1) Forums : Announcements : Beware of this project! (at least for now) (Message 9074)
Posted 8 Oct 2010 by Emanuel
Post:
2) Forums : Technical Support : Is something up with cosmology@home? (Message 8902)
Posted 28 Feb 2010 by Emanuel
Post:
Good to hear it :)
3) Forums : Technical Support : Is something up with cosmology@home? (Message 8895)
Posted 25 Feb 2010 by Emanuel
Post:
Hmm, that sounds like BOINC is trying to work off some huge debt, or thinks it's trying to - I'm no expert on this, but the scheduling code has been worked on a lot lately, so if you're not already, you could try running the latest experimental version and see if that makes a difference. I think resetting the project also resets its work debt, so that might fix it too - since you're not getting any work anyway, you can try both. Finally, if resetting it doesn't work, try detaching and reattaching, which should ensure that anything that was there before is gone.
4) Forums : Technical Support : Is something up with cosmology@home? (Message 8893)
Posted 24 Feb 2010 by Emanuel
Post:
I simply mean the Messages tab of the BOINC manager. I believe there are more in-depth things you could look at, but that's the first thing you should try - see if it's giving you any error messages.
5) Forums : Technical Support : Is something up with cosmology@home? (Message 8889)
Posted 23 Feb 2010 by Emanuel
Post:
Well, I still appear to be getting plenty of tasks. Does the log say anything out of the ordinary?
6) Forums : General Topics : What's the status of the project? (Message 8877)
Posted 15 Feb 2010 by Emanuel
Post:
Using past history as a guide for future events, I'd plan on a longer wait... You might try to find Ben's phone number and call it...

Agreed. Argh, don't just post one status update, then leave again! Post a news update, get involved! This is pointless.
7) Forums : General Topics : What's the status of the project? (Message 8863)
Posted 11 Feb 2010 by Emanuel
Post:
Thank you for the update, Ben. Considering the realities of your budget, have you considered open sourcing the code? You would need tests to validate new applications (of course) and make sure to only accept versions you've personally checked out, but the core development could be done by enthousiasts. I'm not saying they will, though - that's always the danger of open source - but if you're willing to deal with the risks, the benefit -could- be great: I myself am a former CS student (now a student of interdisciplinary sciences) with a strong interest in fundamental physics and cosmology, but I doubt I have the experience to contribute significantly at this time. As my own education continues, that might change.

If you're interested, the first choice you have to make in making your code open source is choosing a license. This is a tough decision that deserves to be looked at carefully, not least because you have to do your best to get the permission of everyone involved in writing the code in the past. The legal validity of licenses has only rarely been tested, but on the internet, everything is based on trust, and violating it is something to be avoided at all costs. This is also, of course, why this project badly needs more public outreach and communication.

I'm looking forward to hearing your take on this. Good luck in your current endeavours (including fatherhood!), and I hope your arms recover fully :)
8) Forums : Technical Support : Errors and white screens bad files (Message 8657)
Posted 25 Oct 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
Cosmology may have similar problems where calls should be checked for possible errors. Anyone interested at looking at the source code should report bugs if they find them, and eventually later crunching software will make it's way to your computer when updates happen.

I'd love to look at the source code, but I don't think it's available. Is it?
9) Forums : Technical Support : reconnecting to client (Message 8654)
Posted 23 Oct 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
I think 6.6.41 might solve the problem I had with 6.6.38. From the changelog:
- MGR: Fix initial first connection problem on startup.  I'm not sure why
. . . .it was only happening at startup, there might have been a few crashes
. . . .because of this issue as well.  The basic problem is that wxWidgets
. . . .had an exception handler around the initial frame creation and when
. . . .the first GUI RPC was issues to detect whether or not we were attached
. . . .to an account manager during menu creation the GUI thread would go
. . . .about doing idle processing while waiting for the GUI RPC thread to
. . . .initialize.  During this time the frame pointer is NULL and was getting
. . . .dereferenced which would halt window construction and stay there until
. . . .some other event was fired.

6.6.41 is the recommended version, so I suggest you update, even though it might not solve this particular problem. (since you're on Vista 64, be sure to get the 64-bit version from this page)
10) Forums : Technical Support : reconnecting to client (Message 8650)
Posted 21 Oct 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
Eh, that message is just a disclaimer. Although earlier builds have indeed had some issues, 6.10.16 should be stable even when doing GPU crunching. But you're right that it probably has nothing to do with your problem.
11) Forums : Technical Support : reconnecting to client (Message 8645)
Posted 20 Oct 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
6.6.38 is a very bad version of BOINC to be running in my experience. I had it on my computer for only a day or so because the manager would constantly lose its connection with the BOINC core (not so much the clients). This might not have anything to do with your problem, but I recommend you try the latest testing version, which is 6.10.16 at time of writing. You can get it here: http://boinc.berkeley.edu/dl/?C=M;O=D
12) Forums : Announcements : Ben's back (Message 8640)
Posted 19 Oct 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
- Increase the frequency of checkpointing.
- Develop a CUDA or OpenCL applcation for this work.

The memory requirement is indeed one of the greatest issues for this project. There must be a way to break up the WUs into smaller chunks - for instance, have one WU do calculations for one half of the model, a second WU do calculations for the other half, and a third WU combine them.

That way you could also safely raise the complexity of the model - just break it up into smaller chunks. Being able to do something like this is very important for any distributed computing project, otherwise you will always be limited by the capabilities of a limited amount of top-end home computers rather than simply the amount of users willing to participate. Right now you're forcing a lot of people to stop participating, as they simply cannot use their computers while the calculations are going on.
13) Forums : Technical Support : Longer / heavier WUs? (Message 8586)
Posted 13 Sep 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
Yeah, I know.. If everyone was as bothered by this as I am (we are?), boycotting the project en masse would be easy to do.. unfortunately they still get enough crunchers (apparently) as it is, so individual users are essentially powerless.

The sad truth is I wouldn't boycott them because I want more credits or even because I feel ignored, but because I want to see that BOINC is a suitable platform for doing science, and I seriously doubt this project is getting anywhere near as much done as it could be. In the (distant) future, when we obtain the technology to make robots do most of our work for us, are we going to just do nothing as a species? Or are we going to contribute our resources, whether it be our computers or our minds, to advancement in science? *sigh* One can dream..
14) Forums : Technical Support : Longer / heavier WUs? (Message 8584)
Posted 12 Sep 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
It's getting to the point where I'm thinking it would be better to boycott the project until we get some attention. Unfortunately I doubt a lot of people check the forum on a regular basis, so it would be hard to make a dent in the amount of contribution.
15) Forums : Technical Support : Memory workload (Message 8580)
Posted 10 Sep 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
It does not seem that you have been very successful in getting the required RAM reduced.

Well, he might have had some success.. we simply haven't heard from him (or anyone from project management for that matter) in a dog's age.
16) Forums : General Topics : What's the status of the project? (Message 8542)
Posted 21 Aug 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
Steve, I think a lot of us are excited about the goals of this project and the chance to be involved in reaching them. That's why it's all the more frustrating when management doesn't allow us to get involved at all. I'm not saying they have to go all the way, i.e. open source and all that, but it would be such a help to at least get periodic status updates, and maybe get some more technical information about why exactly the WUs can't be split up any more without harming the scientific value of the project.

In my opinion the whole point of running projects on BOINC is so you can get as many computers as possible running your project - but I firmly believe they are scaring off at least two thirds of potential users by making the requirements this high - it'll get worse if they increase them even more. I think it would be wise to invest in some server-side code to recombine subsets of finished calculations so complexity can be increased at will without increasing the size of WUs. Computers might get a little less work done that way because of the overhead involved in WU turnaround time, but I think they'd attract enough new users that the overall result would be better for all of us. Not to mention all the users who currently have to turn off BOINC when they want to do a bit of gaming because it makes their computers too sluggish. (considering most games only use one CPU core, that's up to 75% of CPU time wasted during many hours of the day)

I don't personally stand to gain from this as I recently upgraded my computer to 8GiB of RAM which allows me to run Cosmo almost 24/7 - my frustration is purely for the sake of the project.
17) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : Planck first light mode (Message 8522)
Posted 16 Aug 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
Now that Planck is fully operational, will this affect the project in any way?

(by the way, this is off-topic but I wanted to mention that now that I've upgraded my RAM to 8GiB, running Cosmo no longer slows down my PC noticeably so I'm back to crunching full-time)
18) Forums : Technical Support : High memory usage (Message 8447)
Posted 20 Jun 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
Doing "Smaller chunks" (I'm not sure what that means) with the same level of accuracy will not change the amount of memory used in any way.

Well, I haven't looked at the code :P I'll just have to take your word for it; I guess we'll get by. As long as memory requirements remain stable for a while the situation should gradually improve.
19) Forums : Technical Support : High memory usage (Message 8441)
Posted 18 Jun 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
Is there anyway you could work on smaller chunks at a time but do the same amount of work with the same accuracy in the end? I personally wouldn't mind if the WUs got longer, just so long as the memory requirement is let's say halved. You'd be getting less WUs done in the same amount of time, this is true - but don't forget the memory requirement is currently scaring people off.
20) Forums : Cosmology and Astronomy : ASTRONOMY PICTURE OF THE DAY™ (Message 8434)
Posted 16 Jun 2009 by Emanuel
Post:
It was in the visible spectrum at one time, but due to the expansion of the universe it has been stretched to much longer wavelengths, currently peaking at 1.9 mm. Compare that to visible light, which ranges from around 380 to 750 nm.

I assume that it has illuminated various types of objects throughout its long history but I have to defer to an astronomer on this one ...


Next 20