View Single Post
Old 2009-04-20, 06:56   #135
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

11000011010012 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCZ View Post
I reckon we should work out a credit system for sieving.
Not because i want the points but because others will do it for the points.

If this project gets more crunchers then some of us might end up 24/7 365 sieving.
Hmm...interesting idea. Though, this brings to mind something I'd been thinking about for a while: before we even think of doing credits/stats for sieving, we should look into adding all the manual (non-LLRnet) LLR work to the DB. It wouldn't be too hard; especially since the DB automatically screens out duplicates (you'll see where this comes in in a moment). Here's what I was thinking:

-First, we could load in all the manual ranges, by sending AMDave CSV files just like is passed around for LLRnet results automatically behind the scenes. For the username we'd of course put the user's ID, and for time/date we'd put the time/date of the forum post they made reporting the range complete. As for the server/port fields, maybe we could load it in as server MN (for manual--unless somebody can come up with something a bit more imaginitive than that ) port 0.

-Then, we could load all the LLRnet results in through the same method (that is, the LLRnet results that have been processed and sent to Gary as manual results), but this time under user "Unknown". That means that any additional k/n pairs that may have "slipped through the cracks" with the servers would be still accounted for.

After doing this, the DB should contain a full accounting of every result returned by the project. Probably one of the biggest benefits of this (besides granting equal credit for manual results as well as automatic ones) would be that the "Drive Progress" scatter plot would be much more well filled in (this would be most noticeable for the 1st and 3rd drives, much of which were done manually).

I remember that I had originally expressed objections to such a plan a while back due to worries about it overloading the DB. Of course, that was back when we had Adam running the DB on his server that could barely tolerate the load anyway, not to mention that all of the page queries were run live (!) and thus some of the pages took quite a long time to load even with just the LLRNet stuff in there. Of course, by now that is no longer a problem--we now have a highly robust server that doesn't seem to have any limitations in sight on the amount of data we can pump into it.

After we've finally addressed the issue of adding manual LLR work into the stats, *then* we can look into crediting sieve work.
mdettweiler is offline