2 Billion Results |
![]() |
| log in |
Message boards : News : 2 Billion Results
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Tuesday morning we reached 2 Billion BOINC results processed by SETI@home! Or to be more accurate, 2 to the power of 31 results (2,147,483,648). This explains why we haven't yet recovered from the weekly outage: we need to update code to accept larger numbers. | |
| ID: 1169256 · | |
This morning we reached 2 Billion BOINC results processed by SETI@home! Or to be more accurate, 2 to the power of 31 results (2,147,483,648). This explains why we're a little slow to recover from today's outage: we need to update code to accept larger numbers. Unsigned is not a long term solution! Congrats to the crunchers and the project. ____________ | |
| ID: 1169266 · | |
|
Hooray for wrap-arounds ! | |
| ID: 1169274 · | |
|
Very awesome. Now if this trend follows the population trend, we should be seeing our 3 billionth result sometime next year. | |
| ID: 1169275 · | |
Unsigned is not a long term solution! "Unsigned long" (4 bytes) is not a long term solution ;) but at rate of even a 100 000 Results per hour will give the project ~2.5 years to think about another fix :) ____________ - ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :) | |
| ID: 1169281 · | |
Unsigned is not a long term solution! Hmm, where I come from 4 bytes is just an int; ulong is 8 bytes. Mebbe you need to get a more modern computer. :-) | |
| ID: 1169282 · | |
Hmm, where I come from 4 bytes is just an int; ulong is 8 bytes. Depends on the compiler and the environment. I was doing some C++ stuff in Linux a few years back. Two machines, same distro, but one was 32-bit and the other was 64. ulong on 32-bit was 4 bytes, on 64-bit it was 8. ____________ Linux laptop uptime: 1484d 22h 42m Ended due to UPS failure, found 14 hours after the fact | |
| ID: 1169310 · | |
This morning we reached 2 Billion BOINC results processed by SETI@home! Or to be more accurate, 2 to the power of 31 results (2,147,483,648). This explains why we're a little slow to recover from today's outage: we need to update code to accept larger numbers. Congratulations all round, to the pub! :) | |
| ID: 1169311 · | |
|
Great result for the project and all it's crunchers !!! | |
| ID: 1169359 · | |
|
Well done everybody, a great milestone to be proud of. Congratulations all round, to the pub! :) I'll raise a glass to that :-) | |
| ID: 1169394 · | |
|
wow. I don't have not even ONE work unit to crunch. Now that is super slow. And I am thinking on upgrading with a P6T7 motherboard and four GTX 570, I must be crazy. | |
| ID: 1169427 · | |
|
Yaaaaaaayyy!!!!! | |
| ID: 1169428 · | |
|
"wow. I don't have not even ONE work unit to crunch. Now that is super slow. And I am thinking on upgrading with a P6T7 motherboard and four GTX 570, I must be crazy." | |
| ID: 1169435 · | |
Great result for the project and all it's crunchers !!! On The Other Hand, the US Government also doesn't have proof that aliens don't exist... ;-) ____________ . | |
| ID: 1169448 · | |
|
I am sorry I have to respond to this: you cannot prove a negative. | |
| ID: 1169450 · | |
|
Before we get a gentle nudge from a Mod, a teeny off topic guys. This is meant for Techy news from the Project Staff. | |
| ID: 1169455 · | |
|
True, but they are celebrating 1 billion and there are no work units to work on for THREE days. I have my computer set for 10 days of work!! Something is not right. | |
| ID: 1169523 · | |
Hmm, where I come from 4 bytes is just an int; ulong is 8 bytes. Yes, I think the C Standard do not define the exact size in bytes of integer types. Maybe the size of unsigned long int is chosen to match the full size of CPU registers? (in 32-bit CPU mode the CPU registers are seen as 32-bit/4 bytes; And in 64-bit CPU mode the full length CPU registers are "unlocked" - 64-bit/8 bytes) As you can see different sites give different values for int size in bytes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_variable_types_and_declarations http://ieng9.ucsd.edu/~cs30x/Std.C/types.html#Basic%20Integer%20Types http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/variables/ ____________ - ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :) | |
| ID: 1169526 · | |
True, but they are celebrating 1 billion and there are no work units to work on for THREE days. I have my computer set for 10 days of work!! Something is not right. There have been limits in place for weeks now preventing caches from filling to anything near what you have set, depending on the speed of your computer. The limits have been in place due to a bad Boinc server code change, which still has not been fully corrected yet. It may be some weeks yet after the current situation is sorted for the original problem to be tackled. ____________ ****** "Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty." As it is kitten, so shall it be done. | |
| ID: 1169527 · | |
True, but they are celebrating 1 billion and there are no work units to work on for THREE days. I have my computer set for 10 days of work!! That "Something" is time needed to change the code and test it. Do you remember the Y2K problem? (dates written as 00 may be interpreted as 1900 or 2000 because only one byte was used for date in some old programs/databases) This is something similar - for now they can't accept your new results because you will get/return e.g. result #2,150,000,000 and they do not have "room" with such high a number in their "hotel". From the First post: "... This explains why we're a little slow to recover from today's outage: we need to update code to accept larger numbers." ____________ - ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :) | |
| ID: 1169532 · | |
Message boards : News : 2 Billion Results
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |