Are we getting paid for all these validate errors that have popped up here the last week or so?

Were do we post them in the case someone wants to look into them?

I just (all of a sudden) lost many hours of crunching hours and it's not related to any "bad overclock" og "heating" problems - as some of the 'cheerleaders' suggested!!

Regards
Kim

---

Greetings from Norway

Crunch3er & AK-V8 Inside

yes you will if you report them in the validate errors thread at the top.

~BoB

---

Do you Good Search for Seti@Home? http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=888957
Or Good Shop? http://www.goodshop.com/?charityid=888957

yes you will if you report them in the validate errors thread at the top.

~BoB

Hi Bob,

Thanks for reply ;)

I guess I'll have to wait 'till they fix the problem at the server end. Othervise the "Vallidate error" reporting will be a daily painstaking routine!

Kiva

---

Greetings from Norway

Crunch3er & AK-V8 Inside

yes you will if you report them in the validate errors thread at the top.

~BoB

Hi Bob,

Thanks for reply ;)

I guess I'll have to wait 'till they fix the problem at the server end. Othervise the "Vallidate error" reporting will be a daily painstaking routine!

Kiva

Kim....check to see if your validate errors are being awarded...this thread seems to indicate that they are being fixed without individual reporting or posting of the errors......

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

yes you will if you report them in the validate errors thread at the top.

~BoB

Hi Bob,

Thanks for reply ;)

I guess I'll have to wait 'till they fix the problem at the server end. Othervise the "Vallidate error" reporting will be a daily painstaking routine!

Kiva

Kim....check to see if your validate errors are being awarded...this thread seems to indicate that they are being fixed without individual reporting or posting of the errors......

Mine have all been credited without me reporting or posting them.

---

I've finally gotten around to making a script that mostly works at repairing the Validate errors. It's very expensive in terms of searching the database, so it'll only be run once a day or so.

There seem to be some fraction of validate errors that the script doesn't fix. So there's still some work to do on it.

Eric

---

@SETIEric@qoto.org (Mastodon)

I've finally gotten around to making a script that mostly works at repairing the Validate errors. It's very expensive in terms of searching the database, so it'll only be run once a day or so.

There seem to be some fraction of validate errors that the script doesn't fix. So there's still some work to do on it.

Eric

Thank you very much Eric! Both for working on it, and for letting us know that you are doing so.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

I've finally gotten around to making a script that mostly works at repairing the Validate errors. It's very expensive in terms of searching the database, so it'll only be run once a day or so.

There seem to be some fraction of validate errors that the script doesn't fix. So there's still some work to do on it.

Eric

This is fine for repairing the damage after it happens.

Is there a fix in for the validation errors to stop them from happening?

I've finally gotten around to making a script that mostly works at repairing the Validate errors. It's very expensive in terms of searching the database, so it'll only be run once a day or so.

There seem to be some fraction of validate errors that the script doesn't fix. So there's still some work to do on it.

Eric

This is fine for repairing the damage after it happens.

Is there a fix in for the validation errors to stop them from happening?

Eric, Thanks for working on this. I have not been hit by any of the current round of problems, but have had my share in the past.

Some other BOINC projects use a deferral time every time a client contacts the scheduler.

The ones that I am aware of are:

LHC@home 909 seconds = 15 minutes 15 seconds
Rosetta@home 242 seconds = 4 minutes 2 seconds
RALPH@home 242 seconds = 4 minutes 2 seconds
Leiden Classical 181 seconds = 3 minutes 1 seconds

If SETI implemented somthing like this instead of the current:

11 seconds for SETI
7 seconds for SETI Beta

It might improve things a bit.

Is it difficult to change these settings at the server side?

LHC have changed their deferral time several times over the last few weeks from about 1 hour, then ~ 30 minutes, to the current 15 minutes.

---

Sir Arthur C Clarke 1917-2008

Is it difficult to change these settings at the server side?

LHC have changed their deferral time several times over the last few weeks from about 1 hour, then ~ 30 minutes, to the current 15 minutes.

No, changing the deferral-time is fairly easily done by changing a text-file, and SETI@home was earlier using 10 minutes. But, atleast then it comes to this problem, it's doubtful changing the deferral-time will help, since the Scheduler-connections that seems to give validation-errors is either due to "report result immediately" or due to wanting more work just after finished a wu, and in both instances there's a good chance there's 1h+ since last connection.

---

"I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might."