On Tuesday 25 May 2010 07:49:33 am Martin wrote:
> On 25/05/10 00:20, jay wrote:
> > On Monday 24 May 2010 03:03:17 pm David Anderson wrote:
> >> The bottom line: as long as a host is sending correct results,
> >> it shouldn't have a daily quota at all.
> >
> > Exactly.
>
> Nope!
>
> An absolute maximum daily quota is still needed to catch fault
> conditions where Boinc doesn't know or can't detect any faults. I'm sure
> we all know that Boinc is far from complete and definitely not perfect!
>
> There still needs to be a daily maximum that is set to say x10 whatever
> is conceivably possible with today's hardware, or set to whatever the
> project *servers* can withstand without suffering a effective DOS attack.
>
> A finer absolute limit could be to have hard limits for each class of
> known client hardware. For example:
>
> X * CPU_clock * number_CPUs;
> Y * GPU_clock * number_GPU_processing_elements;
> ...
>
> Assume a generous maximum for anything unknown.
>
> (OK, so Intel P4 CPUs and any RISC CPUs would score badly on that!)
>
>
> Also, would you really want a supercomputer cluster to blockade a
> project's servers for the day and leave all other participants dry?
>
>
> I favour the idea of maintaining a "normal average" WU rate per
> application per host CPU and limiting to say x4 of that as a WU *rate*
> limit over a shorter period of say 6 hours. Adjust accordingly if the
> project's WUs vary in compute requirements.
>
>
> For s...@h as highlighted, how do you distinguish s...@h "-9" results as a
> real error or not? Can a checksum test be included in the client to
> detect failed computations?...
>
>
> Regards,
> Martin

That's called "running the world for the sake of the 1%'rs", Martin
(In this case 1/10 of 1%)
It's also why the scheduler is so frakked up in the first place.
_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to