Bible Pay

Read 100905 times

  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Anything we should be testing tomorrow Rob? When would you like me to set up the additional 7 sanctuaries? I have 3 activated at the moment.

I added the cache purge today and fixed the prayers, but I still need to add the two new metrics and the diagnostic feature.

In the mean time if you want to start bringing more sancs up that would be helpful, because Id like to test the sanctuary rank command to ensure out of 10 sancs, that the top 3 by rank are voting.  The sancs will need a place in the payment queue so it would be good to start adding them tonight if you can.

Ill get an update ready asap.


  • jaapgvk
  • Hero Member

    • 617


    • 31
    • September 01, 2017, 08:02:57 pm
    • Netherlands
    more
Yeah, I was thinking since the zotac is 1.1ghz and 4 core, it would run rosetta at half the speed of the power hungry PC, and maybe someone could stack 10 together and have a low power monster, but in reality so far what Im seeing is a 30 RAC (in one day) from the zotac and a 250 RAC (per day) in the ryzen.  So its not quite worth buying these.  But let me finish a full 10 day test before trusting any of these numbers or figures.  Ill make a wiki page with a table on it at the end.

Yeah, I can't really tell anything yet about which CPU is most efficient. But, for example my phone (snapdragon 800 2.2ghz) and my - very slow - laptop (AMD e-450, 2x 1.65ghz) are getting about the same RAC I think, while I only use 1 core on my phone, and it's only processing when it's charging and above 90% battery (about 8 hours per day or something) and my laptop is processing full time on two cores. But I probably need a longer timeline before I can really say anything conclusive.



  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Yeah, I can't really tell anything yet about which CPU is most efficient. But, for example my phone (snapdragon 800 2.2ghz) and my - very slow - laptop (AMD e-450, 2x 1.65ghz) are getting about the same RAC I think, while I only use 1 core on my phone, and it's only processing when it's charging and above 90% battery (about 8 hours per day or something) and my laptop is processing full time on two cores. But I probably need a longer timeline before I can really say anything conclusive.
Thats interesting the phone can do so well.
Day 2 update: The zotac is up to 150 RAC and the Ryzen up to 550 rac.  Zotac wattage:  15 watts, Ryzen wattage: 250 watts.
Price: Zotac: $300, Ryzen $700



  • T-Mike
  • Administrator

    • 398


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Thats interesting the phone can do so well.
Day 2 update: The zotac is up to 150 RAC and the Ryzen up to 550 rac.  Zotac wattage:  15 watts, Ryzen wattage: 250 watts.
Price: Zotac: $300, Ryzen $700

I don't really look at the RAC because it doesn't reach near the real value until a few weeks later. What I do is look at the completed tasks and average out the credits/hour and use this formula to calculate the number of credits per day: (credits/hour)*(#tasks running at any moment)*24hrs. The tasks typically run for either 4 or 8 hours so you can do credits/4hrs or 8hrs and modify the formula. Be sure the # of tasks are the ones actually running and does not include the ones being queued up.

You can see from my android device that I am getting roughly 50 credits per task every 4 hours and I am running 2 tasks at any given moment so my RAC should eventually be 100.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2018, 07:56:15 am by T-Mike »


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
I don't really look at the RAC because it doesn't reach near the real value until a few weeks later. What I do is look at the completed tasks and average out the credits/hour and use this formula to calculate the number of credits per day: (credits/hour)*(#tasks running at any moment)*24hrs. The tasks typically run for either 4 or 8 hours so you can do credits/4hrs or 8hrs and modify the formula. Be sure the # of tasks are the ones actually running and does not include the ones being queued up.

You can see from my android device that I am getting roughly 50 credits per task every 4 hours and I am running 2 tasks at any given moment so my RAC should eventually be 100.

But thats really what RAC is - it gives you an idea about the computing power you have, I realize my RAC wont reach its maximum potential til I have run the nodes for 14 days, but Im taking that into account though.  But anyway for now the small device is 150/550, so its putting out about 25% of what the ryzen is.  Now I dont have to do any complicated credit delta computations or anything.


  • T-Mike
  • Administrator

    • 398


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
But thats really what RAC is - it gives you an idea about the computing power you have, I realize my RAC wont reach its maximum potential til I have run the nodes for 14 days, but Im taking that into account though.  But anyway for now the small device is 150/550, so its putting out about 25% of what the ryzen is.  Now I dont have to do any complicated credit delta computations or anything.

If you started both at the same time then it would probably be OK for a comparison. I have one computer that is generating 10,000 credits per day but the RAC is only at 2.5k after 3~4 days.

What is the floating point benchmark score for the Zotac?
« Last Edit: February 26, 2018, 08:42:43 am by T-Mike »


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
If you started both at the same time then it would probably be OK for a comparison. I have one computer that is generating 10,000 credits per day but the RAC is only at 2.5k after 3~4 days.

What is the floating point benchmark score for the Zotac?

I will look at that FPS later once we have a little more lull in the development cycle.

But focusing on RAC for comparison, I dont catch your gist - RAC is the most accurate comparison from box to box, researcher to researcher, because it takes validated tasks into consideration, time into consideration, and smooths out network-disk-random activity to yield one number.  Thats why we base our magnitude off of ones RAC, and since we only have one project, you couldnt get any better.

Looking at credit delta is more useful for the reporting that deals with day to day changes for tamper reports and auditing etc.

It doesnt matter when one started in the cycle.  Since the RAC has a half life of two weeks after two weeks the numbers are the correct comparison for the two hosts, regardless of when one started.





  • T-Mike
  • Administrator

    • 398


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
I will look at that FPS later once we have a little more lull in the development cycle.

But focusing on RAC for comparison, I dont catch your gist - RAC is the most accurate comparison from box to box, researcher to researcher, because it takes validated tasks into consideration, time into consideration, and smooths out network-disk-random activity to yield one number.  Thats why we base our magnitude off of ones RAC, and since we only have one project, you couldnt get any better.

Looking at credit delta is more useful for the reporting that deals with day to day changes for tamper reports and auditing etc.

It doesnt matter when one started in the cycle.  Since the RAC has a half life of two weeks after two weeks the numbers are the correct comparison for the two hosts, regardless of when one started.

Rob, the RAC is accurate from box to box but in the beginning it needs to catch up to speed. If you have 2 identical computers and one was started a week ago and one just now. You cannot compare the RAC of the 2 to arrive at the conclusion that the one started a week ago is faster than the one you started just now. Now, if it was 2 months from now, then yes you can compare the RAC values of the 2 machines.

http://web.archive.org/web/20120418125739/http://www.boinc-wiki.info/Recent_Average_Credit


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Rob, the RAC is accurate from box to box but in the beginning it needs to catch up to speed. If you have 2 identical computers and one was started a week ago and one just now. You cannot compare the RAC of the 2 to arrive at the conclusion that the one started a week ago is faster than the one you started just now. Now, if it was 2 months from now, then yes you can compare the RAC values of the 2 machines.

http://web.archive.org/web/20120418125739/http://www.boinc-wiki.info/Recent_Average_Credit
Mike,
Do you really believe I dont know what RAC is, when I developed the magnitude formula? 

I said I started both at the same time, and you can compare two RAC's to each other if they have been running for 2 weeks, and yes, if they started at different times, you can compare two RACs together after 14 days - because that is the half life of the formula.



  • T-Mike
  • Administrator

    • 398


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Mike,
Do you really believe I dont know what RAC is, when I developed the magnitude formula? 

I said I started both at the same time, and you can compare two RAC's to each other if they have been running for 2 weeks, and yes, if they started at different times, you can compare two RACs together after 14 days - because that is the half life of the formula.

Rob, I think you know but it wasn't apparent from the conversation. Also, I could not find where you said you started both at the same time in the last 2 pages of this forum, and that was the main point. If I were to compared RAC numbers I would only compare after 4 weeks, at 2 weeks it's still only roughly 80% of what it should be. IF yo ustarted both at the same time then it wouldn't matter as much.


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Rob, I think you know but it wasn't apparent from the conversation. Also, I could not find where you said you started both at the same time in the last 2 pages of this forum, and that was the main point. If I were to compared RAC numbers I would only compare after 4 weeks, at 2 weeks it's still only roughly 80% of what it should be. IF yo ustarted both at the same time then it wouldn't matter as much.

Cool, but its not really a true statement that you need to wait four weeks, even if they are started at completely different times.

When working with exponents, each day both machines are running draws the comparison (of RAC over RAC) closer by 7.14% each - even if they were started at different times, and close to 100% equal in comparison if you wait 14 days, because even in the worst case scenario if Machine B was running for 30 days before machine A, and machine A for only 1 day in advance, by the 14th day, the RAC of machine B is 91% into its average reference reading while machine A is also 91% into its final slot.    By the 15th day this number is close to 99%.   

Thats why magnitude in exec leaderboard is going to reveal highly accurate comparisons of CPIDs without knowing anything about them - but the main difference with magnitude is we are looking at all the machines rolled up to one CPID, and how much total effort they put in (even if they have 90 machines working only 1 hour per day).




  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
My understanding of RAC was it was a weekly half life, so days 0-7 = 100%, 8-14 = 50%, 15-21=25%, etc. etc.

So by my understanding after a week you can roughly estimate that a particular machine will do about double that over the long haul
1 week 50%
2 weeks 75%
3 weeks 87.5%
4 weeks 93.75%
... ...
99% at 7 weeks.

Is that a misunderstanding?

Additionally, I was thinking and wondering if there might be some benefit to the system to require a larger "stake" for higher RAC?  This could alleviate the phone / unbanked poor issue and also be more equitable for the larger RAC users (like it seems like I'm going to be one of).  So basically a graduated system where there were three or four tables for Biblepay UTXO Reward Chart  or maybe making it a percentile based affair?  Such as Stake amount required = 2*RAC for 100% (just spit balling)?  Looking at the leader board, I see a good number of users with RAC in the tens of thousands (and again, I may be one of them at some point), but I don't believe it to be equitable that a 1000 RAC user and a 10,000 RAC user both require the same 50K BBP stake for 100%.

Beyond that, it seems like PoDC is working very very well!  Are we still on target for a mid-to-end-of-March (barring any other significant issues) shift to PoDC?

Yeah, its a misunderstanding of RAC, possibly due to not understand the nature of exponents or what half life of 30 days means.

On day 2 you would have 33% of your RAC in place, on day 8 : 66%, and on day 14 : 90%, roughly similar to what I said in the prior posts.
(By the time the half life hits, you have 90% of your Stabilized RAC in place)!  The Half life is 14 days!

Regarding the second idea, I dont think its beneficial to create arbitrary rules that promote people to split wallets and CPIDs (as thats all they would do, is split the cpid into two if they had to have higher balances).  In addition its important that we run this system for one year in the most simple form possible in order to support it and debug it, then vote on the most important changes after its live for a few quarters.






  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2157


    • 29
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Biblepay 1.0.9.5 - Mandatory upgrade for Testnet

- Allow unbanked to be compensated without PODC Updates
- Added exec unbanked report, this shows a list of the unbanked (used by Sanctuaries)
- Fixed prayers diaplay in overview page  (they were invisible)
- Added UTXO weight and Task Weight to Distributed Computing Page GUI
- Added 7 day Magnitude and 1 day magnitude to exec getboincinfo
- Fixed DC Association process to throw the correct distinct errors for INVALID_CREDENTIALS or ALREADY_IN_CHAIN
- Added cache purging system (to prevent memory bloating in the future)

* Windows is compiling *


  • T-Mike
  • Administrator

    • 398


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Is it our system that is going to work differently?  Because BOINC says https://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Computation_credit  "Recent average credit: The average number of Cobblestones per day granted recently. This average decreases by a factor of two every week."  And the only other discussions I've seen on line about BOINC compute it the same way.  So it that document out of date, am I misunderstanding what it says or is our system utilizing a different factor?

The RAC is calculated by BOINC I believe, is that correct Rob? I think we just need to clarify the formula that will be used.

RAC(new) = RAC(old)*d(t) + (1-d(t))*credit(new)
d(t) = e^(-ln(2)*t / 604800)

« Last Edit: February 26, 2018, 02:44:52 pm by T-Mike »


  • T-Mike
  • Administrator

    • 398


    • 2
    • February 06, 2018, 06:12:58 pm
    more
Biblepay 1.0.9.5 - Mandatory upgrade for Testnet

- Allow unbanked to be compensated without PODC Updates
- Added exec unbanked report, this shows a list of the unbanked (used by Sanctuaries)
- Fixed prayers diaplay in overview page  (they were invisible)
- Added UTXO weight and Task Weight to Distributed Computing Page GUI
- Added 7 day Magnitude and 1 day magnitude to exec getboincinfo
- Fixed DC Association process to throw the correct distinct errors for INVALID_CREDENTIALS or ALREADY_IN_CHAIN
- Added cache purging system (to prevent memory bloating in the future)

* Windows is compiling *

Updating 3 nodes now and if there aren't any big issues I'll deploy the rest tomorrow.