ISP issues and SMP client

[APOLLO]

I’m having a big issue with my ISP in regards to the maximum permitted upload quantity of gigabytes per month. I currently have 14 SMP clients running the A2 core and I noticed the results uploaded are very large. Does anyone know what size the results for A1 WUs average at? I might require to switch if they are smaller or possibly drop the SMP client altogether.

I could easily add another 4-5 SMP clients if I wanted, but seeing that I’m already far exceeding my monthly allotment of 10GB (according to the ISP), I’ll refrain. I'd really appreciate some thoughtful advice on the best course of action to take. I will consider options that are not directly related to folding, if it will make things more tenable to all parties concerned. TIA.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

eww... bandwidth limit ISP's.. thank god comcasts bandwidth limit is fake.. otherwise id have to kill some one..

i think the final output size is something like 10-20 mb.. i cant remember though.. i use to keep track of it when i was running the smp client during the CC..


btw 10GB cap.. what the effin kind of scam is your isp trying to pull? thats a load of shit.. you cant even browse the net on 10GB..

 

[APOLLO]

btw 10GB cap.. what the effin kind of scam is your isp trying to pull? thats a load of shit.. you cant even browse the net on 10GB..

10GB is the upload limit. I believe the download linit is quite a bit higher but don't use it all because I only browse the web and do the occasional music video watching on YouTube. By far, the greatest amount of data is being uploaded due to the SMP A2 client. The A2 WU results are huge and imagine 14 clients at least once every 24hrs uploading. I don't know what to do at this point. Looks like the A1 results are only a little smaller but IIRC they vary a lot more depending if they are older ones like the P2653 or newer units like the P3064. I guess I'll have to convert one client to test it out. Is it simply changing the client type required to receive the A1 units?

 

[sirmonkey1985]

i dont know if you can change file types or anything since i didnt really play with the smp client after i got it running.. what the heck isp do you have anyways? and do they have a higher bandwidth cap you can get? i still think 10GB is effin nuts.. id start breakin shit if comcast ever changed the limits to 10GB up.. id hit the cap within 24 hours..

 

[APOLLO]

I'm in Eastern Canada and the ISP I have here is local to this region. The next biggest cap will cost over $20 more per month. It is a big increase which will really only be used for F@H. If I had other uses, I might consider it since it also increases the DL speeds, but it's still a lot of money just for an Internet connection.

I totally agree with you, though, it is a very low cap. Where I live and in many areas of Canada there just aren't many ISP choices. This ISP is the only cable provider in my area to my knowledge and they have a monopoly. Something you don't see too often in the States.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

I'm in Eastern Canada and the ISP I have here is local to this region. The next biggest cap will cost over $20 more per month. It is a big increase which will really only be used for F@H. If I had other uses, I might consider it since it also increases the DL speeds, but it's still a lot of money just for an Internet connection.

I totally agree with you, though, it is a very low cap. Where I live and in many areas of Canada there just aren't many ISP choices. This ISP is the only cable provider in my area to my knowledge and they have a monopoly. Something you don't see too often in the States.

i live in monopoly central.. all we have is comcast for cable.. and SBC/ATT for dsl.. then the joke you want to call uverse with its 20/40/80/150GB cap limits.. atleast with comcast.. the 250GB cap limit was just a scare tactic.. they dont actually monitor your bandwidth unless you exceed some insane number.. which i never get to..

i cant stand isp's that have a monopoly.. and then on top of that.. local governments that dont give a rats ass about it.. yet its the same bogus local politians that bitch and whine about a super walmart being opened here and how it would effect local business's and how starbucks in the devil.. what the hell ever happened to competitive businesses..

 

[ALL4AMD]

dude really $20 a month, is hard to come by?

 

[Zero82z]

Your ISP is as bad as mine... We have a 20GB download cap and a 10GB upload cap, and the best we can get is a 100GB combined cap for $30 more a month. We go over the limit every month, but thankfully there's a cap on how much overage fees they charge (although they're supposedly dropping that cap in the near future as well).

 

[sirmonkey1985]

dude really $20 a month, is hard to come by?

no its 20 dollars a month more.. if i remember correctly.. out there its like 40-50 bucks a month already.. i know most canadian ISP's are expensive as hell.. especially the ones with monopolies out there.. canadian isp's make comcast look awesome..

 

[ALL4AMD]

no its 20 dollars a month more.. if i remember correctly.. out there its like 40-50 bucks a month already.. i know most canadian ISP's are expensive as hell.. especially the ones with monopolies out there.. canadian isp's make comcast look awesome..

mybad i ment $20 more.

 

[flogge]

The files come in compressed, right? Do they re-compress before they go back to the server?

Would your ISP be happier if the results were sent on off-peak hours? You might be able to set up a scheduled task to allow everything to connect a couple times per day and run extra clients or VMs to buffer your work units.

Obviously they would rather charge you an extra $20 per month rather than allow you extra uploads at scheduled times so you might be spinning your wheels.

 

[APOLLO]

dude really $20 a month, is hard to come by?

See below and I'm unemployed.

no its 20 dollars a month more.. if i remember correctly.. out there its like 40-50 bucks a month already.. i know most canadian ISP's are expensive as hell.. especially the ones with monopolies out there.. canadian isp's make comcast look awesome..

Agreed, and yes, it's per month. The difference IIRC, is actually ~$25 a month that would bring the total cost approaching $65.00 CND/m. I have to confirm the exact pricing model because it changes from year to year.

Would your ISP be happier if the results were sent on off-peak hours? You might be able to set up a scheduled task to allow everything to connect a couple times per day and run extra clients or VMs to buffer your work units.

I don't believe they will permit it and I don't wish to reconfigure my setup other than possibly changing the client type to receive A1 WUs instead, if that will make any significant difference to reduce my total monthly upload amounts.

Your ISP is as bad as mine...

We have the same ISP. I don't live far from you without getting specific. Probably a half hour's drive or thereabouts.

We have a 20GB download cap and a 10GB upload cap, and the best we can get is a 100GB combined cap for $30 more a month. We go over the limit every month, but thankfully there's a cap on how much overage fees they charge (although they're supposedly dropping that cap in the near future as well).

I'm getting charged an additional cost for exceeding my cap that comes close to what I would pay for the next highest cap. It's an absurd amount for what we receive in terms of usage/actual performance.

@all

Besides the exorbitant cost differential, I don't want to pay the additional cost because I have no other use for the higher cap and bandwidth. I simply don't need it and I'm the sole user. It will just go towards F@H. More importantly, why should anyone reward monopolistic practices? It will only reinforce the corporate conviction that supports such skewed pricing schemes to begin with.

 

[Zero82z]

We have the same ISP. I don't live far from you without getting specific. Probably a half hour's drive or thereabouts.

Ah . When you said eastern Canada I thought you meant the maritimes. We're looking into getting either a business line or fibre, but fibre isn't available in my area yet and we may not be able to get a business package for residential use. Plus it's a fuckload more expensive either way. Teksavvy (the only decent ISP in Canada) also doesn't serve this area.

 

[jimbowdang]

I guess I'll have to convert one client to test it out. Is it simply changing the client type required to receive the A1 units?

I don't think you can control which WUs you receive from Stanford, they will send out which ever units they need done. If you want to try out the A1 units though you can run the windows SMP client, I'm not sure why but they never got the A2 units running on windows.

Perhaps you know some friends/family with a high speed connection you could have house your boxen?

 

[Zero82z]

Perhaps you know some friends/family with a high speed connection you could have house your boxen?

Everyone here has the same bandwidth limitations. The best residential service you can get has a combined upload/download cap of 100GB/month, but standard service is either 20GB down/10GB up or 30GB combined depending on which of the two available ISPs you choose. It's not a good situation.

 

[jimbowdang]

I was thinking that you could spread out the machines so that more than one household could share the bandwidth.

 

[APOLLO]

We're looking into getting either a business line or fibre, but fibre isn't available in my area yet and we may not be able to get a business package for residential use. Plus it's a fuckload more expensive either way.

Yep, but you're fortunate in that you can at least engage in the prospect of switching to these types of high-end solutions. Something I can't even dream about...

Teksavvy (the only decent ISP in Canada) also doesn't serve this area.

From what I see, they have very good caps for the rates they're charging. Light-years ahead of what we have. The only thing that gives me pause is the DSL-based technology that I had for a while on two separate occasions with problems both times. Mind you, that was a completely different ISP that isn't very effective in my area.

I don't think you can control which WUs you receive from Stanford, they will send out which ever units they need done.

I think you're right. I tried changing the client config for half an hour on one machine to no avail. It made no difference. Stanford's 'will shall be done' irrespective of our endeavors.

If you want to try out the A1 units though you can run the windows SMP client, I'm not sure why but they never got the A2 units running on windows.

I was thinking of that but it's a big move backwards for me. I abandoned the Windows SMP client largely because of the issues I was going through with crashing WUs in the past. It left a bad taste. I hardly ever experience complications with the Linux client. It's very stable. The possibility of undergoing these issues again makes me cringe. Not to mention the massive drop in PPD. I'd rather just shut down the VMs and switch to console clients, believe me. That's what I have running on my Skulltrail: 8 console clients and 4 GPU clients. I was going to add 4 VMs on that system but no freakin' way now!

Everyone here has the same bandwidth limitations. The best residential service you can get has a combined upload/download cap of 100GB/month, but standard service is either 20GB down/10GB up or 30GB combined depending on which of the two available ISPs you choose. It's not a good situation.

It's a very bad situation for other reasons besides lack of competition, which I don't wish to delve into here because it's way OT. Suffice to say, we're stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to ISP choices. Furthermore, it's been like that for a very long time in computer chronological terms, and I don't see it changing in the foreseeable future.

I was thinking that you could spread out the machines so that more than one household could share the bandwidth.

I really don't know anyone who would approve, not for an indefinite amount of time. Then there's the inconvenience of accessing systems when there's a problem, and the monitoring, but a solution for the latter can at least be found.

I just want to say I truly appreciate all the solutions being offered. Even if I can't implement most of them, it's giving me some ideas.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

this is where you start finding wireless networks around you and hacking into em and stealing internet.. lol


"its all for a good cause officer.. i needed bobs internet connection to help cure cancer.. "

 

[Zero82z]

From what I see, they have very good caps for the rates they're charging. Light-years ahead of what we have. The only thing that gives me pause is the DSL-based technology that I had for a while on two separate occasions with problems both times. Mind you, that was a completely different ISP that isn't very effective in my area.

They offer unlimited bandwidth DSL service for $40 a month, which is very reasonable compared to the competition. It still uses Bell's network though.

 

[capreppy]

Wow. I guess I am really spoiled and won't bitch at my DSL provider any time in the near future.

 

[flogge]

Perhaps reviving the old "[H]ard Orphan Boxen" program would be in order. If you have the machines but don't have the means to support them send them to fellow folders who do not have the same bandwidth or power restrictions.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

Wow. I guess I am really spoiled and won't bitch at my DSL provider any time in the near future.

ill bitch about comcast til they go under and disapear.. and then ill keep bitching about them.. worst friggin isp in the US hands down.. with zero respect for their customers..