Lynn W. Taylor wrote: > > > Martin wrote: [...] >> An important point is that the current credits are many different >> things to different people, and they /appear/ to keep /changing/ ... >> And I have no respect for what the current credits might represent. I >> don't believe they truly represent Cobblestones. > > I like the ditch-digging analogy. > > Guy comes along and says "trench, 1 meter deep, 30 centimeters, 1 credit > per meter." > > Guy says "great" and shows up with a garden trowel. Everyone is digging > trenches with garden trowels. [...] > Then a couple of days later, we've got a guy with a purpose-designed > trenching machine (the "GPU" of trenchers). > > But credit is still granted at the rate of one credit per meter of trench.
Good analogy of what people (participants) can be expected to expect. [...] > Credit is defined in a measurable way: > > Claimed Credit=([whetstone]+[drystone])*wu_cpu_time/1728000 > > See: > <http://www.boinc-wiki.info/BOINC_FAQ:_Credit#How_is_credit_calculated_in_BOINC.3F> > > > > Where we get in trouble is when we start talking about something other > than the formula above -- at least as far as what is canon. > > The "mythical 100 cobblestone computer" is an arbitrarily chosen box > such that when you use the formula above, you get 100 cobblestones per > day, if you use the original method of claiming credit. The 'problem' is that we have a range of hosts with different architectures that can run the synthetic benchmark and "look like" a 100 "cobblestone computer" and yet one host can have the performance of a garden trowel and another host with the exact same benchmark result can have the performance of a tractor-and-backhoe for whatever project. To fix that, Eric's script has gone mythical. The mythical is mythical and may well slowly change. We don't know. Or as we've been discussing, go with a middle-of-the-road "Etalon" system that can be real-world benchmarked with cobblestones. It can also be benchmarked with other benchmarks that are useful or more appropriate for other projects other than s...@h. The actual credits awarded can still be just based on the measured cobblestones (+ all the unmeasured imponderables as a 'hidden' factor in the calibration). Or, going further: We also gain the option to award (as people become interested) for any other performance factors (resources) as referenced against the real hardware of the "Etalon" reference system. For example, so that participating in non-cobblestones intensive projects can be fairly rewarded. To avoid any inflationary/deflationary effects if new measurement factors/resources are included, the formula for "credits" includes the new parameters (resources) being credited plus a fractional factor of cobblestones. That is done proportionately such that as measured on the "Etalon" system, there is no value change between what is now contributed as measured against what was contributed previously by fiddle-factor hidden assumption for those unmeasured resources. Regards, Martin -- -------------------- Martin Lomas m_boincdev ml1 co uk.ddSPAM.dd -------------------- _______________________________________________ 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.
