Hi

Has anyone an idee when the devs get this site free to view again.
It would be helpful.

greetz Mike

Only they know.

<a> [/url]

> Only they know.
>
> <a> [/url]
>

And that's why I'm staying with SETI CLASSIC until this BOINC disaster becomes FULLY operational. I'm not interested in data crunching that I can't see.

>> And that's why I'm staying with SETI CLASSIC until this BOINC disaster becomes
> FULLY operational. I'm not interested in data crunching that I can't see.
>
>
As important as those stats are to you I would think you would be all about joining up early to get ahead of the game.

Stats pages are starting to pop up on the web. Here is one from KWSN member.
http://macg.no-ip.info:5520/boinc/teams.php
It is a day behind on updates, but it is a great start.

> As important as those stats are to you I would think you would be all about
> joining up early to get ahead of the game.
>
>

Stats aren't important to me (I'm only one computer and I'm not going to "win" am I?).

I merely ask for a record (a visible one at that) of my small contribution to this community. Something, which at this point in time, is not available with BOINC.

> Stats pages are starting to pop up on the web. Here is one from KWSN member.
> http://macg.no-ip.info:5520/boinc/teams.php
> It is a day behind on updates, but it is a great start.

Depends on when you check it :) I update as often as Berkeley gives me XML updates which is currently at about 3:45 AM CST every day. Just today I developed a script that lets me 'set it and forget it' as far as updates are concerned. Much preferable to manually downloading, unzipping, etc. And that is about as good as you can get at the moment unless you go for some kind of real-time page scraping business...

Time to forget it all for a few hours. The bed awaits.

> Stats aren't important to me (I'm only one computer and I'm not going to "win"
> am I?).
>
> I merely ask for a record (a visible one at that) of my small contribution to
> this community. Something, which at this point in time, is not available with
> BOINC.

Errmmmm... -Cough, cough-

You do have a visible record of your contribution. It's called your account page. It shows you how many credits you have, and also links you to your team stats, etc...

The only things currently turned off are stats that S@H classic wouldn't dream of giving you. Such as information about the other machines also processing your WUs.

In a nutshell, BOINC at present gives you more of a visible record than S@H classic. So what's the problem you have with this?



<a> [/url]

Oh Heffed...get with the program!

Berkeley tease us with letting us have access to returned results info with beta and with the start of the public project and then when the going gets exciting they turn it off! How can we complain about not getting credit where credit is due or lost wu's when we can't see what's going on!

Here's hanging out for access to returned results info!

Live long and crunch,

Paul
(S@H1 7450+wu's)

[img]http://www.boinc.dk/auto.php?user=1639&project=astropulse&input=1071946756 - boincdk&layout=1071946756 - boincdk.jpg[/img]BETA

> Oh Heffed...get with the program!
>
> Berkeley tease us with letting us have access to returned results info with
> beta and with the start of the public project and then when the going gets
> exciting they turn it off! How can we complain about not getting credit where
> credit is due or lost wu's when we can't see what's going on!
>
> Here's hanging out for access to returned results info!


Exactly my point :)

> Oh Heffed...get with the program!

I'm with the program. Where are you?

> Berkeley tease us with letting us have access to returned results info with
> beta and with the start of the public project and then when the going gets
> exciting they turn it off! How can we complain about not getting credit where
> credit is due or lost wu's when we can't see what's going on!

Maybe complaints were one of the reason it's currently disabled?

> Here's hanging out for access to returned results info!

I never said I didn't want to see them come back. Just that there are other forms of feedback.

<a> [/url]

How can we complain about not getting credit where
credit is due or lost wu's when we can't see what's going on!
==========

That is more than likely the very reason that they did turn those options off. They have enough problems right now without listening to every Tom Dick & Harry Whining & Moaning about a few possibly lost Credits.

Of for christs sake folks.
Every thread turns into a comparison between the Classic version and Boinc.
Why does anyone even care if someone wants to stick with classic version, now
that the "important and critical" pending/results credit link isnt working.

Alex




<a> [/url]

yes its life the stats ;-)


[/url] [/url]

Why does anyone even care if someone wants to stick with classic version
==========

Well it's probably like when you take a favorite toy away from a kid, they don't want to play with the new toy that you got them. The Classic user's might as well get over it and get with the program, because it is the Future of Seti & if they want to run Seti then eventually when they shut Seti Classic down they will have to run BOINC whether they like it or not...IMO

> > Oh Heffed...get with the program!
> I'm with the program. Where are you?
>
> > Berkeley tease us with letting us have access to returned results info with
> > beta and with the start of the public project and then when the going gets
> > exciting they turn it off! How can we complain about not getting credit where
> > credit is due or lost wu's when we can't see what's going on!
>
> Maybe complaints were one of the reason it's currently disabled?
> > Here's hanging out for access to returned results info!
>
> I never said I didn't want to see them come back. Just that there are other
> forms of feedback.

The only point you missed Heffed is that there is a difference between system performance under alpha test conditions, beta test conditions, and "live" conditions.

You get the really bad problems in Alpha, the more subtle ones in Beta testing, and when you go live, well, you can, and most likely will, get other issues.

Any program more complex than "Hello world!" is going to display this type of behavior; We did our best in Beta testing to get the software (including mine, the documentation; which I have not been well enough to do much work these last couple weeks) up to snuff, but there are always issues that have to be isolated and repaired.

For all of that, we have an operational system, and are now exercizing it under a broader user base and are finding that there are some things that are still not quite right.

And credit cannot be "lost", it is just not granted ...

Hopefully, even *I* will be able to get back into the swing of things and spend time in the forums again ...

Sarcasm goes over head once again!

It's obvious that the returned wu info pages were 'This feature is turned off temporarily' as the load on the servers was too much! I just hope that this excellent feature will be turned on again in the near future.

Remember Berkeley are pushing us towards Recent Average Credit to increase peoples desire to crunch more wu's...if this feature is not enabled again then it makes a mockery of Berkeleys' goal here. At this point in time people have no way of knowing if all work they are returning is going towards their credit - other than seeing an increase in credit. But, how do you know if all returned work is granted credit?

Prior to this feature being disabled there were still differences between claimed credit across different platforms and os's. I hope V3.20 helps rectify this issue!

Credit is lost if it is not granted!

Live long and crunch,

Paul
(S@H1 7450+wu's)

[img]http://www.boinc.dk/auto.php?user=1639&project=astropulse&input=1071946756 - boincdk&layout=1071946756 - boincdk.jpg[/img]BETA

> Oh Heffed...get with the program!
>
> Berkeley tease us with letting us have access to returned results info with
> beta and with the start of the public project and then when the going gets
> exciting they turn it off! How can we complain about not getting credit where
> credit is due or lost wu's when we can't see what's going on!


It did work for the first few days "live", but as credits started to be granted, they "turned it off".

Can you imaginge how many threads/posts would occur when people find out that they "requested" 30 credits (based on their own curnch times and processor usage), but were only granted 10! There would be a riot! People might start thinking that Boinc had some major problems! :)

(if WU is one of the good results, your granted should=your requested, and not be reduced based on the fact that it was crunched on two much faster machines, or different OS's!) Heck, they "say" they want to grant credit based on what work was done by a user, but then skew it based on the "middle of three"! "It's the science!" but we'll fudge this!)

> At least it's called a WU instead of an FU. :)
>

That's more like it!

I only got 10 granted credits for a claimed of 35 for that FU.

A cobbler clobberer!

Live long and crunch,

Paul
(S@H1 7450+wu's)

[img]http://www.boinc.dk/auto.php?user=1639&project=astropulse&input=1071946756 - boincdk&layout=1071946756 - boincdk.jpg[/img]BETA

> I only got 10 granted credits for a claimed of 35 for that FU.
>
> A cobbler clobberer!

Seems if a BOINC/SETI WU is processed by at least 2 windows boxes, credit granted will be higher than if processed by two linux boxes. (if they are all in the same ballpark, HW wise). I have no means to run the Mac client, so don't know where that falls...)

The middle in case 1 would be windows, case 2, linux. This was a trend I was watching back when we could see results.

The question is are the linux boxes asking for too little credit, or are the windows boxes asking for too much?

>
> Seems if a BOINC/SETI WU is processed by at least 2 windows boxes, credit
> granted will be higher than if processed by two linux boxes. (if they are all
> in the same ballpark, HW wise). I have no means to run the Mac client, so
> don't know where that falls...)
>

I have seen similar results. I am running 2 3GHz linux boxes and they return results has fast as my friend's 1800MHz Win2K machine. I also belive there is a break down within the Windows boxes.

1. Windows 2000
2. Windows XP
3. Linux

I am looking into ways to tweak XP and linux to reduce the amount of extra processes that are consuming the CPUs.