Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Applications > [email protected] users?

Thread Tools
wlonh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 20, 2000, 04:02 PM
 
Anybody out there running SETI? How many data units have you completed? What's your average completion time?

Would anyone be interested in a 'Team MacNN' for SETI?

In case you've never heard of it: http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/
     
bluefire 529
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Jan 20, 2000, 04:51 PM
 
I just downloaded the [email protected] at work now, so I don't have any stats as of yet, but having a MacNN Team would be cool. I am going to download it at home tonight as well.
     
IronDuck
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Jan 22, 2000, 02:13 AM
 
I've completed 217 units at an average of 15 hours per unit. Most of these were completed on my PowerBook G3 266, but units crunch in between 8 and 10 hours on my new G4 400. I'll join a MacNN team if one forms. Does anyone know where I can get an AltiVec enhanced version??
     
IronDuck
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 12:25 AM
 
*** UPDATE ***
I just downloaded G4 Strip and the new [email protected] 2.0 client, and my G4/400 kicks out units in just 6 hours! This is without AltiVec enhancement! G4 Strip reports about 250 Mflops on average. I'm guessing an AltiVec enhancement running at an average of 1 Gflop could potentially yield 1.5 hours per unit. I'm in awe...
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 12:43 AM
 
wow! nice numbers.

my Mac has crunched 209 SETI units @ an average of 10h 37m (beige rev2 G3 300MHz, using RAM Disk)

and though it was reported that SETI 2.0 would run appreciably slower, it does not run much slower (if at all slower) on my Mac, but i have not really paid_close_attention to it yet.

hey, if you have a beige G3 and want to run SETI as fast as you can:
1) use a RAM Disk
2) use xlr8's Mach Speed L2cache tweaker
3) use LibMotoSh

the RAM Disk is the real kicker that will boost speed dramatically, the other two have less dramatic effect.

(and i am aware that LibMotoSh is somewhat controversial and some people believe it to be the cause of crashes and others believe it to be a cheap hack by Motorola to make their FPU calculations specs look better and that its use results in incorrect calculations in certain high math operations, etc... use it at your own risk)

[This message has been edited by wlonh (edited 01-26-2000).]
     
Dev
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 01:59 AM
 



I have over 150 units completed using my iMac Revb and iBook, average work time per unit is about 14hrs 30mins, no ram disk, screensaver is enabled. I installed on my 8500/233 but it took it over 45 hours so it doesnt participate anymore. I plan to download the newest version asap and hope to see more improvement.

Cheers!


Dev
     
Keda
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Alexandria, VA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 11:19 AM
 
I NEED HELP!! I have a 400mhz Yikes at work. The fastest speed to date here is 7 hours-its held be an IT guy who uses a PIII 600/NT. Right now hes got me beat by 43 minutes.

Please, someone, tell me how to speed this up. He outclocks me by 200mhz, but Im real close. How do you use the RAM disk (10 years on a Mac and Ive never used this) and whats this about ALTIVEC enhancements? Also is v2 slower? Can I give more memory to the program?

Im SO close to this guy, I know I can catch him.

[This message has been edited by Keda (edited 01-27-2000).]
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 11:52 AM
 
first, RAM Disk for [email protected] 2.0... go to Memory control panel and turn on the RAM Disk and set it to about 2MB (a little less or more is OK, mine is set to 1920K) and restart Mac. When restarted, find the folder '[email protected] Data' in the 'Users' folder in the root of your HD and copy it to your RAM disk. Now make an alias of the [email protected] Data folder from the RAM Disk and put this alias in place of the [email protected] Data folder in the Users folder. This alias must not have the word 'alias' at the end of its name, the alias must have the exact same name as the original. (v. 1.6 uses a different location for the [email protected] Data folder, it's in the Preferences folder in your System Folder, so if you are still using version 1.6 you need to place the alias made from the RAM Disk in the same location as the original and it must be the exact same name as original). The general idea with BOTH versions is that you must place the alias of the [email protected] data folder where you found the original [email protected] data folder.

And if applicable, be sure enable the 'save contents of RAM disk' button in the Memory control panel... and if you do not have the luxury of the persistent RAM Disk feature, see this: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/Hype...-backup-21.hqx

speed:

set the SETI pref's so the screen goes blank after 1 minute, according to many, this definitely speeds SETI up...

you can set the SETI control panel to a higher RAM allocation if you use the Reaper (see versiontracker).

i have found that SETI 2.0 is hardly any slower than v. 1.06, if at all slower. UPDATE: i have found 2.0 to be approx. 5% faster than 1.6
UPDATE: no, it is about 5% slower
UPDATE, again: well whatever

most of this info can be had at the SetiStation... http://www.flex.com/~daniel/SETI/

YOU WILL CLOBBER this pc guy with these tweaks!!!!



[This message has been edited by wlonh (edited 03-09-2000).]
     
Keda
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Alexandria, VA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 02:02 PM
 
I did what you said. Ill post the results in the next few days. Thanks!

Oh, I set Reaper to increase the memory by 100% (SETI is only on when Im not using my computer) and I allowed OS9 to access FBC. Im not sure what that is-can you suggest any settings for Reaper?
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 02:15 PM
 
Reaper should be 'experimented' with, i'd go for a more modest setting like maybe 20% first and let SETI work at that setting for a few data units and then increase the setting in Reaper by 10%, etc, and compare results...

as for the FCB bit, the AKUA page http://www.akua.com/Software/Reaper/index.html for Reaper states:

'Allow MacOS 9 Access to FCB'; See the Nine 11 page for more information on this option: http://www.akua.com/Software/Nine11/index.html

(i don't think you need this setting enabled)

ALSO, a side note: this Reaper widget can increase RAM allocation to the Finder which MAY result in a more robust user experience for some who have had Finder trouble, etc. in MacOS 9...

[This message has been edited by wlonh (edited 01-27-2000).]
     
iMacMike
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Lubbock, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2000, 04:00 PM
 
The older version processed units at an average of 21 hours, but SETI 2.0 has cut that to 15 1/2 hours. I'm running my 7th packet right now on an iMac 233 Rev. A, 96mg RAM. I use my iMac about 12 hrs. a day on average and the older one took so long to process that I quit after my 3rd packet... a weeks worth. With SETI 2.0, I can finish a packet almost overnight.

------------------
I work, I play, iMac!
--
"I work, I play, iMac!"
     
Keda
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Alexandria, VA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2000, 11:50 AM
 
Weel, my average dropped by 2 minutes over night-to 7hr41min. That leads me to believe that the mods had a very positive effect.

wlonh-I went to that SETI page you linked to. I noticed that they had their best times listed, as well as their average. How do they do this? I have v2 and when I go to seti home page, All I see is my average. I would love to see what I did last night.

Im going to leave the Mac on all weekend, and really get the average down!
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2000, 12:36 PM
 
ok, i think a somewhat 'manual' method is required to figure your 'best time', you 'd need to set your SETI pref's to ask you each time for a connection when it is finished and then note the info in the SETI app's window when you allow the connection for more data... there is a freeware widget called SetiLogger http://www.logictools.de/mac_us/ that used to work to log each SETI data unit, but it has been broken by the new security protocols in SETI 2.0 and SetiChecker http://www-users.rwth-aachen.de/stef.../index_gb.html has been_somewhat_broken by 2.0 as well, even though a new version of SetiChecker has been released since the release of SETI 2.0

and here is something i've just now found: http://212.86.34.76/sum/Read%20me.html
called SETI UNiT Manager, don't know exactly what it does yet.

i bet you will get your average down by that 43 minutes before too long...



[This message has been edited by wlonh (edited 01-28-2000).]
     
yuhui
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Singapore
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2000, 05:41 PM
 
I've crunched 5 units averaging about 25 hrs per unit. I'm using a Wallstreet PB G3/233 with 64MB RAM and [email protected] 2.0.

I've set it to be my screensaver, at the same time, I let it run as an application with my other stuff. My only gripe with it is it seems to steal CPU cycles, my whole system becomes sluggish and slightly unresponsive, even typing is a problem.

I think I'll try the RAM disk method and see if there's a speed bump.
     
DanielMaui
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Maui, Hawaii
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2000, 05:21 AM
 
Hi Gang!

From what I can tell and from experience, the RAM Disk will speed up your WU processing only slightly, unless you are on a really slow Mac and have a really slow Hard Drive. The most important function of using a RAM Disk with [email protected] is to reduce the constant writing of the data to you Hard Drive (every few seconds).

Version 2.0 is not that significantly faster on most newer Macs, but they have made it so it has a little "Better compatibility with older PPC Macs." This should make a difference for the non-G3/G4 systems out there.

The "science" that was expected to produce a dramatic increase in processing time was NOT included in version 2.0/2.01. It will be included in version 3.0 in about a month's time, according to one of the developers. This so-called "science" is additional code that checks for pulsating signals, in addition to the continuous signals now being analyzed. It is expected to be the main new feature in Version 3.0.

Altivec? Who knows, but it is doubtful. To include code that is optimized for Altivec, for the new G4s, would almost force [email protected] to create special versions for many different OSes and platforms. Not only do they not have the time and staff to provide these versions, if anything, they want us all to run slower than we are now. With only about 2 months worth of data backlogged and dimishing quickly because of the increase in participants, the last thing [email protected] needs is faster processing.

But that's not going to stop us Mac fans from trying, now is it?

I didn't think so...


------------------
Daniel

Visit SETI Station: A Mac site for [email protected] Enthusiasts
     
Kocher
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2000, 06:00 PM
 
I just started running SETI at my network at school, I have 8 5500/225's averaging 24 hour unit completion times. They have done 66 units so far.
     
graphixmaker
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2000, 05:19 AM
 
Hey guys. I just downloaded 2.0 on my G4 450 and its done 5 units in 27hr 35min, for an average of 5hr 47min per unit! This thing is flying on my G4.

Jim
     
Keda
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Alexandria, VA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2000, 10:25 AM
 
Another day, another minute...or two. I wont post every day, but it looks like I shaved another 2 minutes off my average last night. Im at 7:21/unit.

I dont know why my machine was doing so poorly at first (10:00/unit) , but its back on its feet. 2minutes a night, and 20 minutes on the weekend...If this keeps up, I will be below 6:00/unit by next monday. This will make my Mac the fastest in the company.

This is SO sweet!!! Until recently, the mind set here was that Macs were on their way out. Things have been changing...G4s w/the power of UNIX (soon anyways) . When I tell NT drones about this kind of raw power, they get a far away look in their eyes. I think they are dreaming of freedom. I think they are dreaming of a Mac!
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 08:57 AM
 
hey folks! time to join Team MacNN for SETI!

if you are using [email protected] software already, just go here: http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/s...eam_62645.html
and click on the 'Join' link, EASY!

Join "The single most amazing group of Mac users ever assembled for anything. Ever."
     
brock76
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 11:36 AM
 
Hey Keda

I have a G3 350 Yosemite and i was running seti chunks at about 13h20min. Then i found that if I use WindowShade on seti, my unit times dropped to 7-8 hours per data chunk. I can't believe it, but it cut my data chunk times nearly in 1/2. All i did is go to seti's prefs and turn the screensaver off....then go to your EnergySaver control panel and go to more choices....all i did is have my screen go blank after X amount of minutes but NOT spin down my HD. This should REALLY help your average.

Good Luck

b r o c k 7 6 @ m a c . c o m
Member of Overclockers-Network
Member of XiBase.com
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 12:30 PM
 
brock76, i don't doubt your results and that is a good method no doubt... but by [email protected]'s ReadME and SetiStation's info on running [email protected] (the following will be a combination of info from these sources), best results can be achieved by:

1) running [email protected] as a screensaver and not an as active app in the background... and further, quoting ReadME: in the SETI pref's "you may have the screensaver set your monitor completely black after a period of time. This greatly speeds up the processing of data, as the screensaver does not spend time updating the display." go to black after 1 minute is best.

2) using a RAM disk.

notes from FAQ in SETI ReadMe:

Q: What can I do to make [email protected] run faster?
A: Here are some suggestions:

Each time [email protected] launches, it optimizes itself for the current monitor color “depth” (256 colors, Thousands, Millions). If you change the color depth while [email protected] is running, it may slow things to a crawl.

It should run reasonably at any screen depth, but it will run somewhat faster at lower screen depths (256 colors) than higher ones. Screen resolution (640X480, 800X600, 1024X732, etc.) should have negligible effect on speed.

In screensaver mode, SETI[email protected] runs fastest if the screen is blanked, so for maximum speed set the preferences to blank the screen after a short time.

In application mode, [email protected] runs fastest if its window is collapsed, using the Windowshade feature under OS 8.0 and later.
(moderator- it should be noted that it truly does run faster in screensaver mode)

Many Macintosh models are equipped with the Energy Saver Control Panel. This can put the computer's processor, hard drive, and monitor in a low-power “sleep” mode if the mouse and keyboard have been idle for a period of time. Although [email protected] can continue to run when the computer is in “sleep” mode, it will run much slower. You may want to change the settings in the Energy Saver Control Panel to let [email protected] have more time. Some people prefer to have the computer never sleep so it can analyze more signals, while others prefer to save electricity. The choice is up to you.


Q: I would like to save energy by allowing my hard disk to power down. How can I get [email protected] to run without starting up the hard drive?
A: You can use a RAM disk. For further information, please see our web site's links page at http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/links.html. You can also let your monitor go into low-energy mode, or even turn your monitor off.


and see http://www.flex.com/~daniel/SETI/

and oh yes, you can also use LibMotoSh if you wish (it works on my 466MHz G3 running OS 9) and yes i am aware that LibMotoSh is somewhat controversial in some folks' opinion... but i get a bit of a boost in SETI processing by using it.

[This message has been edited by wlonh (edited 03-03-2000).]
     
OoklaTheMok
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 12:51 PM
 
Allright I have jumped ship. Since O'Grady's changed I have been looking for a place to go. Arstechnica tempted me for a while but macnn is the place for me.

I'm Peter Ahlstrom by the way.

------------------
OoklaTheMok
http://customs.macstarcraft.com
Not affiliated with http://otmfan.com
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 01:42 PM
 
THIS IS A REPOST

ddiokno
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Registered: Sep 1999 posted 03-03-2000 12:30 PM            

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi, just wanted to post some seti times. On my Wallstreet Powerbook G3/266 w/192MB OS9, and SETI 2.03 (and 2.02) I get and average of 10 hours per work unit. On my B&W G3/400 320MB, OS9 and SETI 2.03 (and 2.02) I have been averaging 7 hours per work Unit. I also have a couple of iMac 333's w/64MB, SETI (2.02) running between 12.5 and 14 hours. I have found that more physical memory makes a huge difference, and using the screensaver (or windowshade if you are doing other work) helps a lot.
dave
     
brock76
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 01:48 PM
 
Hey wlonh,

That sounds like a winner....I was just dorking around with SETI to see what I could do to speed it up. What you said about the blank screen and RAM Disk is very helpful. I'll give that a try when I get off work. We'll see how it goes.

Thanks,

b r o c k 7 6 @ m a c . c o m
Member of Overclockers-Network
Member of XiBase.com
     
The Gonif
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 05:10 PM
 
Hi everyone,

You know, I'm running SETI at home on my G3/400 with OS 9 and at work on my PIII/500 with Win2000, and the results are interesting.

My Mac (blanking screen, using RAM disk) chomps through work units in about 8-9 hours. However, the "faster" PC takes about 11 hours or so. Score one for the Mac!

However, with Windows 2000 you don't even notice any kind of CPU slowdown. I mean, I can have a bunch of apps open with WinAMP and SETI both running in the background, and there is absolutely zero feeling of slowdown. I guess that's the benefit of pre-emptive multitasking at work, huh? On my Mac, the system becomes sluggish and unresponsive if SETI runs in the background. Score a big one for Windows (as much as I hate to say that).

I think we will really benefit when OS X gets here.
     
vack
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 06:22 PM
 
I've been running [email protected] since the first day they posted it last year. I leave my 7600 PCI 233 mhz machine on at home and it works on it continuously, though it's not tweaked to speed up the process. My times are kinda embarrassing but I'll post them here also:

109 units in 5342 hours (49 hours per unit)
     
CIA
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 08:57 PM
 
Well, I was a beta tester way back in the day, and have worked on the current project since day one. I constantly run a Rev. A G3 266, and average around 12-14 hours per block. I also run it every now and then on a B&W G3 300 and a G4 450. The G4 averages about 4.5-7 hours, and the G3 300 around 10. No optimizations. In an ironic note, my roomate bought a Compaq with a PII 450 in it. It takes him around 20-30 hours to complete a block, much slower then my G3 266. But he can run it in the background of windows with no noticable slowdown.
My stats: 436 Units completed in 6099 hours, at the pace I've been going with my machines I should hit 1 year of computing time in about 45-50 days.
Work: 2008 8x3.2 MacPro, 8800GT, 16GB ram, zillions of HDs. (video editing)
Home: 2008 24" 2.8 iMac, 2TB Int, 4GB ram.
Road: 2009 13" 2.26 Macbook Pro, 8GB ram & 640GB WD blue internal
Retired to BOINC only: My trusty never-gonna-die 12" iBook G4 1.25
     
slboett
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Pasadena, CA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2000, 09:21 PM
 
Alright, you bastards just got my 120 units - pay up!



Scott

     
OoklaTheMok
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2000, 12:06 AM
 
Well well, with my iMac DV, my 15 G3 266s, and my 15 PIII-450s, which have given me 3000+ units, who has me beat? =)

I am considering taking over 2 more computer labs...I'm actually losing ground! I went from 1960th place overall to 1983rd.

------------------
OoklaTheMok
http://customs.macstarcraft.com
Not affiliated with http://otmfan.com
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2000, 07:10 PM
 
http://www-users.rwth-aachen.de/stef.../index_gb.html

above site is for SETI Checker (freeware) helps you to keep track of your SETI stats and Team stats... new version just released.
     
OoklaTheMok
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2000, 04:09 PM
 
There's just not enough enthusiasm here. Sorry if it seemed like a one-night stand.

I'm out of here.

------------------
OoklaTheMok
http://customs.macstarcraft.com
Not affiliated with http://otmfan.com
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2000, 04:27 PM
 
wait... no... come back...

     
OoklaTheMok
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2000, 12:29 AM
 
Oh well, sorry about that. MacNN making a team was the catalyst for me to leave O'Grady's, but I realized what I really wanted was a team with some competition and a great stats/graphs page. So arstechnica is the place for me. (Even if they are the sworn enemy of MacAddict--but that's okay, never cared for MacAddict anyway.)

If MacNN somehow later becomes a team like I am looking for, I may come back, who knows? At least for me it's not a question of loyalty

------------------
OoklaTheMok
http://customs.macstarcraft.com
Not affiliated with http://otmfan.com
     
slboett
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Pasadena, CA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2000, 12:24 PM
 
OoklaTheMok'
While I also left team O'Grady in hopes of joining a great new MacNN team, you're kind of being a bit of a fair-weather-friend aren't you? We can't build a team if everyone bails after one day!?

Scott
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2000, 12:52 PM
 
well... i think the estimable OoklaTheMok is in this for rather selfish reasons, hi-profile and flash... after all, he does have some major numbers.

tell ya the truth, i really do not care that he had such big numbers but rather that he left.

a very nice Team MacNN for SETI webpage is in the offing, it should be posted before too much longer and OoklaTheMok could've had a little patience as Rome was not built, etc...

Team MacNN will grow!
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2000, 07:34 PM
 
it has come to my attention that Team MacNN members are tempted to experiment and are joining more than once, using different accounts from different configurations of SETI on their various Macs.

hey, please, just join ONCE if you are only one person... if you are schizophrenic, we can make allowances for you...

the rest of you, PLEASE join Team MacNN for [email protected] just once!

but DO join!
     
jeffreyloaf
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: New Ringgold, PA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 11, 2000, 02:22 PM
 
And so it begins.
I do believe I'll start today, and see where the it goes.

In god we trust/ Cash is king /All others pay thru the nose
     
zac4mac
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: near Boulder, Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2000, 08:53 AM
 
Good show wlonh, if I wasn't already on the BEST team on the charts (MacCPU SETI 2000), I would jump in here...112 WU's so far Avg time 6h 10 min...
just watched WU #112 finish in 5h 53m 30.6s PM8500/G3-454/227 240MB RAM/OS9
BTW the RAM Disk method you mention won't really affect your time much, but if you can make a Disk BIG enough to boot from...
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2000, 09:27 AM
 
RAMDisk for SETI... ten million Frenchmen can't be wrong... and it is not purely MY suggestion as i am following all the 'tricks' from the SETIstation website mentioned previously in this thread... http://www.flex.com/~daniel/SETI/

any boost is a boost!

best team? the best team is the one you feel an affiliation to... you should join us!

RAM disk for Boot? i'm not gonna burn that much RAM for a boot disk... you go right ahead

Watch out! Team MacNN will have a SETI webpage up soon! we will grow!

thanks for your comments, zac4mac
     
tadd
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2000, 11:28 AM
 
We are getting about 35 results a day in team MacNN, also donating 18 CPU days per day to the [email protected] effort.

I tried to customize my MacOS9 system folder to get faster than 6 hours/result on a G4/400/agp. I couldn't get faster than 6 hours. Anybody got any ideas? What is the ideal complement of the Extensions folder for best performance? What is the ideal Memory ctl pnl settings? Feel free to e-mail me.


------------------
Tadd Torborg
     
OoklaTheMok
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2000, 07:17 PM
 
well... i think the estimable OoklaTheMok is in this for rather selfish reasons, hi-profile and flash... after all, he does have some major numbers.

tell ya the truth, i really do not care that he had such big numbers but rather that he left.

a very nice Team MacNN for SETI webpage is in the offing, it should be posted before too much longer and OoklaTheMok could've had a little patience as Rome was not built, etc...
That's just about right. Selfish reasons, fair-weather friend.... I am trying to fill voids in my life. I keep trying different things and some work for a while but only so long. While I like MacNN, the team just wasn't doing anything to fill any voids. I mean, having over twice as many WUs as the rest of the team combined and churning out more each day than the number 8 person on the list has total...can you see that it didn't guve me anything to think and wonder about (how many days left until I pass up the next person? oh yeah...) to keep me from thinking and wondering other things that I have no control over and will probably never know the answer to.

I wish you had made the team back in the beginning. Then maybe it would have been different. But as it is, I have no attachment yet to the people in the forums or on the team.

you are right, Rome wasn't built in a day, but Ars Technica Lamb Chop has an 873-year lead on you. That's a little hard to make up.

I hope things do go well for you and you can get a kickin' SETI page...so far I am unimpressed with the various mac SETI pages.

If anyone wants suggestions about how to run SETI hidden on your work's or friends' PCs (or run it not hidden but nice and fast on any PCs you'll admit to having around the house), I can pass on the information.... Use any computer you can to get those numbers up! Numbers are all that matter! Ahhhhhhhh!
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2000, 07:22 PM
 
yes, and greed is good...

hope you are kidding about the void
     
OoklaTheMok
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2000, 08:49 PM
 
I fail to see what greed has to do with it. Is a basketball team greedy because they want more points than the other team? Um, no. It's not like I am getting paid for it or anything. But it's not really about wanting more points...if I wanted to be on the top team I'd go to SGI Seti or [email protected], whichever is on top, I can't remember.

(Edit: sorry, didn't remember exactly what it was that I said that you were responding to, until I re-read the post.

My numbers remark was sarcastic. As I guess your greed remark was? Nevermind. Ignore that paragraph.)

No I am not kidding about filling voids. It's not a very good void-filler but I really don't know what else to do at the moment.

[This message has been edited by OoklaTheMok (edited 03-14-2000).]
     
angel66
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2000, 09:14 PM
 
seti. what a major waste of time. you'll be lucky to hear or detect anything in the next 200,000 years and thats only if another world out there paralleled our own development equally. and if they developed earlier we'd be hearing their history now. the realityis ,finding radio bleed is more a matter of timing than volume analysis.
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2000, 09:25 PM
 
you've made me examine the reasons i am running [email protected]

do i think that there is a possibility that we'll 'hear' ET phoning home? there's a chance, but i think it is mighty slim. that is not really why i am in it.

is it because i want to be part of the Mac users who are running [email protected], statistically (not empirically) demonstrating that the Mac platform is a fast one? yes.

and maybe i run [email protected] because the idea of such a network of computers worldwide focussed on one project, crunching data @ 12.42 TeraFLOPs/sec is just kinda cool because it has created a new paradigm for cooperative computing to further scientific endeavors. i think this is my main reason, it is just kinda cool.

so why teams, clubs? because the more the merrier and Mac users can strut their stuff, show off the speed of their Macs in contrast to other platforms. people are social beings: "my Mac's faster than yours", "my Mac KILLS your lame Pentium!" etc...

so it appears that we approach this SETI thing from different angles. fine.

and even though the whole thing is pie-in-the-sky, i obviously think it is a worthwhile endeavor.



so c'mon everybody let's show those Pentiums, download SETI and join Team MacNN

     
tadd
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2000, 01:16 AM
 
Originally posted by wlonh:
so why teams, clubs? because the more the merrier and Mac users can strut their stuff, show off the speed of their Macs in contrast to other platforms. people are social beings: "my Mac's faster than yours", "my Mac KILLS your lame Pentium!" etc...
If this is a good reason to do this, shouldn't we be identifying which results/performances are generated by Macs, indeed by WHICH Macs. My performance-result under "Tadd" (at 15 hours/block average) are a compilation of the times of computers ranging from a G4 to a PowerTower 180, i.e. 6 hours to 48 hours per block, and a couple of MSWindows machines as well. Wouldn't it be a Mac Boosting Thing (as you brought out above) to identify how fast each Mac is?

_rant_
I get disheartened when people pick on my iBook as being slow (after all it's only 300Mhz) but when it kicks my friend's Sony Vaio's butt by doing a block in 15 hours compared to his 60 hours (!) it makes the whole Megahertz argument rather silly. In support of one of your justifications for doing this process, wouldn't it also be good if we made it clear how fast these computers are? I really love that my G4 is ONLY $1600 yet it blows the doors off of similarly priced MSWindows98 machines that are impossible to manage (installs/uninstalls/DLLs/over and over) (unless you are a full time geek) and also my G4 CAME with firewire and USB keyboard/mouse, not to mention a really flashy and eminently servicable chassis.
_/rant_


By the way... a good justification to use on people who think that ET is a joke, is that one of the scientific truths that Arecebo is doing with our help is to generate facts about what they are NOT hearing. After they are done they can say (with feeling) that ET was NOT transmitting narrow band signals in *this* region of sky between *these times* on *these frequencies*. Up until now they haven't been able to say that. So... beyond trying to hear something, what we are doing is identifying places where we DID NOT hear something.

Readers who want to actively participate in monitoring portions of sky for visiting spacecraft or ET calling "hello out there" may want to check out http://www.setileague.org. That group is assembling an amateur listing group to monitor for incoming perposeful contact messages using salvaged/surplus and kit-built components.

------------------
Tadd Torborg

[This message has been edited by tadd (edited 03-15-2000).]
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2000, 01:49 PM
 
there's plenty of data to document just exactly who's fastest and mostest right here:
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/platforms.html

and
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/cpus.html

and
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/oss.html

the above links to stats and other links to more stats are listed here: http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats.html

[This message has been edited by wlonh (edited 03-15-2000).]
     
sine -``-..-
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2000, 10:05 PM
 
we gotta start a SETI team,
im only on my first few packets but this is so cool, all the enthusiasm.



------------------


-mac the planet-
     
zac4mac
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: near Boulder, Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2000, 09:23 AM
 
Hey wlonh, didn't mean to sound pompous. I don't have big numbers like Ookla. I only run one Mac, but it's fasssst. I'm with the MacCPU{a mighty fine little upgrade house in Fla.) team because of a very kind invitation from the team leader in January, when I started running SETI. we are rising in the ranks of Small Businesses at a near meteoric rate. Hit the bottom of the top 200 list week before last and are at #90 now.(team is cranking over 200 WU's/day)

If you want to let folks know what you run, when you set up your profile, instead of a URL for your name to link to, put your Mac's Info

[This message has been edited by zac4mac (edited 03-18-2000).]
     
wlonh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2000, 09:38 AM
 
hey no offense taken, i was just responding to your post, if that is what ya mean...

and jolly good (really, i mean it) that you have some integrity/principles, call it what you will. this is nice.

MacCPU... that guy is SMART, the guy that owns/runs that biz... i've read his stuff, very good.

more power to you
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:41 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,