Proposed LL assignment and recycle rules

[TheMawn]

Originally Posted by chalsall

A critical part of being an Engineer, or even just a Manager, is knowing (or, at least, having a reasonably good idea) what will be required in the future. Having a good ability to model different situations in one's head, and ask oneself "what if" questions, helps a lot.

Thanks. I appreciate you making this link. On the other hand, I would never have claimed enough knowledge of the workings of the system to implement the rules myself. Obviously you had the foresight to at least ensure this would work, being THE guy. That's why I would defer to you in this kind of situation, or at least ask if we can go ahead.

[cuBerBruce]

Originally Posted by Prime95

The thresholds web page now displays the proposed cutoffs. The get assignment code does not enforce these thresholds yet.

WHAT?!?!? I thought you said the LL rules were going to be less stringent than DC rules. The 2 results per 90 days rule for LL is just plain RIDICULOUS! Remember, assignments are normally requested shortly before finishing an assignment, which makes it all the more harder to meet the requirement. It at least is way too harsh for category 3 assignments.

I just don't understand what the obsession is with this 2 results in 90 days stuff. And it is totally inconsistent with the required progress rules, especially for category 3 assignments.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by cuBerBruce

The 2 results per 90 days rule for LL is just plain RIDICULOUS!

Since the most critical assignments expire in 90 days instead of 60, we could also increase the 2 per 90 days rule by 50% to 2 per 135 days. Make sense?

Along a similar vein, should the 2 results per N day rule be relaxed for category 3 for both DC and LL? After all these results aren't due for 240 or 270 day.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by TheMawn

Obviously you had the foresight to at least ensure this would work, being THE guy.

I'm not "THE guy". George is "THE guy"; it's his project.

I'm just one of many cogs in a complex machine.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Since the most critical assignments expire in 90 days instead of 60, we could also increase the 2 per 90 days rule by 50% to 2 per 135 days. Make sense?

It could make sense...

Since, at the end of the day, we want to ensure untrustworthy machines are not assigned "low" candidates they cannot complete in a timely fashion, this change should not be a huge problem.

If they don't complete them in time, they'll be completed by someone else (for LL), and the slow machines who promised to deliver (but didn't) will be credited for a DC (same GHzD credit).

[cuBerBruce]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Since the most critical assignments expire in 90 days instead of 60, we could also increase the 2 per 90 days rule by 50% to 2 per 135 days. Make sense?

Along a similar vein, should the 2 results per N day rule be relaxed for category 3 for both DC and LL? After all these results aren't due for 240 or 270 day.

Yes, this would seem reasonable at least from my point of view. It should at least ensure my Core i7s can get preferred assignments (at least the lower prioity ones) without having to resort to manual assignments or some other trick.

My main concern was with category 3 as that is a large amount of exponents. I fully agree with having fairly strict rules for category 1. If you relax the rules for category 2, I won't complain.

[markr]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Since the most critical assignments expire in 90 days instead of 60, we could also increase the 2 per 90 days rule by 50% to 2 per 135 days. Make sense?

Makes sense.

Along a similar vein, should the 2 results per N day rule be relaxed for category 3 for both DC and LL? After all these results aren't due for 240 or 270 day.

Definitely. I agree with your logic, and share cuBerBruce's concern about the number of exponents in category 3.

My two home machines are "slow" (slower than cuBerBruce's i7s) but even so they can do current category 1 (DC on the slower machine, LL on the other) within the maximum 60 or 90 days. Of course I wouldn't say they can do them "quickly"! And one of the aims of category 1 is to do the work quickly. But I would like to think they could at least get category 3 work!

For category 1 DC the allowed maximum is 60 days: for category 3 DC the maximum increases from 60 days to 240 So using simple proportions we would increase the 90 days for 2 results to 360 days. Maybe it should be a bit tighter than that? Thoughts?

[frmky]

With these changes, is there a way to get top DC/LL exponents for CUDALucas? With the Teslas, I can finish them quickly and reliably.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Since the most critical assignments expire in 90 days instead of 60, we could also increase the 2 per 90 days rule by 50% to 2 per 135 days.

Hey George et al.

Once you've come to the final decision as to the criteria for each assignment category, I think we've got enough of a buffer (and enough fire-power now working the range) for Category 4 that you can implement the new assignment rules whenever you'd like.

Please don't, however, implement the new "recycling" rules for another couple of weeks, as this will result in a bit of a surge for Cat 4 requests that I'm not sure we're ready for.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by frmky

With these changes, is there a way to get top DC/LL exponents for CUDALucas? With the Teslas, I can finish them quickly and reliably.

One way (which works currently) is to use a mprime/Prime95 instance which is "Trusted" to fetch assignments, and then transfer them to the GPU(s). If you don't yet have such a trusted CPU instance, use a CPU to pump out a couple of DCs within and every 90 days, and you're good to go.

Another way (but this would involve George/Scott/James doing additional coding work) is to consider a metric for a user's production heuristics to the Primenet manual assignments page.

[TheMawn]

How hard would it be to give mfactx a more friendly interface like what Prime95 has? Or maybe include GPU's into that interface?

I should stress I don't want to sound like I'm demanding more work being piled on. Seriously just asking.