nanodesigner-developers

[Nanodesigner-developers] Design Question

[Fuji H. <fo...@gm...>]

Hi Team,

I've been reading up on JavaSpace technology and it's really
interesting, I look forward to seeing how it works with the project. 
Anyways, I have a question about the Nanodesigner architecture: Why do
we need two separate clients for Designing (DC) and Computing (CC)?  I
understand from the design description that the CC will only be
responsible for processing job requests (workunits).  Is the intention
here to utilize machines dedicated for processing and processing only?
 Or could we have one machine running both the CC and the DC clients
concurrently?

Let me know if you understand my question and what you think.

Also, let me know if you guys have any GUI chat sessions.  I
unfortunately don't have the Yahoo messenger, but I do have the
following:
ICQ: 18059890
MSN: atm...@ho...
(I like IRC as well)

Thanks,

Fuji

Re: [Nanodesigner-developers] Design Question

[Elie De B. <el...@de...>]

Hello,

Afaik your assumptions are correct. When visualising molecules the client
will use a (big) part of its processing power (or call it wasting just to show
something on the screen). So it's easy to imagine that distributing the 
workload over multiple clients crunchers will be much faster than rendering
molecules and calculating them on the same cpu. Nevertheless a machine rendering
a molecule will also have some idle time in which it can also dedicate to 
numbercrunching. So your question comes to this: "Can the setiathome webserver
run a seti client ?". For small molecules/testing purposes I think all three servers
can easily be one. But once the molecules and calculations increase you'd either
want to see the workload spread acros machine or see smoke coming out your own
machine ;-).

Hope this helps (and i'm not telling any lies here).
Elie De Brauwer 

> Hi Team,
> 
> I've been reading up on JavaSpace technology and it's realyly
> interesting, I look forward to seeing how it works with the project. 
> Anyways, I have a question about the Nanodesigner architecture: Why do
> we need two separate clients for Designing (DC) and Computing (CC)?  I
> understand from the design description that the CC will only be
> responsible for processing job requests (workunits).  Is the intention
> here to utilize machines dedicated for processing and processing only?
>  Or could we have one machine running both the CC and the DC clients
> concurrently?
> 
> Let me know if you understand my question and what you think.
> 
> Also, let me know if you guys have any GUI chat sessions.  I
> unfortunately don't have the Yahoo messenger, but I do have the
> following:
> ICQ: 18059890
> MSN: atm...@ho...
> (I like IRC as well)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Fuji
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Nanodesigner-developers mailing list
> Nan...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nanodesigner-developers

Re: [Nanodesigner-developers] Design Question

[<sw...@us...>]

Fuji Hakayito wrote:

> <>I've been reading up on JavaSpace technology and it's really
> interesting, I look forward to seeing how it works with the project.
> Anyways, I have a question about the Nanodesigner architecture: Why do
> we need two separate clients for Designing (DC) and Computing (CC)? I
> understand from the design description that the CC will only be
> responsible for processing job requests (workunits). Is the intention
> here to utilize machines dedicated for processing and processing only?
> Or could we have one machine running both the CC and the DC clients
> concurrently?
> Let me know if you understand my question and what you think.

Using two or more systems is only necessary in case there is a need for=20
large amounts of raw processing power not uncommon in molecular=20
modelling and design. Obviously to take advantage of parallel processing=20
you also need algorithms that can be parallelized which is a problem on=20
its own. So in case parallelizing is not possible or not desirable the=20
processing needs to be done on the Design Client itself.
I think it should be possible to use both on the same machine although I=20
am not sure what the benefit would be in this case, except maybe for=20
debugging purposes.

You are correct, it is the intention to use machines for processing only.
Mind you that over time the newly designed molecules will become larger=20
and larger so obviously the processing power needed will become more=20
extensive. To give an idea about it: an ab initio (read: exact)=20
molecular modelling calculation of a molecule of 10 atoms or so takes=20
all the processing power of the biggest supercomputers. There is no need=20
to be alarmed however because I doubt it will ever be needed for the=20
goals we have set ourselves. There are a lot of other algorithms, less=20
accurate of course, but who will do quite nicely for the purposes of=20
molecular nanotechnology and other fields. Those kind of algorithms only=20
give approximations, true, but they do it a lot faster than ab initio=20
algorithms.

More details about such an environment can be found on=20
http://math.nist.gov/mcsd/savg/parallel/screen/index.html
Javier was kind enough to point me to it earlier on. I have contacted=20
the person in charge, William George, and he replied that their software=20
will be open source and available around the end of this year. I see no=20
reason why we couldn=92t adapt it to our goal. Also it would be=20
interesting to adapt it I think. No need to reinvent stuff. That holds=20
true for other parts of the software also. We only need to be careful=20
about license issues.

Does this answer your questions Fuji?

>Also, let me know if you guys have any GUI chat sessions.  I
>unfortunately don't have the Yahoo messenger, but I do have the
>following:
>ICQ: 18059890
>MSN: atm...@ho...
>(I like IRC as well)
> =20
>
There has been no chat session for the UI group yet. You are in the=20
UTC-7 time zone if I am not mistaken, Javier is in the UTC time zone and=20
Chandresh is in the UTC+4 time zone I believe. It might be difficult to=20
arrange a chat session and I must confess I didn=92t take into account th=
e=20
time difference while creating the groups. I only took into account your=20
apparent interests.

Val=E8re