BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

[T-Mike]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BOINC_Credit_System

Please read the part on RAC, is there any information on exactly how it's calculated? Even though the statement needs verification on the wiki, I think we should calculate our own from the credits of each task which would be more accurate. If the statement is true, it looks like maybe you can trick the RAC to being higher possibly by having a higher benchmark score. I will also try to find out how the credits are calculated.

[Rob Andrews]

Why do they make RAC decrease by a factor of 2 every week. So even if I'm doing 200 cobblestones a week the next week it's a 100 RAC?

http://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Computation_credit

RAC is a very cool float.  Think of it as the half life of a piece of uranium.  It takes computing power to build it up, then it decays over a one month period with the half life being 2 weeks.  Its very useful to show exactly where a researcher is in the work curve.  If you have been researching for one month solid before you come to Biblepay, we know with certainty how much effort you already put in and can confidently pay you in the next superblock based on your RAC.  It ends up being a perfect representation to rank Rosetta users side by side using disparate equipment.  ( Our biblepay magnitude is also based on the sum of Rosetta RAC and our available budget, so your in-client magnitude is Your next DC superblock share as a percent * 10).

If you want to see work done over a one day period, you can instead look at total credit delta.  Look at todays total credit minus yesterdays total credit.

[Rob Andrews]

The first machine I tried was an ARM (aarch64) and didn't work.  This is because, I believe, Rosetta does not craft their work units to process correctly in ARM.

Yeah, I can add a couple additional things need done to host an ARM project on boinc.  Its not a limitation of Boinc or the Rosetta Project.

Basically, the Build of Rosetta produces a long compatibility string, something such as "Linux 64 - ARM - Kaeplin" and when the Rosetta developer finds that string, they have to ask Rosetta web admin to add it as a project type (So then Rosetta supports Windows, Mac, Linux, Arm Kaeplin).  After that nothing works yet.  Then they have to have config manager build a Kaeplin build.  Then Network manager configure the outputs to go in the Kaeplin directory.  Then enable Boinc Rosetta to serve those workunits.  Then script a program to Create work units for Kaeplin. 

So its everything from a custom build for that proc to enabling that proc for the project.  They probably only support one Arm build at this time, whatever one is in the google play store that works on the galaxy s7.

You can make posts in the Rosetta forums asking them to support more Arm flavors.   You can get the string from the task scheduler error, where it says Project has no tasks available for "Arm xxxxxx".

[Rob Andrews]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BOINC_Credit_System

Please read the part on RAC, is there any information on exactly how it's calculated? Even though the statement needs verification on the wiki, I think we should calculate our own from the credits of each task which would be more accurate. If the statement is true, it looks like maybe you can trick the RAC to being higher possibly by having a higher benchmark score. I will also try to find out how the credits are calculated.

Its just the half life of your recent credit added in the last month.  Actually its very accurate. 
I dont understand why you would want something different - how could anyone tamper with it?  Its not possible.  No researcher has access to the Rosetta validator or write access to the boinc network.

Its already more accurate than anyone would ever need.

[T-Mike]

Its just the half life of your recent credit added in the last month.  Actually its very accurate. 
I dont understand why you would want something different - how could anyone tamper with it?  Its not possible.  No researcher has access to the Rosetta validator or write access to the boinc network.

Its already more accurate than anyone would ever need.

I understand the decreasing by a factor of 2 part now. That's for the old number and then the new current RAC is added to it.

I was just trying to see if the RAC and credit given was fair and not easy to manipulate. I read the paragraph again and understand it a little better now, it does not appear the RAC is tamperable so far.

[T-Mike]

It appears every project has a different credit system. Rosetta's credit system seems pretty good so far.

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=2194

[Rob Andrews]

1.0.9.0b-Mandatory Upgrade for Testnet

- Allow headless to participate in SanctuaryQuorum
- Enabled CPID botnet busting rule (requires each block to have signed and associated CPIDs with Magnitude in order to mine (and we enforce distinct CPIDs over 5 block periods))

* Windows is still compiling *



*** ALL : I have discovered that by moving up to version 1.0.9.0 and enforcing it (since we don't want to touch the Protocol Version in Prod) for some reason, the nodes are now interpreting "1090" as "109".  Therefore, I had to check in some code to allow the wallet to understand we are on 1090.  Please upgrade to 1090b in Testnet and please discard the last 1090 version.  (Otherwise, we cant connect).

[orbis]

it looks, that rosetta is too much for VPS. I'm testing it on one of my VPS and in last two days it freeze up 3 times. No respond from VPS and only solution was restart. Then it works for some time and freeze again.. I must find solution how to limit cpu resources Is here anyone else testing VPS?

[T-Mike]

it looks, that rosetta is too much for VPS. I'm testing it on one of my VPS and in last two days it freeze up 3 times. No respond from VPS and only solution was restart. Then it works for some time and freeze again.. I must find solution how to limit cpu resources Is here anyone else testing VPS?

Did you try something similar to this yet?
https://boinc.berkeley.edu/dev/forum_thread.php?id=3113

Or you can do this for any process:
https://www.tecmint.com/cputool-limit-linux-process-cpu-usage-load/

[Rob Andrews]

1.0.9.0b-Mandatory Upgrade for Testnet

- Allow headless to participate in SanctuaryQuorum
- Enabled CPID botnet busting rule (requires each block to have signed and associated CPIDs with Magnitude in order to mine (and we enforce distinct CPIDs over 5 block periods))

* Windows is still compiling *



*** ALL : I have discovered that by moving up to version 1.0.9.0 and enforcing it (since we don't want to touch the Protocol Version in Prod) for some reason, the nodes are now interpreting "1090" as "109".  Therefore, I had to check in some code to allow the wallet to understand we are on 1090.  Please upgrade to 1090b in Testnet and please discard the last 1090 version.  (Otherwise, we cant connect).

[T-Mike]

1.0.9.0b-Mandatory Upgrade for Testnet

- Allow headless to participate in SanctuaryQuorum
- Enabled CPID botnet busting rule (requires each block to have signed and associated CPIDs with Magnitude in order to mine (and we enforce distinct CPIDs over 5 block periods))

* Windows is still compiling *


*** ALL : I have discovered that by moving up to version 1.0.9.0 and enforcing it (since we don't want to touch the Protocol Version in Prod) for some reason, the nodes are now interpreting "1090" as "109".  Therefore, I had to check in some code to allow the wallet to understand we are on 1090.  Please upgrade to 1090b in Testnet and please discard the last 1090 version.  (Otherwise, we cant connect).

Updating all node, not sure if some are compiling 1.0.9.0b though. WIll check after they are done.

[orbis]

Did you try something similar to this yet?


Or you can do this for any process:

Thanks. I've tried those config options, but didn't work for me. I've used "cpulimit" before, so it seems to be my way

[orbis]

1.0.9.0b-Mandatory Upgrade for Testnet

- Allow headless to participate in SanctuaryQuorum
- Enabled CPID botnet busting rule (requires each block to have signed and associated CPIDs with Magnitude in order to mine (and we enforce distinct CPIDs over 5 block periods))

* Windows is still compiling *



*** ALL : I have discovered that by moving up to version 1.0.9.0 and enforcing it (since we don't want to touch the Protocol Version in Prod) for some reason, the nodes are now interpreting "1090" as "109".  Therefore, I had to check in some code to allow the wallet to understand we are on 1090.  Please upgrade to 1090b in Testnet and please discard the last 1090 version.  (Otherwise, we cant connect).

Rob, this is great work and you were really fast to make Sanctuaries headless.

[Rob Andrews]

Rob, this is great work and you were really fast to make Sanctuaries headless.

Thanks.
Hey guys, there is something up with 1090b.  Im working on it now.  If you cant connect please standby...

Some bug in here dealing with the connection string still.

[MIP]

Hello all, I want to contribute to this PoDC testing effort.

Could you please send some tBBP to

yWKX5CXuPCJNLLSwUjqwQcUifnYToco1zM

Thank you very much.