On the other hand, If we had our table of calibrated machines CPDN could do a look up and determine that your machine is not suitable ...
Except, they are not in that much of a hurry so they might not mind that your machine takes 2 years to return the model. On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Lynn W. Taylor wrote: > I thought about that.... > > So, I dig out my old 486/66, and attach to CPDN. > > It requests 1 second of work, and gets one of their longest models. > > ... and there is no way it can finish it in a year or two. > > OTOH, the benchmark can be off by an order of magnitude and the > project > can still recognize that my 486 is unsuitable. > > The other problem is that you don't really have a benchmark until you > finish the first work unit, and for something like CPDN you could go a > year without a benchmark. > > Looking at the "reference machine" idea, that's a problem there as > well > since the reference won't be recalculated very often. > > Richard Haselgrove wrote: >> There would actually be some benefit in re-thinking this. >> >> At the moment, on attaching to a new project, the BOINC client >> makes an >> initial request for a nominal 1 second of work, and then immediately >> proceeds to fill the predicted cache on the basis of benchmark and >> TDCF = >> 1.000000 > _______________________________________________ > boinc_dev mailing list > boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev > To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and > (near bottom of page) enter your email address. _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
