On Oct 1, 2009, at 2:45 AM, Raistmer wrote: >> The flaw in your comparison is that both with adaptive replication >> and single task validation more and more projects are going to >> single task validation... > Sorry, I especially emphasized REDUNDANCY. Adaptive replication > doesn't implement this in required degree IMO. Single task vaidation > too. > If project go to such measures, it feels it can tolerate with > decreased level of result validity. > My words in no way were about adaptive replication or single task > validation. Let's will not mix these.
My only point was that aside from the sources of error that I have tried to explain that we will be looking for are not always going to be detected by the use of HR. If you do use HR with redundancy levels of 3 and over you may catch some of the errors of which I speak ... I stress MAY ... at least your chances are higher. But, AR and single validation knocks out those legs because the effect is that you are expecting that the computer returning the task will return a correct answer or one that is so far out of bounds that even the laxest validator will catch all errors. In some cases on some projects this MAY be true ... on others it is demonstrably false. And that is the larger set and more common case ... and the one group I am addressing. So, the argument against my idea is that the validator catches all errors through redundancy ... yet we are whittling away at the scope and intensity of redundancy all the time... so, ipso facto more errors are going to not be caught. _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
