Please see this wu

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=2989276

I received credit (woohoo/pheeew), but the poor third returnee schmuck got zippo. Everything looks OK for the 3rd returnee. Has the 3rd returnee bug raised it's ugly head again?

---

Paul
(S@H1 8888)
And proud of it!

> Please see this wu
>
> http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=2989276
>
> I received credit (woohoo/pheeew), but the poor third returnee schmuck got
> zippo. Everything looks OK for the 3rd returnee. Has the 3rd returnee bug
> raised it's ugly head again?
>
>
It is tagged as Invalid. I wish that a more detailed reason was given for this state.

---

BOINC WIKI

> It is tagged as Invalid. I wish that a more detailed reason was given for
> this state.
>
Yeah, that's the point. Why is it invalid? Everything else appears OK!

> > It is tagged as Invalid. I wish that a more detailed reason was given
> for
> > this state.
> >
> Yeah, that's the point. Why is it invalid? Everything else appears OK!


It simply could have been processed and was not within the bounds that the valuator qualified as valid. Since SAH does not use Homogenous redundancy results will vary from platform to platform and you might have just hit a bad combination where the results were just really different. I noticed on the given work unit that one host used an AMD. I am just guessing here but I think that the crunch just went bad in this case.

That host seems to have a problem with invalid work units. It seems to indicate the problem may be the computer. File corruption? Faulty hardware?

---

<a href="http://www.boincstats.com/stats/boinc_user_graph.php?id=877f93559fda9f7c5a65f974a8763090"><img src="http://www.boincstats.com/stats/banner.php?cpid=877f93559fda9f7c5a65f974a8763090"></a>