Donate@home. The same issues were seen there. Donate wasn’t just a proof of concept project, it trail-blazed funding through mining, proved that there was enough interest and that it could be successful; ultimately Donate resulted in funding for a PhD student.

It was inevitable that another similar project would emerge.
Donate used GPU’s to mine one unit of currency (Bit coins) and had to retire because of the emergence of ASIC’s which increased the level of difficulty to the point of no return.
Donate could have tried to mine on CPU’s, but there were not enough crunchers for this to happen, yields were tiny and the implementation too much effort.
Donate could also have waited for and then started using ASIC’s, but there would have been too few crunchers with ASIC’s, new apps would have been needed and it would have distracted the researchers away from molecular dynamics.
Donate could also have diverged, crunching for a number of alternative currencies, but again it would have taken a lot of effort from what is a small team.
It really wasn't until a few months ago that ASIC mining had matured enough and became popular enough to make an ASIC based funding project viable. Prior to this however, it simply wasn’t.

The reality of crunching is that you can start-up whatever Boinc project you like, and crunchers can crunch whatever they like and for whatever reason they want.
Some crunchers crunch for whatever gives the biggest credit at any time. In the past these migratory credit opportunists typically crunched for projects such as Collatz, PrimeGrid, MilkyWay, Moo! Wrapper, Distributed Rainbow Table Generator, SubsetSum, ABC… and often only did so when the credits were highest, but many also chipped in at POEM, GPUGRID and WCG (when they had the HCC on GPU for a few months).
It’s no surprise to see the same crunchers over at Bitcoin Utopia, and to me this is an improvement. Crunching Pi, Soduko or any other meaningless crap resulted in nothing positive, Bitcoin Utopia on the other hand results in money going into research projects.
The only problem is the credits, and in the same way as GPU’s result in massive credits compared to CPU’s, ASIC’s result in massive credits compared to GPU’s. The difference however is that GPU’s can be used to do a range of scientific research, while ASIC’s can only be used to mine. Comparing CPU’s to GPU’s to ASIC’s is a bit like comparing a pair of shoes to a tram to an elevator in a sky-scraper.

In terms of Boinc cross-project stats I'm starting to drop too; was around 280ish, now 290 and falling... Entirely down to BitCoin Utopia as I had been rising slowly.
Personally, I'm not particularly bothered whether I'm 250th or 400th, but I expect many crunchers in the top 10 or 100 wouldn't like to be shifted from that hard earned position because a couple of hundred people plugged in USB sticks!

Again, regarding credits there needs to be a segregation by project types (various scientific areas and non-scientific fields).

The present fields (according to the Boinc Client) are:

- Biology and Medicine
- Cognative Science and AI
- Distributed sensing
- Earth Sciences
- Mathematics, Computing and...
- Multiple Applications
- Physical Science

I don't think any of this is respected in any of the stats sites though.
Unless Boinc command steps in and sorts this out, it's down to the stat sites to deal with this, after all it's their stats that are looking pointless!

This would do the trick,
- Funding/Mining (doesn't count for cross-project credit)

However, the stat sites can count what they like, so it's down to them.
10) Message boards : Server and website : Not getting short WUs (Message 37312)
Posted 9 days ago by Profile skgiven
I think I sort of know what the issue is.

My setup is different and to test this I wanted to only run short tasks on GPU 0 (a GTX770), but run long tasks on a GTX660Ti (I don't always want to crunch on the 770).

My cc_config file (without the logs) is,
    <cc_config>
    <options>
    <start_delay>30</start_delay>
    <use_all_gpus>0</use_all_gpus>

    <exclude_gpu>
    <url>http://www.gpugrid.net/</url>
    <type>NVIDIA</type>
    <device_num>0</device_num>
    <app>acemdlong</app>
    </exclude_gpu>

    <exclude_gpu>
    <url>http://www.gpugrid.net/</url>
    <type>NVIDIA</type>
    <device_num>1</device_num>
    <app>acemdshort</app>
    </exclude_gpu>

    </options>
    </cc_config>



I was running one Long WU on GPU 1. GPU 0 was free, and remained so after a restart, but Boinc would not ask for short work for GPU 0.

Instead I got the message,

19/07/2014 19:03:31 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 0; 1.000000 pending for 37x2-NOELIA_BI_3-10-14-RND2323_1

19/07/2014 19:03:31 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 1: confirming 1.000000 instance for 37x2-NOELIA_BI_3-10-14-RND2323_1

To me this suggests a WU is being linked with both GPU's (GPU0 has 1 pending WU - which is wrong because it's running on GPU1) so Boinc thinks the GPU isn't available to run other tasks because there is a pending WU?
If my interpretation is correct-ish then there is a bug. Maybe this has already been fixed in a beta?

I suspected it might have worked in 4h, when the Long WU completed, but I didn't want to wait, so I tried to force the issue.
First I told my system to only get short tasks and then to start using both cards for all types of work. After downloading a short task, I suspended both tasks read the cc_config file and then enabled the tasks. They started running on the correct cards.

I've changed back to both types of work in the profile. I suppose I will have to wait and see if it keeps working before I know for sure, but I think that demonstrates that it will work, but not straight away - running tasks would first need to complete...

Another problem is that Boinc doesn't ask for a specific task type when downloading work - it just asks for work, so if you need short tasks but download a long task then it will sit in the queue and you will not get a short task,

20/07/2014 09:28:04 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 0; 1.000000 pending for 2x19x1x6-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND8291_0
20/07/2014 09:28:04 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 1: confirming 1.000000 instance for 2x19x1x6-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND8291_0
20/07/2014 09:28:04 | GPUGRID | [coproc] Insufficient NVIDIA for 2x26x1x13-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND1179_0; need 1, available 0

So unless you changed profile before asking for tasks (every time), to ensure you only get short (or long) tasks when you need them, this won't work. IMO this is all too complicated as is, so even if a fix turned up the way forward can only be hardware orientation (allocate per hardware unit). Try writing a detailed cc_config file for a system with an Intel CPU/GPU, an ATI, 2 NVidia's and a mix of external mining devices.

The only other thing I can think of would be to run two instances of Boinc, disabling one GPU in each (and I don't know if that would actually work or not).

...
Tried 7.4.8, same problem,
20/07/2014 14:03:47 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 0; 1.000000 pending for 2x26x1x13-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND1179_0
20/07/2014 14:03:47 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 1: confirming 1.000000 instance for 2x26x1x13-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND1179_0

Changed profile to ask for Short tasks and other tasks if no short tasks available!

20/07/2014 13:36:06 | GPUGRID | No tasks sent
20/07/2014 13:36:06 | GPUGRID | No tasks are available for Short runs (2-3 hours on fastest card)
20/07/2014 13:36:06 | GPUGRID | No tasks are available for CPU only app



Next 10