Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby fangfufu » Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:57 am

Obviously FAH predates BOINC, did Pande group ever consider moving abandon FAH and run everything on BOINC? What is the reason behind maintaining separate FAH codebase? I can think of many myself, but it would be great to hear from people who are more closely associated with the project. Bonus question, does Pande group still exist? Does Pande group still run their experiments on FAH?
Folder:
- Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4900MQ (running on two thread to prevent thermal throttling...)
- Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4200M

I first started folding back in the Google Compute days!
fangfufu
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:26 am
Location: Norwich, United Kingdom

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby Joe_H » Thu Mar 19, 2020 7:47 am

Yes, there are some much older topics here on that. Basically they found too many incompatibilities in the way they were doing things and the way BOINC was doing things for it to be a good match.

As for the actual Pande Lab, there may be some people still handling things there, others with closer contacts can comment on that. But the various grad students finished up their degrees and Dr. Pande is working for a private company. What is behind F@h at this point is referred to as the F@h Consortium - https://foldingathome.org/about/the-fol ... onsortium/. A number of the researchers at these labs are former grad students or post-docs at Pande Lab. Dr. Bowman at WUSTL is the Director.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
Joe_H
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6700
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: W. MA

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby bruce » Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:34 am

BOINC was originally designed based on the needs of seti@home. (Yes, iI has come a long way since then.) If you intend to analyze the radio signals within a specific part of the spectrum from a small patch of sky. It makes no difference which analysis is completed first or last as long as they all get analyzed. Each one has a rather loose deadline, of course but finishing your assignment early earns zero bonus. FAH, on the other hand cares very much how quickly you finish your assignment and which assignments must be completed first. Those facts lead FAH to grant generous bonuses for rapid returns and penaleies for exceeding the deadline.

That difference in philosophies has led to a rather extreme differences in goals an methodologies that are essentially incompatible.
bruce
 
Posts: 20160
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby NBR » Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:36 pm

bruce wrote:BOINC was originally designed based on the needs of seti@home. (Yes, iI has come a long way since then.) If you intend to analyze the radio signals within a specific part of the spectrum from a small patch of sky. It makes no difference which analysis is completed first or last as long as they all get analyzed. Each one has a rather loose deadline, of course but finishing your assignment early earns zero bonus. FAH, on the other hand cares very much how quickly you finish your assignment and which assignments must be completed first. Those facts lead FAH to grant generous bonuses for rapid returns and penaleies for exceeding the deadline.

That difference in philosophies has led to a rather extreme differences in goals an methodologies that are essentially incompatible.

Great explanation. :)
NBR
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed May 20, 2020 12:11 am
Location: Brasília, DF, Brazil

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby Endgame124 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:41 pm

bruce wrote:BOINC was originally designed based on the needs of seti@home. (Yes, iI has come a long way since then.) If you intend to analyze the radio signals within a specific part of the spectrum from a small patch of sky. It makes no difference which analysis is completed first or last as long as they all get analyzed. Each one has a rather loose deadline, of course but finishing your assignment early earns zero bonus. FAH, on the other hand cares very much how quickly you finish your assignment and which assignments must be completed first. Those facts lead FAH to grant generous bonuses for rapid returns and penaleies for exceeding the deadline.

That difference in philosophies has led to a rather extreme differences in goals an methodologies that are essentially incompatible.

Boinc can be used for protein folding with quick turn around times - check Rosetta@Home - so it’s not just focused on the seti use case. That said, I’m pretty sure Rosetta is fairly different than F@H in end folding goal as well.
Endgame124
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:22 am

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby Jonazz » Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:11 pm

Rosetta does not/barely simulate the protein folding process. They predict the 3D structure of proteins computationally and design new proteins.
Jonazz
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 3:08 pm

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby toTOW » Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:30 pm

I think GPUGRID has a similar behaviour as FAH (next WU need previous one to be generated) ... unfortunately, it has lead to an elitist project only working well on faster and newer NV GPUs ... :(
Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.

FAH-Addict : latest news, tests and reviews about Folding@Home project.

Image
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5653
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby JimF » Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:42 pm

toTOW wrote:... unfortunately, it has lead to an elitist project only working well on faster and newer NV GPUs ... :(

That is fortunate, if you are trying to get the science done. I just hope that FAH get a CUDA app soon.
JimF
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:03 pm

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby MeeLee » Mon Jul 27, 2020 9:15 pm

bruce wrote:seti@home... It makes no difference which analysis is completed first or last as long as they all get analyzed. Each one has a rather loose deadline, of course but finishing your assignment early earns zero bonus. FAH, on the other hand cares very much how quickly you finish your assignment and which assignments must be completed first. Those facts lead FAH to grant generous bonuses for rapid returns and penaleies for exceeding the deadline.
..

It's not entirely true. If you return a WU early, it means you can start a new WU early. Which means more work can be done, which usually leads to higher points anyway.

QRB brings up the possibility of 2 users (one with a fast system regularly pausing his computer, the other with a slow system continuously folding non stop) doing the same amount of work, over the same amount of time, but one gets more points than the other; just for owning faster hardware; even if the same amount of work is done in the same amount of time.

Same is true for 2xRTX 2060 vs 1x RTX 2080Ti. They're both as fast as one another, get the same amount of data processed per time, but the 2080Ti will just get more PPD for it.
MeeLee
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Did FAH ever consider to move to BOINC?

Postby bruce » Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:09 am

MeeLee wrote:Same is true for 2xRTX 2060 vs 1x RTX 2080Ti. They're both as fast as one another, get the same amount of data processed per time, but the 2080Ti will just get more PPD for it.


You get more points because each WU is completed faster.

E.g. Run one project from t1 to t2 and another project from t3 to t4. You have removed one project from the server for t2-t1 and another for t4-t3. during which times nobody else can work on them.

Compare that to running two projects from T1 to T4. You have remove two projects from the server for longer periods of time so you've created more interference with other people ability to work on the server's pool of FAH's WUs. In the grand scheme of things, the latter means FAH needs to create more clones to distribute to donors even if the science doesn't need them.
bruce
 
Posts: 20160
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.


Return to Discussions of General-FAH topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron