Well, I finally caught my first AP WU ever, just gotta' let 2 MB tasks run through on AK V8 and then I'll be crunching AP optimized 5.00 on my slow desktop, my fast laptop is still dedicated to MB until further notice.

I'll give it a credit comparison when it completes...

---

- Luke.

Here's an interesting WU that is doing a 0 credit, but I'm confused about my wingman's result, though he does seem to be consistant with it in his other tasks. From the look of his previous tasks it doesn't look like a thrid wingman will be sent out either.

Edit: BTW the new opti app did well on the this Intel dual core too. Norm for it was over 42 hours on the previous opti app, and on the 5.00 was 38 1/2 hours. ;)

---

Here's an interesting WU that is doing a 0 credit, but I'm confused about my wingman's result, though he does seem to be consistant with it in his other tasks. From the look of his previous tasks it doesn't look like a thrid wingman will be sent out either.

Zero CPU time reported for what otherwise seems to be an ordinary BOINC v5.10.45 running under Windows XP SP3 has been reported as symptomatic of the use of wine. But there may be other explanations, and the wine hypothesis doesn't explain the lack of flopcount information for the credit claim.

Here's an interesting WU that is doing a 0 credit, but I'm confused about my wingman's result, though he does seem to be consistant with it in his other tasks. From the look of his previous tasks it doesn't look like a thrid wingman will be sent out either.

Zero CPU time reported for what otherwise seems to be an ordinary BOINC v5.10.45 running under Windows XP SP3 has been reported as symptomatic of the use of wine. But there may be other explanations, and the wine hypothesis doesn't explain the lack of flopcount information for the credit claim.

I'm all ears for any explanations just out of common curiosity. Will the result I gave be good enough to determine if it's a good result? I'm sure it is, and if another wingman doesn't have to do it then I'm satisfied with it.

---

I've PMed EAGLE about that computer - hopefully he/she will stop crunching and figure out what the problem is so no more wingmen are cheated out of credit. I've also reported the situation to Matt. We'll see how it plays out.

---

Cruiser
Gateway GT5692 L-f-S Edition
-Phenom X4 9650 CPU
-4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM
-500GB SATA HD
-Vista x64 SP1
-BOINC 6.2.19 32-bit client
-SSE3 optimized 32-bit apps

I've PMed EAGLE about that computer - hopefully he/she will stop crunching and figure out what the problem is so no more wingmen are cheated out of credit. I've also reported the situation to Matt. We'll see how it plays out.

Ok, glad I checked back here, I was just about to send them a message too.

Thanks Leaps.

---

Ok.

I found something garbage in the graphics window (under the Dispersion info) when running the optimized Astropulse 5.00.



The graphics window also crashed. Hopefully it didn't trash the WU.

Henri.

---

Manned mission to Mars in 2019 Petition <-- Sign this, please.

Ok.

I found something garbage in the graphics window (under the Dispersion info) when running the optimized Astropulse 5.00.

The graphics window also crashed. Hopefully it didn't trash the WU.

Henri.

From the errors "No main program specified" -185 it looks to me like you might have a problem in the AP portion of the app info file

Edit: BTW the other AP 5.00 on the Intel came in at 144,152.10 CPU time of just over 40 hours.

---

From the errors "No main program specified" -185 it looks to me like you might have a problem in the AP portion of the app info file

Thanks, but I already (hopefully) fixed it. There was a " " (space) between "main_program" and "/". :)

Henri.

---

Manned mission to Mars in 2019 Petition <-- Sign this, please.

From the errors "No main program specified" -185 it looks to me like you might have a problem in the AP portion of the app info file

Thanks, but I already (hopefully) fixed it. There was a " " (space) between "main_program" and "/". :)

Henri.

Ah, "Claggy's space" (â„¢) rears its ugly head again.

You didn't, by any chance, allow one of the app_info.xml files to open in Internet Explorer, and copy it from there? If so, you'll also have introduced extraneous spaces into the '<executable />' tags. There should be no space there either.

The instructions do specifically refer to using Notepad to open all copies of app_info.xml

You didn't, by any chance, allow one of the app_info.xml files to open in Internet Explorer, and copy it from there? If so, you'll also have introduced extraneous spaces into the '<executable />' tags. There should be no space there either.
The instructions do specifically refer to using Notepad to open all copies of app_info.xml

Oops! Sorry guys. :(

Henri.

---

Manned mission to Mars in 2019 Petition <-- Sign this, please.

Got some more completed work units on Cruiser:

Main:368768645 (Pending), 368768653 (Validated)
Beta: 1563494 (Validated)

Cruiser's compiled results so far:

Main:
368768645 (Pending) - 0.008021076 credits per CPU second
368768653 (Validated) - 0.008183099 credits per CPU second
368496971 (Pending) - 0.008235288 credits per CPU second

368418713 (v4.37, Pending) - 0.006726898 credits per CPU second

Beta:
1563494 (Validated) - 0.009484371 credits per CPU second
1565756 (Validated) - 0.009705443 credits per CPU second
1564992 (Validated) - 0.009227865 credits per CPU second

For comparison:
Shorty Multibeam (16.84 credits): 0.007037046 credits per CPU second
Average Multibeam (44.12 credits): 0.008375063 credits per CPU second
Long Multibeam (63.86 credits): 0.010619245 credits per CPU second

---

Cruiser
Gateway GT5692 L-f-S Edition
-Phenom X4 9650 CPU
-4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM
-500GB SATA HD
-Vista x64 SP1
-BOINC 6.2.19 32-bit client
-SSE3 optimized 32-bit apps

I found something garbage in the graphics window (under the Dispersion info) when running the optimized Astropulse 5.00.

The graphics program is ap_graphics_4.35_windows_intelx86.exe.

Does anyone know what that garbage could be?

Henri.

---

Manned mission to Mars in 2019 Petition <-- Sign this, please.

I found something garbage in the graphics window (under the Dispersion info) when running the optimized Astropulse 5.00.

The graphics program is ap_graphics_4.35_windows_intelx86.exe.

Does anyone know what that garbage could be?

Henri.

Probably exactly that. Garbage. The optimised AP application doesn't have a graphics component.

I have 2 AP units crunching right now on my PC, it looks like they will both come in under 20 hours as they hit 25% right around 4:45 or so.

---

Got some more completed work units on Cruiser:

Main: 368768645 (Pending), 368768653 (Validated)
Beta: 1563494 (Validated)

Cruiser's compiled results so far:

Main:
368768645 (Pending) - 0.008021076 credits per CPU second
368768653 (Validated) - 0.008183099 credits per CPU second
368496971 (Pending) - 0.008235288 credits per CPU second

368418713 (v4.37, Pending) - 0.006726898 credits per CPU second

Beta:
1563494 (Validated) - 0.009484371 credits per CPU second
1565756 (Validated) - 0.009705443 credits per CPU second
1564992 (Validated) - 0.009227865 credits per CPU second

For comparison:
Shorty Multibeam (16.84 credits): 0.007037046 credits per CPU second
Average Multibeam (44.12 credits): 0.008375063 credits per CPU second
Long Multibeam (63.86 credits): 0.010619245 credits per CPU second

Add another one to the Main list:
368768654 (Validated, canonical result) - 0.008136883 credits per CPU second

---

Cruiser
Gateway GT5692 L-f-S Edition
-Phenom X4 9650 CPU
-4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM
-500GB SATA HD
-Vista x64 SP1
-BOINC 6.2.19 32-bit client
-SSE3 optimized 32-bit apps

Was just looking at the task I mentioned earlier in the thread, and noticed for the first time my wingman with the strange result is the canonical result. I'm more confused about that than his task being valid.

---

I found something garbage in the graphics window (under the Dispersion info) when running the optimized Astropulse 5.00.

The graphics program is ap_graphics_4.35_windows_intelx86.exe.

Solved!



I copied ap_graphics_5.00_windows_intelx86.exe from setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu_beta folder and changed app_info.xml so that all references to ap_graphics_4.35_windows_intelx86.exe were replaced by ap_graphics_5.00_windows_intelx86.exe.

Now there is no garbage under the Dispersion info.

Henri.

---

Manned mission to Mars in 2019 Petition <-- Sign this, please.

Was just looking at the task I mentioned earlier in the thread, and noticed for the first time my wingman with the strange result is the canonical result. I'm more confused about that than his task being valid.

Nothing unexpected, unusual or confusing about that at all.

When you finish a BOINC task (any application, any project), two things are sent back to the project.

First, a data file is uploaded. This contains all the scientific information generated by the application running on your computer.

Second, a report is sent. The report says, in effect, "I sent you some science results some time ago. They're called <whatever>, and they're ready to check now. Oh, and by the way, I spent this much time working on it, and I'd like some credit please".

EAGLE's computer clearly uploaded some science, and enough of the report to let the project know that it had been sent. The project checked the science file, and found that it was good: the WU validated against the wingman, and didn't need sending out again.

The only thing which didn't work was that little "Oh, and by the way..." postscript, but that doesn't affect the science.

EAGLE's computer clearly uploaded some science, and enough of the report to let the project know that it had been sent. The project checked the science file, and found that it was good: the WU validated against the wingman, and didn't need sending out again.

The only thing which didn't work was that little "Oh, and by the way..." postscript, but that doesn't affect the science.

Ok, so the work will be accepted. Cool.
Thanks for explaining it to me.

---