|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,704
Moderator / Da Masta
|
Moderator / Da Masta
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,704 |
My most imaginative topic title to date Is it just me, or have the size of the work units, er, doubled? It's taken me around 12 hours to return a unit that usually takes about six... If they have become bigger, this is potentially a bad thing for the people with slower computers or dinosaurs with 56K connections (I didn't mean that  ) because they either (a) won't return a result for days on end, or (b) will take forever to upload the unit, meaning less points in return for that unit... Which is bad for all. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,042 Likes: 7
Moderator
|
Moderator
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,042 Likes: 7 |
They have. My rating is a 116 and have a cable connection and it still takes me like twice as long to finish one up.
It also takes up twice as much memory usage. They say you won't even notice it running. I do.
.. i do.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,708
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,708 |
12 hours is long for you? I have one at nearly 30 hours right now 92% complete.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 19
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 19 |
they are taking a lot more time to complete, my other comp is overall rated at 52, its at 87% at 134 hours heh this comp usually goes at 5 hours for one, but its been taking 9-10 hours.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 699
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 699 |
Recently there have been fewer ligands per WU, but it takes longer. These typically take 70-odd hours on my main system - a PII 400. I've also dreaded returning results since ligandfit started since it hogs all my bandwidth and I can't do much.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30 |
Just passing through whilst keeping up with what's happening with UBB. Yes, the processing times have increased with this version of LigandFit (released Nov 19) because the researchers have requested more data out of it But Dave, you should notice less of a hit on your connection, the new results files are only about 30% the size of the previous ones at most.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 699
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 699 |
Yeah, I have noticed that recently... thought it was just my imagination or something  .
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451
Spotlight Runner-Up
|
Spotlight Runner-Up
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451 |
This would certainly explain why my PC is seeming rather sluggish at the moment..
It's taking around 3 times longer than the usual time it takes to complete a task. It used to take around 8 hours, now it's more like 30. On top of this, I haven't really noticed the agent giving me the amount of points expected for the increased work load.. I used to get around 150 per result, now I get about 215..
Why have the researchers requested more data out of it..? They're not recieving the data as quick, and the whole idea of the project is supposed to be voluntary and not effecting the speed of the volunteer's computer..
On a side note, due to the increased work load and sluggish connections a few of my friends are experiencing, they have deleted the agent.. I can't really see the gain in this for the researchers as I'm sure more will follow.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,079 Likes: 3
I type Like navaho
|
I type Like navaho
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,079 Likes: 3 |
My old home pc has been taking ~200 hours each of the last 3-4 it's crunched 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451
Spotlight Runner-Up
|
Spotlight Runner-Up
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451 |
I have now removed the agent due to REALLY slow connection speeds on a 1MB cable service.. Yes this was the agent because as soon as it was removed and I restarted my machine, it's running so much faster..
Let me know if the nice researchers over at LigandFit decide to be reasonable again. I'll continue to run the sub-team, not that I know how many of us there will be left at this rate..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451
Spotlight Runner-Up
|
Spotlight Runner-Up
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451 |
Whoops.. Pressed quote instead of edit.. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 30 |
Hmmm, it really shouldn't be making the computer more sluggish. I'd personally found that this new version caused less problems than the old one. As for the whys, its because we've moved into Phase 2 of the project and then want to perform as much refinement work on the computer as possible on the promising molecules identified previously before the move into the lab work. If you wanted to try and find a cause for what you are seeing, you might like to drop in on the forums and ask over there because I'm only an infrequent visitor here.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451
Spotlight Runner-Up
|
Spotlight Runner-Up
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451 |
Thanks for the reply Graham, I'll ask around on the forums.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,223
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,223 |
I have definately noticed a huge difference in the length of time it takes to finish a WU. But for all that, I don't notice any difference at all in the performance of my machines. they still run exactly the same as they always did where UD just backgrounds itself if I am actually doing something on the computer (such as typing this message). I look at it like this: My machine is going to be crunching work units 24/7. What do I care if it takes 4 hours to crunch a work unit or 8? Am I keeping score? To a degree, yes, but if I'm taking 8 to do a unit I'm betting most other people are taking 12. 
Picture perfect penmanship here.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 699
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 699 |
12? My current one is 72 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451
Spotlight Runner-Up
|
Spotlight Runner-Up
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451 |
It hasn't effected the speed of my p2 233Mhz at all.. However, the decrease of performance on my p4 1.6Ghz was horrible.. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451
Spotlight Runner-Up
|
Spotlight Runner-Up
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451 |
*sigh* I've just re-installed the agent.. Someone close to the family died of cancer last night, a sluggish computer is a small price to pay if it helps.. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,668
Pooh-Bah
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,668 |
Sorry to hear of your loss. My condolences to you and the family. 
- Deb
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,704
Moderator / Da Masta
|
Moderator / Da Masta
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,704 |
I'm also sorry to hear that, OB. My thoughts are with you and your family. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,708
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 6,708 |
Sorry to hear that too. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451
Spotlight Runner-Up
|
Spotlight Runner-Up
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 451 |
|
|
|
Donate to UBBDev today to help aid in Operational, Server and Script Maintenance, and Development costs.
Please also see our parent organization VNC Web Services if you're in the need of a new UBB.threads Install or Upgrade, Site/Server Migrations, or Security and Coding Services.
|
|
Posts: 69
Joined: January 2001
|
|
Forums63
Topics37,575
Posts293,931
Members13,824
|
Most Online6,139 Sep 21st, 2024
|
|
Currently Online
Topics Created
Posts Made
Users Online
Birthdays
|
|
|
|
|
|
|