Reminder to reset <ncpus> tag in cc_config.xml if you changed it

If you altered the <ncpus> tag in cc_config.xml from -1 to a large number, as a way of bypassing the 'no more tasks too many uploads in progress' problem when upload11 was down, could I please remind everyone to change that tag back to <ncpus>-1</ncpus>.

There are some more OpenIFS batches coming soon and we don't want 100+ tasks landing on volunteer machines that really don't have 100 cores: e.g. https://www.cpdn.org/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1524863.

It would save CPDN trawling through their database to find these hosts and contact their owners.

Thanks!

This reminds me of some other project's trick. They grant additional credits if tasks are returned within X days to disincentive excessive hoarding.

This reminds me of some other project's trick. They grant additional credits if tasks are returned within X days to disincentive excessive hoarding.

Back when my machine could always get work from CPDN and WCG (and Seti@home), I had at least 0.35 days of work and about 0.65 days additional work in my preferences. Now that Seti@home is gone, WCG is sort-of back up, and CPDN is erratic in work availability, my machine is set to at least 0.50 days of work and 1.5 days of additional work, and that 1.5 days is not really enough. When the upload server went down, I mostly let my machine keep crunching and I got around 20 completed tasks before they started uploading again. I do not think of that as hoarding. IIRC, some of the more recent "classical" CPDN work took around 8 days to complete a task, and in the distant past (and on slower machines) tasks could take several months.

But I do not think, with the new Oifs tasks, there is much point grabbing a month's supply because they would time-out before I could get around to them. I usually leave my machine up 24/7.

Mon 30 Jan 2023 12:17:25 GMT |  | Project communication failed: attempting access to reference site
Mon 30 Jan 2023 12:17:25 GMT | climateprediction.net | Temporarily failed upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0348_1989050100_123_958_12174992_1_r944602151_121.zip: transient HTTP error
Mon 30 Jan 2023 12:17:25 GMT | climateprediction.net | Backing off 00:02:15 on upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0348_1989050100_123_958_12174992_1_r944602151_121.zip
Mon 30 Jan 2023 12:17:25 GMT | climateprediction.net | Started upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0085_1992050100_123_961_12177729_2_r1618474980_1.zip
Mon 30 Jan 2023 12:17:26 GMT |  | Internet access OK - project servers may be temporarily down.

I have the same problem

30/01/2023 12:14:07 | climateprediction.net | Started upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0783_2001050100_123_970_12187427_1_r1449012272_86.zip
30/01/2023 12:20:00 | climateprediction.net | Backing off 00:02:04 on upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0783_2001050100_123_970_12187427_1_r1449012272_86.zip

Thanks, yes this server is inaccessible at the moment and I cannot get in through there online portal. I have emailed their helpdesk.

Best wishes,

Andy

This reminds me of some other project's trick. They grant additional credits if tasks are returned within X days to disincentive excessive hoarding. No matter how people fake it, whether it's bogus core count or multiple clients per machine, they can't fake the actual compute throughput of the machine. Given CPDN has credit granting script run once a week instead of continuously, it might even be possible to adjust for upload server downtime if necessary.

If anyone confirms it isn't just me i will message Andy.

Mon 30 Jan 2023 11:25:51 AM EST | climateprediction.net | Starting task oifs_43r3_ps_0171_2001050100_123_970_12186815_1
Mon 30 Jan 2023 11:34:17 AM EST | climateprediction.net | Started upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0171_2001050100_123_970_12186815_1_r1404095512_0.zip
Mon 30 Jan 2023 11:36:17 AM EST |  | Project communication failed: attempting access to reference site
Mon 30 Jan 2023 11:36:17 AM EST | climateprediction.net | Temporarily failed upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0171_2001050100_123_970_12186815_1_r1404095512_0.zip: transient HTTP error
Mon 30 Jan 2023 11:36:17 AM EST | climateprediction.net | Backing off 00:02:59 on upload of oifs_43r3_ps_0171_2001050100_123_970_12186815_1_r1404095512_0.zip
Mon 30 Jan 2023 11:36:19 AM EST |  | Internet access OK - project servers may be temporarily down.

Yes, they are. Their presentation of it is:

Standard credit if task is reported 48 hours or more after issue.
Plus 25% bonus if returned between 24 hours and 48 hours of issue.
Plus 50% bonus if returned within 24 hours of issue.

Some of their tasks follow each other in sequence - the results of one task are used to create the starting conditions of the next, up to five times. They say they need to complete the task sequences for the entire cohort quickly, in order to make the research ready for publication. They also award badges - usually some years after the computing is completed - to recognise the contribution of each volunteer to each publication.

I'll mention it and see what response I get, credit is actually quite a pain for a project to have to manage from what I've learnt.

I'll mention it and see what response I get, credit is actually quite a pain for a project to have to manage from what I've learnt.

Returning valid results for the researchers to analyze is the important matter, credit is a 'nice to have'. Others may think otherwise, but I won't mind if the credit update is rare or doesn't happen.

I'll mention it and see what response I get, credit is actually quite a pain for a project to have to manage from what I've learnt.

Returning valid results for the researchers to analyze is the important matter, credit is a 'nice to have'. Others may think otherwise, but I won't mind if the credit update is rare or doesn't happen.

I tend to agree. For myself, credit is more about another tool to spot problems than anything else. But I get that for some it is a motivating factor.

I'll mention it and see what response I get, credit is actually quite a pain for a project to have to manage from what I've learnt.

Returning valid results for the researchers to analyze is the important matter, credit is a 'nice to have'. Others may think otherwise, but I won't mind if the credit update is rare or doesn't happen.

I tend to agree. For myself, credit is more about another tool to spot problems than anything else. But I get that for some it is a motivating factor.

Some kind of accounting of work done both in relative and absolute measure is important I'd argue. I have little doubt that at one point or another everyone looked at their credit and standings even if to just get an idea of the level of contribution over time. It's pretty normal behavior and I have no doubt that everyone would be asking for some way of knowing of how much one's contributed if there was no such measure provided at all. I agree that complicated credit system is unnecessary and a weekly credit run is fine. Unlike other projects, on CPDN task counts don't get erased from when you first join so you can actually tell how many tasks you've processed and calculate your error rate long term. I think that's kind of a nice thing. Although a cluttered and somewhat uninformative Project Status page is the trade-off, is my guess. Badges might be nice as they'll provide incentive to likely many people. Although, I'd rather see a number of other things improved first before concerning with badges.

Rather than the absolute credit count (although that is nice as well) I find the RAC a more useful measure of how well the system is performing - not that I’m hinting or anything :-)