Is the validator actually running?

Questions and Answers : Windows : Is the validator actually running?

Author	Message
TPR_Mojo Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Apr 00 Posts: 323 Credit: 7,001,052 RAC: 0	Message 720 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 17:58:01 UTC
	Has someone forgotten to press the "validator" switch? After all the fuss and many, many people transferring, according to the leaderboards nobody has a single item of granted credit yet. Is this "normal" or is there a problem? Thanks in advance :)
	ID: 720 ·

Ageless Send message Joined: 9 Jun 99 Posts: 11633 Credit: 1,992,912 RAC: 4,368	Message 728 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 18:19:50 UTC
	It takes 3 computers to crunch the same work unit and return it, before the credit is granted. So it can take a while. ---------------------- Jord™
	ID: 728 ·

TPR_Mojo Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Apr 00 Posts: 323 Credit: 7,001,052 RAC: 0	Message 731 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 18:27:45 UTC
	Thanks, I'm aware of that. There are units already complete by 3 users e.g. http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/workunit.php?wuid=7821 I'm sure there are others. It seems odd after this time that nobody in the world has been given any credits?
	ID: 731 ·

Ian D Send message Joined: 17 Dec 02 Posts: 1 Credit: 20,482 RAC: 0	Message 733 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 18:28:25 UTC - in response to Message 728. Last modified: 23 Jun 2004, 18:29:18 UTC
	> It takes 3 computers to crunch the same work unit and return it, before the > credit is granted. So it can take a while. > > > ---------------------- > Jord™ > > As above - you got there before me m8 ;-)
	ID: 733 ·

The Balrog Send message Joined: 23 Oct 99 Posts: 3 Credit: 409,490 RAC: 0	Message 735 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 18:31:00 UTC - in response to Message 728. Last modified: 23 Jun 2004, 18:32:37 UTC
	> It takes 3 computers to crunch the same work unit and return it, before the > credit is granted. So it can take a while. > > > ---------------------- > Jord™ Nice to be up & crunchin' for real :-) Well done the beta testers. Think Lowfield was talking about this one Jord http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/workunit.php?wuid=7821 Regards Balrog EDIT Oops too slow again. Disregard pls
	ID: 735 ·

John McLeod VII Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 15 Jul 99 Posts: 22343 Credit: 439,020 RAC: 429	Message 736 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 18:34:22 UTC Last modified: 23 Jun 2004, 18:34:58 UTC

	ID: 736 ·

TPR_Mojo Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Apr 00 Posts: 323 Credit: 7,001,052 RAC: 0	Message 779 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 20:40:16 UTC
	Maybe because result 23463 was crunched with 3.18 CC and the others 3.19? It would surely be 3.08 SAH in any case? I'm just wondering "if" because the CC revision levels don't match the validator has decided the results are different.
	ID: 779 ·

Ageless Send message Joined: 9 Jun 99 Posts: 11633 Credit: 1,992,912 RAC: 4,368	Message 801 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 21:03:59 UTC - in response to Message 779.
	> Maybe because result 23463 was crunched with 3.18 CC and the others 3.19? You can't blame that one. It's a Linux client that crunched the one with 3.18 Only the Windows client is 3.19 So this may well be a small bug in the database. Seeing that JM7 has been in this thread, it's almost definitely been reported to the devs. ---------------------- Jord™
	ID: 801 ·

TPR_Mojo Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Apr 00 Posts: 323 Credit: 7,001,052 RAC: 0	Message 816 - Posted: 23 Jun 2004, 21:25:35 UTC - in response to Message 801.
	> > Only the Windows client is 3.19 > > Jord™ > My bad, didn't spot that one, thanks :)
	ID: 816 ·

John McLeod VII Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 15 Jul 99 Posts: 22343 Credit: 439,020 RAC: 429	Message 929 - Posted: 24 Jun 2004, 1:32:47 UTC
	Actually they noticed without my input. Apparently one of the computers reported a complete upload without actually uploading the data. IMHO, this should generate an error and a resend to a different client. jm7
	ID: 929 ·

EclipseHA Send message Joined: 28 Jul 99 Posts: 1018 Credit: 178,047 RAC: 93	Message 966 - Posted: 24 Jun 2004, 3:13:10 UTC - in response to Message 929.
	> Actually they noticed without my input. Apparently one of the computers > reported a complete upload without actually uploading the data. IMHO, this > should generate an error and a resend to a different client. > jm7 > Sounds like a Beta Issue to me! Ya... we're ready to go live.... :(
	ID: 966 ·

Heffed Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Mar 02 Posts: 1856 Credit: 40,736 RAC: 0	Message 1022 - Posted: 24 Jun 2004, 6:52:16 UTC - in response to Message 779. Last modified: 24 Jun 2004, 18:41:10 UTC
	> Maybe because result 23463 was crunched with 3.18 CC and the others 3.19? It > would surely be 3.08 SAH in any case? I'm just wondering "if" because the CC > revision levels don't match the validator has decided the results are > different. I don't think it's a problem with 3.18 and 3.19 turning in the WUs. Here's one of mine that should be validated, and all hosts are using 3.19. http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/workunit.php?wuid=7239 Edit: Ah, so now it goes through...
	ID: 1022 ·

TPR_Mojo Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 Apr 00 Posts: 323 Credit: 7,001,052 RAC: 0	Message 1513 - Posted: 24 Jun 2004, 23:46:02 UTC
	Guess what, the "problem which never existed" got fixed. Thanks Beta testers all, your input is appreciated ;)
	ID: 1513 ·

Questions and Answers : Windows : Is the validator actually running?