This may be hard since SETI is back in action and shares GPU-s :(

Mayby another power failure .... ;)


____________

We are working hard, in our challenge...

December maximum power is trying to increase the power of einstein@home and also try to finish the S6LV1 before new year...


But is very difficult because good computers compute bigger GPU data than CPU...We are crunching because is hard to get...


Greetings from Spain :))

Everyone has a friend or family member somewhere that might be interested in volunteering their computing resources.

I like to think my desktop computer helps keep my bedroom warm over the winter months as it crunches :)!

Os little team adds another 4MM credits to the E@H cause today... 1 PF mark is a little closer.
____________

Adding a Radeon HD 7950 and two Radeon HD 6850s to help you reach that goal.

Sorry I can't keep my pc running over the holiday season.

Hello Bruce
I am as excited as you that the project has accomplished so much. If I had the money, I would place more resources in operation to do more work. I can assure you though, that I intend to keep the resources I do have working 24/7, as they do all the time. I think we are going to make the goal by the end of the year.
Regards,
Mark W. Patton

Os little team adds another 4MM credits to the E@H cause today... 1 PF mark is a little closer.

Thank you!

Bruce

Do you have any idea Bruce what we will compute after finishing S6LV1 ? Are there any other project ideas beside the BRP4 Arecibo pulsar search? And maybe you or anyone else can answer one more question: Is seti@home still doing serious scentific analysis on their data like einstein@home does?

Thanks for any answers, Merry Christmas and a happy new year!
Greetings from Munich, Germany.

I have been to the LIGO Observatory in Hanford this summer (great tour btw!), and it looks like It is going to take a long time until we get new data.

I just added a cheap GPU to one of my less-capable crunchers. However, I set up new prefs for it to do GPU work only, and then I set it to no new tasks until it finishes all the CPU work it has on board. There is only one Einstein unit left, but a bunch of Seti. It should finish that up in a week or so and then I'll unleash the GPU for both projects.

____________

Fingers Crossed that we can Achieve That Goal. My 2 Computers are almost Running 24/7. I just put them in Hibernate or Sleep Mode for a few hours or overnight, each couple of days, just to give them a rest. I only Shut Down about once or twice a week. I'm not expecting any New Ones at Xmas, but hopefully will be getting my Old Computer Working Again, and if I do, I'll be Activating it as soon as I can. I currently Run 5 Projects on My Desktop: Seti@Home, Einstein@Home, Cosmology@Home, Rosetta@Home, Milkyway@Home. I also have Orbit@Home, but have not done any work as yet, due to its Inactivity. On my Notebook (Laptop), I only Run Seti@Home due to it only having 2GB RAM and if I Run too many things on it, everything either Slows Down or Crashes. Even without any Programs Open, The RAM Usage is between 60 and 90 Percent. I do quite a few Einstein Tasks on my Desktop, and My Laptop is always loaded with Seti@Home tasks (I have had 35 Seti Tasks on it at one time). I actually got involved in The (Other) BOING Projects through The S.E.T.I. Program.
____________

Today Ill add another 24/7 machine with Kepler GPU

Hi Bruce,

could you give us some information about the plans for publications you have for the already processed data? Will there be publications about the gamma-ray searches? And what about the S6 search? The computations ended almost a year ago or so and I am wondering, if there will be a similar paper as for the S5 search that was published a few month ago. And what about the pulsars found in Arecibo data? Will there be a publication?

Cheers,

Vegard

Suspended other causes to help achieve 1 petaflop goal. I should be getting a desk top soon. Will add as soon as I do. You people are doing great work and I wish others would join. I will also put it up on facebook.

Seti@Home has been giving fits over the past month ...and I know as an Einstein cruncher who had his project set for "no new tasks" while crunching SETI has returned full time after 3 years off and crunching high numbers. I`m sure other Seti crunchers just got fed up with the condiciton of the project and left, thus returning to Einstein@hoime like I did./...good luck and I hope yo umake it.
____________

I have found some great water cooling units that are sealed from Corsair ( H80i for ~ $140 AUD ) that drop the CPU cores down to ~ 25C. Big & quiet fans. Choice of brackets to mount to the various CPU form factors. Heat exchange right over the chip. No trouble whatsoever.

Another 4MM (3,991,963) added to the E@H cause yesterday but the total flops still at 943.4 TFLOPS. Did we reach the actual total capacity?
____________

bonsoir
j'arrête pour le moment les autres projets et je met toute ma puissance disponible sur Einstein@home pour passer à 1 pétaflop!!!!!
bonne réception

And this means in english?..
____________
DSKAG Austria Research Team: http://www.research.dskag.at

My french is not that good, but it means something like: I'll stop crunching for my other projects and will focus on Einstein.
____________

The computing power of Einstein@Home has exceeded 950 Teraflops for the first time since the project was begun in 2005.

Why should Einstein@Home pass the 1 Petaflop (1000 Teraflop) barrier this time?
If I understand right the S6LV1 search progress is almost completed and in addition to this the sensitivity of interferometers has to be increased before creating new gravitation wave work units?

Best regards.

Markus

Another >4MM day (4,210,026) our team dialy record, a 20.1 Tflop added to the E@H pot!
____________

预祝爱因斯坦@home项目的计算能力突破一千万亿次大关。

And now that you pointed that out, the project immediately got scared and the TFLOP amount is in decline ever since. ;-)

Real men run 24/7/365, year in, year out. No holidays or vacations, just brief downtime for hardware upgrades. Time to brass-up and hit 1 Petaflop. Your PC can holiday when you're dead.
____________
There are only 10 kind of people in the world, those that understand binary and those that don't!

Real men run 24/7/365, year in, year out. No holidays or vacations, just brief downtime for hardware upgrades. Time to brass-up and hit 1 Petaflop. Your PC can holiday when you're dead.

Real men run 24/7/365, year in, year out. No holidays or vacations, just brief downtime for hardware upgrades. Time to brass-up and hit 1 Petaflop. Your PC can holiday when you're dead.

I understand you're about to offer to pay my electricity bill for me? LOL

Congratulations on almost reaching 1 Petaflop!

I wish I could do more to help the project. I have the hardware to run about 1200 BRP4 tasks and additional S6LV1 tasks per day but not the bandwidth/throughput to keep all my systems crunching full time. My hosts seem unable to download at a rate of more than 1.4 Mbps per host from the Einstein download servers. Since I have a limited window each day of unrestricted bandwidth, it has been difficult to keep the systems fed with work.

Congratulations on almost reaching 1 Petaflop!

I wish I could do more to help the project. I have the hardware to run about 1200 BRP4 tasks and additional S6LV1 tasks per day but not the bandwidth/throughput to keep all my systems crunching full time. My hosts seem unable to download at a rate of more than 1.4 Mbps per host from the Einstein download servers. Since I have a limited window each day of unrestricted bandwidth, it has been difficult to keep the systems fed with work.

Merry Christmas Bruce. I will leave my computer on for the rest of the year. Thank you for your commitment to the advancement of the understanding of nature.

That made me wonder how compressible the data is, so I tried bzip2 compression on a couple of files:-

p2030.20120101.G177.93-02.24.N.b1s0g0.00000_543.bin4 2098320 bytes in=> 450585 out
h1_0403.95_S6GC1 8445248 bytes in => 7130498 bytes out

So based on this limited sample, it appears BRP4 files are pretty compressible (almost 5x) but SL6V1 less so (<1.2x). If it's possible to somehow arrange compressed downloads for you, you could get almost 5 times the work in the same bandwidth.

Is it possible to proxy e@h downloads? I think it downloads with wget or curl, so in principle it seems possible to insert a compress/decompress step.

edit: compressing about 20 BRP4 files gave an average compression of ~3.58x; files fell into 3 roughly similiar sized groups, with compression rations of 4.72x, 3.73x and 2.84x)

I think that would be fantastic if there was a way to compress the data down in BOINC either with Bzip2 or possibly LZMA2 (xz).

I think that would be fantastic if there was a way to compress the data down in BOINC either with Bzip2 or possibly LZMA2 (xz).

From FileCompression: The BOINC client can handle compressed downloads using both the mod_gzip and mod_default mechanisms provided by Apache. However, resumption of interrupted downloads doesn't work with either of these methods, so we don't recommend using them.

For application version files, you can specify a <gzip/> flag. This will cause the file to be transferred in compressed form to 7.0+ clients.

and

If you include the <gzip_when_done> tag in an output file description, the file will be gzip-compressed after it has been generated.

The gzip_when_done is only supported in client version 5.8+.
(ClimatePrediction uses this form)

This is what I'm planning to do: Link the application with zlib, so it can easily handle both gzipped and plain data, then add gzip as the last step of pre-processing. Shouldn't require much of a change.

We are already using the gzip feature of the BOINC Client for result files in BRP and GW work (<gzip_when>done>), in fact this is why Einstein@Home requires a minimum Client version of 5.8. But I wouldn't rely on that feature for input/workunit files.

BM

We'll continue with the BRP4 search indefinitely. First we need to catch up with the data backlog of about 13,000 beams (this will take a couple of months at the current rates) then we'll continue in the steady-state. PALFA is taking about 50 new beams of data per day, on the average, so this search will be running for some years, at least for as long as PALFA is collecting new data.

I figure my home computing taps me for 50 cents per day maximum. I'll balance my cost by having a glass of water rather than a can of diet coke.
____________
There are only 10 kind of people in the world, those that understand binary and those that don't!

Okie Dokie Smokey. We are crunching in Oklahoma.

We done all GPU BRP4 Units already, it seems ^^
____________
DSKAG Austria Research Team: http://www.research.dskag.at

Just fired up my I7 2600k and gtx 580.I want a pulsar by years end so 24/7 runing hehe.

Running 6 cores, one is gpu- Einstein 4 ever, happy days !!!!
____________

I don't think we'll reach it before the end of 2012. the FLOPS have been decreasing since days now. I guess most if not all SETI people have gone to their home and that's why we're seeing such decrease.
____________

Team Belgium

I don't think we'll reach it before the end of 2012. the FLOPS have been decreasing since days now. I guess most if not all SETI people have gone to their home and that's why we're seeing such decrease.

Just fired up my I7 and nvidia gpu
all 9 cores 24X 7
1 petaflop here i come
vivek

I finally activated the new GT630 in one of my older crunchers. It immediately downloaded 16 Setis and 10 Einsteins, and got to work on the Einsteins in HP.

____________

I got another one of my machines up and running. It is a 2 core AMD with no extra video processing power. I think if I put more RAM in it, it will be able to run a GPU.

I got another one of my machines up and running. It is a 2 core AMD with no extra video processing power. I think if I put more RAM in it, it will be able to run a GPU.

Adding a GTX570 1280 MB (FERMI) in my 8 Core Mac Pro running OSX 10.8.2 to help you !
____________
Mac Pro 8 Core 2008 3.0 GHz (2 x Xeon X5472) 4 GB DDR2 800 intel SSD 330 180 GB nVidia GTX 570 1280 MB Flashed for Mac running OSX 10.8.2

I just stop other(SETI) proyect to start getting Einstein data and what happend? I was getting 512 WU and it say that this a limit of a day. Ok, no problem, but the problem is that i get 500 WU for CPU, maybe few less and around 15 for GPU. So, what can my sistem, i7 and 2 gtx460 do about that? Oh, busy a cpu for about 10 days and i can take a GPU out of the sistem. Beehh.

Hi Bojan,

here @Einstein you do not need the workbuffer of 10 days, a setting on 0.5 days is quite sufficiant.
I run my systems with a workbuffer-setting of 0.05 days and I never ran out of work.
That's very different to SETI.
____________

Hi Bojan,

here @Einstein you do not need the workbuffer of 10 days, a setting on 0.5 days is quite sufficiant.
I run my systems with a workbuffer-setting of 0.05 days and I never ran out of work.
That's very different to SETI.

I finally activated the new GT630 in one of my older crunchers. It immediately downloaded 16 Setis and 10 Einsteins, and got to work on the Einsteins in HP.

i know that, but in pass(when a seti was down, start of december) i have limited my project at 1gb of hdd, i always getting around 20 GPU work and about 10 CPU work and disk of limited for BOINC was full. It seems that project was knowing what my sistem was needet, but now? Im getting a 500 CPU work for 10 days and almost nothing for GPU (GPU on my sistem is much faster), it will finished all work less in a day.....
sorry for my bad english, hoppe that you understand me what i will tell you.

"Don't forget to keep one cpu-core free to feed the gpu."

I understand that, but i read every post on every forum on BOINC projects but dont understand still that.

What is for you one Core on i7 which Intel say that have 8 Core?

Im running 6 WU, 2 are free "HT" or i shuld run only 3 WU and realise 1 real core not HT one?

thanks for your answer and thanks

"Don't forget to keep one cpu-core free to feed the gpu."

I understand that, but i read every post on every forum on BOINC projects but dont understand still that.

What is for you one Core on i7 which Intel say that have 8 Core?

I'm running 6 WU, 2 are free "HT" or i shuld run only 3 WU and realise 1 real core not HT one?

thanks for your answer and thanks

How are we doing with the Petaflop challenge? I was able to get a dual-core machine running again that had fried a power supply. Hope we can make it.
Mark

Mark,

On the Einstein home page under Tech Stuff you will find a server status link. The current average is 915.7 TFLOPs. We will need a lot more help to pass the PFLOP barrier.

Are you the same Mark that recently posted in MW. If so I responded to your post there.

Joe

Yep, that was me. Thank you for your quick response.
Mark

Tossing in a 560ti-448 and a 660 till New Years!


____________

Hello,

[Im getting a 500 CPU work for 10 days and almost nothing for GPU (GPU on my sistem is much faster), it will finished all work less in a day.....

Hallo!
I think, no one believes, that we will cross the 1 PFLOPS barrier within this year (only another 40 h). But since 5 days we see well a daily increase in crunching speed. So I will try a forecast, when we will reach our intermittend goal.
Within the last 8 weeks we had an average increase of 4.10 +/- 0.29 [TFLOPS/d], so we will get a range of the evening of 13.Jan. till the morning of the 16.Jan., most likely the evening of the 14.Jan..
If I take the increase over the last 5 days of 9.4 +/- 0,69 [TFLOPS/d], I get the late night of the 5.Jan. till the late night of the 6.Jan., most likely the midday of the 6.Jan..
So it´s a wide spread range. Let´s see what will happen.

Best whishes for a happy and healthy and wealthy NEW YEAR 2013 !!!!

Kind regards and happy crunching
Martin
____________

Thanks Gary Roberts and others for yours all replies. I just stop geting CPU work at beginning and now is fine. Still have around 300 CPU work to finish it utill 9.1.2013 and i hoppe that will manage all of them to that date.

thanks again to all and good crunching

Greetings! Just added a new notebook w/NVidia to the cause. 24/7 - but, only connects when I'm stopped for the night.
____________

Is the rising computing power since the last few days (about 940 TFLOPS at the moment) real or just due to the very large credits per FLOPS ratio of the new FGRP2 tasks? Is this taken into account in the calculation?

Cheers!

Hallo Vegard!

.... due to the very large credits per FLOPS ratio of the new FGRP2 tasks? Is this taken into account in the calculation?

Hi Martin,

I believe that the spread in crunching time or the credit/hour is not the crucial point here. I assume that the overall number of floating point operations is (almost) the same for each FGRP2 task, regardless of how long it runs on a certain machine. So, if I know this number and count the jobs per day, I can calculate the overall FLOPS of the project. But does it work like that? Or are the total FLOPS calculated from the CREDIT by using a fixed(!?) conversion number credit/FLOPS? If this is the case, the given FLOPS numbers on the server status page are meaningless (or at least very uncertain), since the credit/FLOPS are different for the 3 subprojects (but would explain the recent increase since FGRP2 is running). It would be nice, if an expert could clarify the method of computing the FLOPS (and thereby explain the HUGE differences of FLOPS numbers on different BOINC webpages, e.g. boincstats.com says 435 TFLOPS at the moment...).

Cheers!

Where are we at as of today?

Go to http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/server_status.html and scroll all the way down to "Computing capacity".
____________
Jord

-The BOINC FAQ Service
- BOINC 7.0 FAQ

I used to be an adventurer like you. Then I took an arrow in the knee...

The link points to

Floating point speed
(from recent average credit of all users) 945.8 TFLOPS

this includes the better credit for the FGRP2, because it's calculatet with the credit as base.

More at the beginning of the server status page the 'COMPUTING' line gives the following info:

CPU TFLOPS
(from successful tasks last week)

This does not necessarily mean 'from average credit'; but since the numbers are very similar I assume that it means the same.

So the post

... due to the very large credits per FLOPS ratio of the new FGRP2 tasks? Is this taken into account in the calculation?

must be answered with YES

Happy new Year to all of you!

Alexander
____________

Oh, I overlooked this line of text, sorry... But I disagree that the answer is YES. I rather think that it depends on the conversion factors that are applied, if the numbers make sense or not. Would be nice, if an uncertainty could be calculated and written next to he numbers. Otherwise it will not be clear, if in the future we really passed any nice barrier like 1 PFLOPS or so... (And there are still the large discrepancies in the various webpages.) I am just surprised that we are celebrating the 950 TFLOPS (the first post by Bruce), while it is far from obvious (at least for the users) that this is correct.

Cheers and happy new year!

Gary,

You've done it! and with time to spare.
What a fantastic way to enter 2013.
Congratulations and all the very best for a prosperous New Year :-)

Gavin.

Edit: Bugger, I may have spoken too soon, you just dipped under again!

Hallo Vegard!

I rather think that it depends on the conversion factors that are applied, if the numbers make sense or not.

Hi Martin,

interesting, thanks! In your fit you make the assumption that there is only one conversion factor in the FLOPS calculation, which I guess is known to be true. But since the conversion factor of FGRP2 tasks SHOULD be completely different than for the other tasks at the moment (in the current testing phase) and since this subproject accounts for something like a fifth of the current official computing power, it has a significant impact on the current total FLOPS. In that sense it can easily explain the recent increase in computing power (after we lost some SETI people).

I think I understand everything better now, but I also think that we only reach this new peak by definition. Let's see how everything will develop in the future.

Thanks and cheers!

The old maximum was 953,8 @ Dec. 10th 20:35.Now it´s 952,5.

I was right. No 1 PFLOPS at the end of 2012. Let's hope we can reach it shortly into 2013
____________

Team Belgium

Hi Vegard!
It´s just what BM meant in his thread Message 121517 dated Dec. 21st by

... Flops estimation and Credit will be fine-tuned when we have more data (i.e. tasks returned), but possibly not this year anymore.

Hallo Sid!
Be careful. Shortly before midnight (MEZ) most often there occures a drop back by about 0.5% (5 TFLOPS). Don´t know why this happen.

Kind regards and happy crunching
Martin
____________

Martin:

I figure with 500 more late model GPU's, 1 Petaflop today is possible.

I'm trying to drum up some support on the shoutbox at BOINCstats

. . . chugga, chugga.

When Seti came back on line, I was expecting progress to drop backwards sharply. What I wasn't expecting was the quick recovery that has now occurred. Sure, a significant proportion of this upward spurt is due to the fact that tasks in the new FGRP2 run are crunching rather quickly. But I'm sure there is also the help of both existing and new volunteers who are adding resources in response to Bruce's messages.

... partially due to Seti's latest problem with downloads getting stuck again.

I don't follow Seti so I'm quite oblivious to whether the project is running normally or not. I do understand that Seti supporters tend to keep large caches and tend to use E@H as a backup. Unless Seti has not been supplying work for a few days, I wouldn't think we would see much effect here yet. Sure, caches might be having the shortfall supplied by E@H but until Seti tasks actually run out, I wouldn't think that more E@H tasks are being crunched yet.

Overclock.net have added E@H as one of their three "Projects of the month"...

Prepare for blast off, after BGB January 2013 is over...

dunx

965.7 TFLOPS and rising.

976.8 as of now :)
____________

The only problem is that you don't seem to have enough work lined up. I am only a small contributor, with a little less than 700k work units done, but I frequently find that you don't have work for my i7 computer.
____________

The only problem is that you don't seem to have enough work lined up. I am only a small contributor, with a little less than 700k work units done, but I frequently find that you don't have work for my i7 computer.

I agree, there must be something with the settings.
I have five systems running here, all set to an additional workbuffer of 0.05 days and they never run dry.
____________

Hallo Vegard!

I rather think that it depends on the conversion factors that are applied, if the numbers make sense or not.

As long as I´m with this project, this is more than 7 years now, the conversionfactor is stable at 1,02*10^-5 (TFLOPS/(Cobblestone/d)]. - for E@H !!! - This I prooved by taking the daily data from the server status page, put them into a graphic and made a least square fit. The correlationfactor R^2 for this is 0,99991, so verry good. But intentionaly the factor is 1e-5 --- 100,000 Cobblestone/d for 1 TFLOPS. I think, the difference is somewhat difficult to rule out here.
The definition of the Cobblestone for the done crunching work, was set up for a better comparison of the different BOINC-projects.

By the way, we will get a new peak crunching power this afternoon. The old maximum was 953,8 @ Dec. 10th 20:35.Now it´s 952,5.

Best whishes for a happy, healthy and wealthy NEW YEAR 2013 !!!!

Kind regards and happy crunching
Martin

Hallo Alex!

a RAC of 50.000 means 0.5 TFLOPS / day? Is there a definition for the 'Cobblestone'?

yea seti is down again so I guess i'm back with a paltry 4.2 terraflop

and I will leave it there until well after you get a petaflop.

good luck guy's it was at .974 pettaflop just before I posted.

For the record: 985.5
____________
Jord

-The BOINC FAQ Service
- BOINC 7.0 FAQ

I used to be an adventurer like you. Then I took an arrow in the knee...

I've made a challenge over at BOINCstats called "PetaFLOP Crunch" to celebrate the upcoming 1 PFLOP for Einstein@Home. I think we will reach the 1 PFLOP before the challenge's start (which is 5th jan 2013) but it doesn't matter... Anyone is welcome to participate in the challenge and late entrants are allowed as well.
____________

Team Belgium

Hallo!
It will be hard up to reach the 1 PFLOPS today.
At 14:45 we hat 989,2 TFLOPS with an increase of 1.3 TFLOPS/h. In princip that´s enough to reach 10001,1 TFLOPS at midnight (UTC) but very often, like yesterday, between 22:45 and 22:50 there occures a drop of about 5 TFLOPS. So we will have very likely the 1 PFLOPS within the early morning tomorrow.

Kind regrds and happy crunching
Martin

____________

Hi Martin,

I believe that the spread in crunching time or the credit/hour is not the crucial point here. I assume that the overall number of floating point operations is (almost) the same for each FGRP2 task, regardless of how long it runs on a certain machine. So, if I know this number and count the jobs per day, I can calculate the overall FLOPS of the project. But does it work like that? Or are the total FLOPS calculated from the CREDIT by using a fixed(!?) conversion number credit/FLOPS? If this is the case, the given FLOPS numbers on the server status page are meaningless (or at least very uncertain), since the credit/FLOPS are different for the 3 subprojects (but would explain the recent increase since FGRP2 is running). It would be nice, if an expert could clarify the method of computing the FLOPS (and thereby explain the HUGE differences of FLOPS numbers on different BOINC webpages, e.g. boincstats.com says 435 TFLOPS at the moment...).

Cheers!

... partially due to Seti's latest problem with downloads getting stuck again.

I don't follow Seti so I'm quite oblivious to whether the project is running normally or not. I do understand that Seti supporters tend to keep large caches and tend to use E@H as a backup. Unless Seti has not been supplying work for a few days, I wouldn't think we would see much effect here yet. Sure, caches might be having the shortfall supplied by E@H but until Seti tasks actually run out, I wouldn't think that more E@H tasks are being crunched yet.

I think there's a fair chance we should be able to declare the Petaflop within the next 36 hours.

SETI has been limping for a while, with a recurrence of the scheduler timeout problem it suffered at the very beginning of November. And around 02:50 UTC this morning, one of their collection of creaky and cranky servers left the party: no work has been sent out or reported since then.

They are also due for scheduled maintenance - probably tomorrow, after the holiday. That means we should get the benefit of the big post-holiday office switch on tomorrow, when their volunteers fetch from backup projects. And even if we miss this opportunity, Berkeley has another outage scheduled for electrical supply work between 4-6 January...

965.7 TFLOPS and rising.

996.6 TF !! :-)

Cheers, Mike.

I think there's a fair chance we should be able to declare the Petaflop within the next 36 hours.

FTR: 994.5

BM

Hallo!
Maximum today was 996,9 TFLOPS at 22:45. Then occured this mysterious drop back by 4.0 TFLOPS at 22:50. Its rising further now. Presumably will arrive at 1000 TFOLPS at 3:25 (all UTC).

Kind regards and happy crunching
Martin
____________

just a thought I am running about 4 tflops

and have at least 60 wu pending and while it would not change

the overall computation if say any one with a rac of 10,000 was to do only

validation it would make things more immediate for both the slower systems

and the faster ones as well shortening the time the wu are in the field.
____________

999.2 TFLOPS :)
____________

999.6! Could be the next update's the one.

I submitted this to Slashdot, who've run the news story.

edit: now 999.9 at 08:37 UTC

Congrats get your beers and ciggars ready!

Floating point speed (from recent average credit of all users) 1000.0 TFLOPS

Page last updated 3 Jan 2013 8:40:02 UTC
____________

congratulations to all of us for hitting the petaflop.

Congrats us :D

Good stuff everyone, let's find some pulsars!!

now can you do 100 petaflops.

yayyyyy we reached it! :D
____________

Team Belgium

I hate to put a damper on the celebrations but I don't think this is a real record. The RAC that is used to determine the 1 Petaflop barrier is currently inflated with the to high credit values for the FGRP2 results.

If the runtime and credit given for S6LV1 is taken as a baseline then the runtime for FGRP2 should yield about 75 to 80 credits not the current 337 leading to lower RAC numbers.

Sure, the whole thing is just numerology, but it's still fun.

And she's still rising - 1001.4 TFLOPS at 10:30 (at least - the status page is a bit slow to update).

Somebody at slashdot was thinking we ought to be counting in base-2 rather than base-10, and gave us a new target of 1024 TFLOPS to aim for.

Or, if our existing Tflop is base-10 (as I suspect it might be), we'd need 1125.9 of them....

Congrats all!
____________
Jord

-The BOINC FAQ Service
- BOINC 7.0 FAQ

I used to be an adventurer like you. Then I took an arrow in the knee...

I hate to put a damper on the celebrations but I don't think this is a real record. The RAC that is used to determine the 1 Petaflop barrier is currently inflated with the to high credit values for the FGRP2 results.

If the runtime and credit given for S6LV1 is taken as a baseline then the runtime for FGRP2 should yield about 75 to 80 credits not the current 337 leading to lower RAC numbers.

Good that I left my laptop turned on overnight so we made it! :)
____________

I hate to put a damper on the celebrations but I don't think this is a real record. The RAC that is used to determine the 1 Petaflop barrier is currently inflated with the to high credit values for the FGRP2 results.

If the runtime and credit given for S6LV1 is taken as a baseline then the runtime for FGRP2 should yield about 75 to 80 credits not the current 337 leading to lower RAC numbers.

I hate to put a damper on the celebrations but I don't think this is a real record. The RAC that is used to determine the 1 Petaflop barrier is currently inflated with the to high credit values for the FGRP2 results.

If the runtime and credit given for S6LV1 is taken as a baseline then the runtime for FGRP2 should yield about 75 to 80 credits not the current 337 leading to lower RAC numbers.

Hallo Henk!

The RAC that is used to determine the 1 Petaflop barrier is currently inflated with the to high credit values for the FGRP2 results.

Hallo dancer42!

now can you do 100 petaflops.

next stop 2Peta Flops?
____________

Einstein@home ya supero el teraflop 1012,9Teraflops!!!!!!!
____________

I hate to put a damper on the celebrations but I don't think this is a real record. The RAC that is used to determine the 1 Petaflop barrier is currently inflated with the to high credit values for the FGRP2 results.

If the runtime and credit given for S6LV1 is taken as a baseline then the runtime for FGRP2 should yield about 75 to 80 credits not the current 337 leading to lower RAC numbers.

I hope that my computer that running 24 Hours can help you.
Kind Regards
Paolo

It's at 1023.1. Congrats to all.




____________



http://www.AI4FR.com

Congratulations to all!

If I have not forgotten anything, Einstein@Home will be a second(after Folding@Home)scientific* distributed computing project in history which has pass the 1 petaflop mark of average (steady) computing speed! If can keep it after FGRP2 CR correction of course.
Many project was very close at some point of time (SETI GPUGrid POEM Milkyway) but failed to keep reached peak speed.

* Projects on cracking ciphers/numbers i do not count as scientific dc.

At least for the time being, we seem to have reached a plateau at 1026.9

SETI is running this weekend after all (the electrical work was postponed), and the new FGRP2s have been corrected to 70 credits each, so I imagine we'll be here for a little while.

FGRP2 TFLOPS decrease now (190) and overall TFLOPS still increase (1034), so I would say it is a true, honest record.
____________

Congratulations on passing 1 PFLOPS!

found that on gulli.com (sorry, german)
http://www.gulli.com/news/20590-einsteinhome-wissenschaftsprojekt-erreicht-ein-petaflop-rechenleistung-2013-01-03
____________

i signed up for this project on the 24th and haven't stopped working on it. yay me i helped do something!!!!!!

Oh, no! ;)
Throughput has dropped to 0.9959 PF, presumably(?) as a result of the recent FGRP2 credit reduction. How large is the averaging window? Any estimates of what the new equilibrium will be, and how long it will take for E@H to re-pass 1.0 PF?

I suspect the drop is more do to the BRP4 validators being off line until tomorrow.
____________

I suspect the drop is more do to the BRP4 validators being off line until tomorrow.

2 Gary Roberts
CPU TFLOPS for individual subproject are not accurate because BOINC still do not handle speed of GPU apps correctly.
If you want estimate distribution between subproject better look for score. For current moment:
BRP4 - 3,831,740 ~ 71%
S6LV1 - 1,049,780 ~ 19%
FGRP2 - 543,301 ~ 10%

Almost all speed of BRP4 come now from GPU calculations and GPU can not crunch other subprojects so seems it is a main cause of such uneven distribution...

P.S.
BTW seems S6LV1 and S6BucketLVE statistic is mixed up? I think S6LV1 is already finished and replaced by S6BucketLVE?

...it would really be appreciated if hosts are left 'available' to accept resends.

2 Gary Roberts
Ok, thanks for explanation.
I just think "S6LV1 search progress" blok of stats count WU as "Already done" only after WU pass validation (i.e. at least 2 matching result in quorium).
And it was strange to see from one side 100% completed, and on the other >200k tasks ready to send.
If it mark task as "done" after it pass from WU generator to DB it can explain "strange" statistic.


But then how to explain this message poping up(all last day) in the logs of of my BOINC client?
................
14/01/2013 01:32:31 | Einstein@Home | No work is available for Gravitational Wave S6 LineVeto search (extended)
14/01/2013 01:32:31 | Einstein@Home | No work is available for Gravitational Wave S6 LineVeto search
...............


Server offer for me only BRP4 and FGRP2 Wus last days. When I try to opt-out of them in prefs then server respond by:
14/01/2013 03:42:16 | Einstein@Home | Requesting new tasks for CPU
14/01/2013 03:42:19 | Einstein@Home | Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
14/01/2013 03:42:19 | Einstein@Home | No work sent
14/01/2013 03:42:19 | Einstein@Home | No work is available for Gravitational Wave S6 LineVeto search (extended)
14/01/2013 03:42:19 | Einstein@Home | No work is available for Gravitational Wave S6 LineVeto search
14/01/2013 03:42:19 | Einstein@Home | see scheduler log messages on http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu//host_sched_logs/6180/6180386
14/01/2013 03:42:19 | Einstein@Home | No work available for the applications you have selected. Please check your preferences on the web site.

...
I did mention it in a message a long time ago and Bernd did make an explanation which I don't think I understood at the time and which I've certainly long forgotten now anyway.

I didn't pursue the matter at the time because the client was always able to (eventually) get what it wanted by being a bit persistent with the server. Maybe it would ask a few times for a certain type of work and be refused with a 'no work available' answer but then, after yet another request to the server, the request would suddenly be granted.

I don't know for sure, but I think the explanation goes something like this. There are (I think) server-side settings that control what the scheduler 'prefers' to give you when you request work. To keep it simple, let's assume that for 40% of requests, the scheduler wants to send you FGRP work and for 60% of requests the scheduler wants to send GW work. If your prefs allow any type of CPU tasks or if you have said 'yes' to the pref setting about 'other apps' if work for your preferred app is not available, I think you will always get what the scheduler has chosen to send. If you have excluded one of the apps and said 'no' to 'other apps' I think you may very well get the 'no work available' message, even though there actually is work available. It's possible you may need to go through this cycle a few times until the scheduler's choice of what it prefers to send actually coincides with the search that your prefs allow and so you get the work. I have seen this sort of cycle so many times (with the ultimate happy ending) that I don't even worry about it anymore.

The full explanation must be more complicated than this because it doesn't happen on every host that always asks for just one particular type of work. It seems to happen on hosts that have complicated preference settings, particularly when there are some local over-ride settings in play. I just haven't felt the urgency to attempt to document it better, particularly as the server code is rather old and will eventually be updated anyway.