| log in |
|
1)
Message boards :
Science :
New experiment: gene network expansion of human pathologically relevant genes
(Message 1332)
Posted 14 Jun 2018 by Col323 Thanks for updating the Science Status page with the information you can supply. I really enjoy seeing what progress has been made and at what rate, even if we have no idea how far down the path we are. We'll just keep crunching until we get there. :-D |
|
2)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Server Status - No Work Available
(Message 1218)
Posted 7 Dec 2017 by Col323 Thanks for pushing out the application optimization! I know it makes the work generation situation "worse", but I'm always happy to do more science with less effort. Any luck with the work generation optimization? |
|
3)
Message boards :
News :
Another experiment on E. coli
(Message 1136)
Posted 19 Oct 2017 by Col323 Thanks for the new "science meter". I really appreciate that you created a separate meter for the new experiment instead of lumping it all into one and recalculating the percent complete based on total work done. With separate meters, it feels like we are going forward. Recalculating the percentage would feel like we're going backward. Plus, we can track the progress of each experiment individually. Keep up the good work! |
|
4)
Message boards :
News :
Vitis vinifera: new dataset
(Message 1091)
Posted 7 Jul 2017 by Col323 Happy to keep crunching the work! In the "Optimizations" thread, it was mentioned that Daniel's latest optimizations would be included in the official version toward the end of May. Has that happened yet? |
|
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Output file size (and plans for the future)
(Message 889)
Posted 9 Feb 2017 by Col323 Forgive the novice question, but what is the difference between the two Ec experiments? If we've run out of work on e-coli, I'm not sure how you can say there's more e-coli work to do which is not redundant. Are we analyzing it from a different angle? Are the results used differently? I just don't want to feel like my limited CPU cycles are being kept busy so I'll stick around while we sort out the upload size. But if there's useful work which can be done, then send more of those Ec units my way while the Vv units are sorted! Thanks! |
|
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Optimization
(Message 807)
Posted 24 Jan 2017 by Col323 I just wanted to say a big Thank You! I have run a few using your FMA optimizations released on the 23rd, and they did cut my runtimes in half! Now I'm emptying my queue to see what this latest tweak can shave off of that. I really appreciate you digging into this. I love seeing us go faster with the same amount of effort. |
|
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Optimization
(Message 677)
Posted 21 Dec 2016 by Col323 Thanks for your work on these! I've been running the Linux AVX, the Win SSE, and Win FMA clients overnight with great success. The linux instances are shared virtual machines. They've gone from about 21,000 seconds/WU to about 11,000 seconds. The Windows machines are both dedicated machines. They have gone from about 10,000 seconds/WU to just under 3,600 seconds. My only slight problem is that one Windows machine has Symantec endpoint protection installed, and it's flagged pc.exe as a potential risk. It leaves it alone so I can continue to crunch, but it does not recognize it enough to know how to classify it. Every so often it will pop up a message about the file. Thanks again! I love doing more science in less time. |