What the amount of demanded credit depends on?

---

POLISH NATIONAL TEAM - Join! Crunch! Win!

Take a look at the 1st post in this thread.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

I have got very long task http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=547633 as second cruncher (GTX260 Top, host ID: 31329). Estimated time calculated after 4h15' (6.722%) is ~63 hours. The first cruncher's claimed credit is 45,669. I have no chance to finish it within 2 days to get bonus. On the other side claimed credit looks like bonus credit included. Now is task suspended and I’m crunching next standard 8h task to get bonus.
Question: Am I true in my calculation that bonus credit is included in that long task? If not, I will follow the first cruncher and abort that task as bonus’s looses would be about 8,700 credits during 63h run of that task.

What ever happened to that task is probably not intended.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

So what to do with it, abort or try to run and finish it? I like long tasks, but if it crashes after 60h, I would not be happy.

I've got one of these monsters running too:

http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=547641

3 hours, 4.5 percent done. Most normal WUs take 6-7 hours on this card.

What ever happened to that task is probably not intended.

MrS

Is intended maybe, names of that strange tasks includes "twomons". We have received not only monsters, even doublemonsters :-).

Now I've got one of that monster Wus, too.
http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=547733
26 % in 15 h. The deadline is on June 29th. Maybe imposible to finish it in time.

WhiteFire

..... I've got a pair of 'monsters' running on my 295. 24 hours elapsed and only showing 25-30% complete.

Abort or run out?

P.

I've got one of these monsters running too:

http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=547641

3 hours, 4.5 percent done. Most normal WUs take 6-7 hours on this card.

Hmm, aborted by project, redundant result after 18:40 run time on a GTX 260 and no credit.
That's 3 normal WUs worth of time. Doesn't seem too fair does it?

Monster aborted by server, no credit granted. Moving to AQUA, it is not fair.

You guys might like this:
http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=1155&nowrap=true#10686

GDF

OK, nice

Thanks!

I agree. The whole idea of this setup is to use spare capacity NOT force people out to buy faster equipment for the sole use of these projects. My computer suits my needs not my needs be adapted to suit others.

Wiyosaya wrote:

I agree that the credit scheme should be revamped to be more fair to the volunteers.

What do you mean by that?
1. Increasing of the basic credit for short queue. That means enter to the credit war, as that credit is the same as Seti granted credit for CC 1.0/1.3 GPUs.
2. Erasing time bonus. Developers needs results ASAP, that would be not with accordance to their requirements.
3. Decreasing the basic credit of long queue to the basic credit of short queue. As I cas remember, credit bonus for long queue is for two reasons: more errors and more important results. There would be no reason to crunch the long queue if credit was the same.

I see the credit scheme by the other way: Granted credit include 24 hours bonus is the basic one and lower granted credit is penalty for slower crunching then the projets needs.

Any other idea?

Wiyosaya wrote:

I agree that the credit scheme should be revamped to be more fair to the volunteers.

What do you mean by that?
1. Increasing of the basic credit for short queue. That means enter to the credit war, as that credit is the same as Seti granted credit for CC 1.0/1.3 GPUs.
2. Erasing time bonus. Developers needs results ASAP, that would be not with accordance to their requirements.
3. Decreasing the basic credit of long queue to the basic credit of short queue. As I cas remember, credit bonus for long queue is for two reasons: more errors and more important results. There would be no reason to crunch the long queue if credit was the same.

I see the credit scheme by the other way: Granted credit include 24 hours bonus is the basic one and lower granted credit is penalty for slower crunching then the projets needs.

Any other idea?

So you call your response fair? People have no idea what I posted nor why I advocate changing the scheme. In fact, you've simply posted a reply to what I said in another thread completely when site moderators were participating in that thread AND also suggesting that perhaps the credit scheme should be revamped.

I'm not repeating what I said there. For those truly interested in discourse - see the original post.
Seems like you want to perpetuate the "credit war," I want to end it.

---

I have read not only your post - I read whole thread. As you can see I have put NO response, I am asking you for response, not only for comment. I have commented possibilities that came on my mind and I am waiting for other possibilities.
It is easy to comment, it is difficult to think up. I would be happy if the credit scheme was more friendly too, but I can't see the way, what about you?

By the way - do you remember credit scheme of United Devices? If you do not: 25% of credit was according to transfer speed of a modem.