Is it possible a couple days can be added to the current deadline for reporting work? I have a bunch of WU's I can't report and will expire tomorrow.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

If the work unit is complete maybe you can go to your "Transfers" tab click on the work unit and select "retry now".

---

> If the work unit is complete maybe you can go to your "Transfers" tab click on
> the work unit and select "retry now".
>
Thanks, but I do know how to report the work and retry if the server is busy. I was wondering if there was a way for the project to grant a couple days to the deadline so everyone could get their work reported.

I'm on dial up and connect and disconnect manually. I could sit here and click on "retry" for hours, but I don't have the time. If I was always connected, eventually I might hit a point where the servers are up and I can get in the cue, but the servers have been shut down at the optimal time (at night in California.)

Seems ridiculous to throw away crunched work units because the project has been down so much lately and a deadline has passed.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

> > If the work unit is complete maybe you can go to your "Transfers" tab
> click on
> > the work unit and select "retry now".
> >
> Thanks, but I do know how to report the work and retry if the server is busy.
> I was wondering if there was a way for the project to grant a couple days to
> the deadline so everyone could get their work reported.

As I understand it, as long as you report the WU before it can be reassigned and re-crunched, you'll get credit. The deadline is more about when the project assumes work is lost and resends it.

You'll also get credit if there is a quorum and you report within a few days.

You should not assume that all work is lost just because you're past the deadline.

---

Looking at this thread, generates a question: Does this imply that if for whatever reason a WU takes a long tme to calculate (such as our PCs being used for word processing or whatever, which is what we have them for) that the electricity and time we provide doesn't generate any form of credit?

This seems to be a somewhat arrogant approach to clients if true, and may be one of the reasons why there is a reluctance for people to move from classic to boinc.

Bearing in mind that the credit standings is all we get out of this for our efforts.

---

> Looking at this thread, generates a question: Does this imply that if for
> whatever reason a WU takes a long tme to calculate (such as our PCs being used
> for word processing or whatever, which is what we have them for) that the
> electricity and time we provide doesn't generate any form of credit?
>
> This seems to be a somewhat arrogant approach to clients if true, and may be
> one of the reasons why there is a reluctance for people to move from classic
> to boinc.
>
> Bearing in mind that the credit standings is all we get out of this for our
> efforts.

If you don't get into the quorum of results, for whatevere reason, the current standard policy for BOINC projects is to grant no credit.

In a way it does make sense, if the WU fails to validate, it is useless, someone the Over-Clocks their system without knowing what they are doing and returning bad results consistently are wasting everyone's time. No sense in encouraging them.

THere has been off and on discussion about consolation prize awards, but now you have to track a lot of data in the database which is one of the system bottlenecks right now.

A lot of the infrastructure needs to be looked at; but right now the effort is focused on getting the basic software system working across all of the planned system types. Once that is done, and the GUI is made feature complete with the planned features, I am sure that we will see some more effort underway to address the back-end protions and how they operate.

Even better, we are seeing a decent number of GUI sysems coming out now that will allow you to run the "standard" version, or a version written by another participant. I am using BOINC View on a PC and can manage all my computers from that one screen. On the Macintosh there is a new GUI I am testing and so far it looks like it is Ok. Still rough around the edges a bit, but the developers seem enthusiastic about support and a new version is around the corner.

In one sense, especially since I am not too wild about the "official" "look-and-feel" I may primarily use other GUIs instead, and only install the "official" GUI for the purposes of capturing images for the documentation. But then never use them in real life ... :)

---

There does come a point where a quorum isn't met, and the WU is *not* sent out to anymore hosts. Paul is right. And in those cases, the default is to give everyone who did return sucessfully, 0 credit.

Predictor was having a problem with this for awhile back when everyone was on CC 4.13, and WUs were comming back with

7 download errors
5 over, no reply

(Those people had a download error and didn't get the WU)

and 1 or 2 people managed to sucessfully complete the WU and upload it...

In that case, they ended up setting the thing to "skip check" and manually assigned the credit...while trying to fix their validator and all the d/l errors they were facing...

---

> If you don't get into the quorum of results, for whatevere reason, the current
> standard policy for BOINC projects is to grant no credit.
>
> In a way it does make sense, if the WU fails to validate, it is useless,
> someone the Over-Clocks their system without knowing what they are doing and
> returning bad results consistently are wasting everyone's time. No sense in
> encouraging them.
>
It makes sense when the project is up so one can report their work. But I haven't been able to report work on one of my computer for quite a few days. I have 21 WU's to report by March 7. They were crunched on a machine that is not over-clocked and rarely returns errors.

I can access that computer at night, but since I'm in California, it seems that's when they shut down while they are working on the power problem.

Seems like a library that says you have to return books by Friday but we are closed on weekdays.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

> This seems to be a somewhat arrogant approach to clients if true, and may be
> one of the reasons why there is a reluctance for people to move from classic
> to boinc.

What do you suggest as an alternative?

I see three kinds of crunchers (classic or BOINC):

1) Dedicated fanatics like most of us who read the forum.

2) Those who participate in crunching by loading the client, but don't do much other than let it run.

3) Those who download the client, check it out, download work, and for whatever reason disappear.

Group #1 is reasonably well accomodated as long as they don't set "connect every x days" too high. Even the 14 day limit should work for most with a "connect every 10 day" maximum.

Group #2 is fine, because they are probably running the default cache which is something like 0.1 or 0.5 days, and they're reporting results quickly.

Group #3 has disappeared. There is no way to ask them if they're going to report, so the only solution is to set a deadline and count 'em gone (or the other two who did return a result will NEVER get credit).

---

> What do you suggest as an alternative?

Expand the deadline to maybe four weeks (or even remove the deadline) during server problems like now. Switch back to two weeks when everything is ok again.

I have similar problems like JAF and 12 hours of work are lost due to the problems (database server, power outage) during the last weeks.

> As I understand it, as long as you report the WU before it can be reassigned
> and re-crunched, you'll get credit. The deadline is more about when the
> project assumes work is lost and resends it.
>
> You'll also get credit if there is a quorum and you report within a few days.
>
> You should not assume that all work is lost just because you're past the
> deadline.
>
ACTUALLY....as long you return a work unit BEFORE any of the resent ones get returned you will still get credit. If you return it AFTER any of the resent ones you will be out of luck.

---

> > What do you suggest as an alternative?
>
> Expand the deadline to maybe four weeks (or even remove the deadline) during
> server problems like now. Switch back to two weeks when everything is ok
> again.

The original post was complaining about how the project even has a deadline, so let me restate the question: "How do you handle lost work when clients can and will simply disappear."

When deadlines are longer, credit comes more slowly (and people complain). Shorter deadlines means overdue work (and people complain).

> I have similar problems like JAF and 12 hours of work are lost due to the
> problems (database server, power outage) during the last weeks.

How do you know you've lost 12 hours work? Unless you chose to "reset" the project work done during the outage will be uploaded, reported, and very likely credited.

---

> Expand the deadline to maybe four weeks (or even remove the deadline) during
> server problems like now. Switch back to two weeks when everything is ok
> again.

P.S. to expand the deadline when work is issued, you have to know that there will be server problems, and to switch back, you have to know that things will be okay.

It's hard to predict the future sometimes.

---

> P.S. to expand the deadline when work is issued, you have to know that there
> will be server problems, and to switch back, you have to know that things will
> be okay.
>
> It's hard to predict the future sometimes.
>
You make a good point. However, since the project has been DOWN more than it's been up lately, I'm WAY backed up on work units to report and I can't seem to connect even when the darn servers are up because they're overloaded and everyone else is trying to report. It's extremely aggravating when I've got overdue work units and the damn server is unreachable!

I agree... suspend deadlines for any work units sent out that were due in the past two weeks and restart the deadline for any new work units being sent out, since they claim they have the "graceful shutdown" under control.

---

> You make a good point. However, since the project has been DOWN more than it's
> been up lately, I'm WAY backed up on work units to report and I can't seem to
> connect even when the darn servers are up because they're overloaded and
> everyone else is trying to report. It's extremely aggravating when I've got
> overdue work units and the damn server is unreachable!
>
> I agree... suspend deadlines for any work units sent out that were due in the
> past two weeks and restart the deadline for any new work units being sent out,
> since they claim they have the "graceful shutdown" under control.
>
Maybe this will be a cue for people to actually LOWER their workunit cache instead of trying to max it out all the time!
I for one have a 1 day cache, I also have a cable connection, for me that works fine most of the time. At times like this I still have several days left before my units will start to expire. Those that have large, ie many day caches, could be in trouble, depending on when they were last able to connect.

---

> As I understand it, as long as you report the WU before it can be reassigned
> and re-crunched, you'll get credit. The deadline is more about when the
> project assumes work is lost and resends it.
>
> You'll also get credit if there is a quorum and you report within a few days.
>
> You should not assume that all work is lost just because you're past the
> deadline.
>
I just don't feel spending three days crunching WU's that are past the deadline and "hoping" some get credit is very scientific or efficient. Aborting those WU's and starting with new one's make more sense (to me).

I don't understand the reasoning of a deadline when the project is down as much as it has been. Writing a "deadline offset" into the code that would allow WU's past the deadline when there's major outages, might work.

Ned, please don't take my responses the wrong way. I respect your opinion and look at these threads as good debate and a learning experience. Hopefully it will help the project with ideas and policies in the future. Boinc and the individual projects are evolving and I find the whole process fascinating (and sometime aggravating.)

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

> The original post was complaining about how the project even has a deadline,
> so let me restate the question: "How do you handle lost work when clients can
> and will simply disappear."

Sorry, I didn't got that right. The 'normal' handling of the deadlines is ok.

> How do you know you've lost 12 hours work? Unless you chose to "reset" the
> project work done during the outage will be uploaded, reported, and very
> likely credited.

mikey wrote in his post (#83639) that you won't get credits if you return results after any of the resent ones. The particular work units were already resent. And the other computers already got their credits. So, I'm out of luck now? Or will I still get the credits? (if "yes" please ignore my posts... ;-) )
Sorry, but right now I cannot look after that computer. I will have access to it not before friday. Right now I only see the red "no reply"-lines in the stats.

update:
> (if "yes" please ignore my posts... ;-) )

One of the results has successfully been reported an is waiting vor credits...
So: please ignore my posts...

---

> Maybe this will be a cue for people to actually LOWER their workunit cache
> instead of trying to max it out all the time!

The cache size on that particular computer is 0.5 days...

During the data server problems two weeks ago I turned off Boinc SETI and turned on Classic SETI. Last monday (one week ago, the data server problem was solved) I turned on Boinc SETI again. Shortly after that there was the power outage and I had no chance to report the finished work units since then...
(by the way: why is the reporting of the finished work units a two-step-process? First uploading, then reporting by contacting the scheduler? Two points where the process can fail...)

---

> I agree... suspend deadlines for any work units sent out that were due in the
> past two weeks and restart the deadline for any new work units being sent out,
> since they claim they have the "graceful shutdown" under control.

My observation is that they don't need to actually "extend" the deadlines because the deadlines are not cast in concrete. They are at best cast in jello.

It will take a while for the schedulers to realize your work is late and reassign it.

It will take a while for some machine to download that WU and crunch it.

In the meantime, you'll likely report the result, join the quorum and get the points.

---

> (by the way: why is the reporting of the finished work units a
> two-step-process? First uploading, then reporting by contacting the scheduler?
> Two points where the process can fail...)

Two totally different servers. The data server is just a big tank for files.

The report tells the scheduler to look in the tank and give the file to the scheduler.

---