http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=1081358108
an example. thats a very long number. are we looking at a change?

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=1081358108
an example. thats a very long number. are we looking at a change?

At SETI Beta from March through July 2011 there were WUs with a somewhat similar big number in that field, then they went back to the usual channel indicator in the 3 to 16 range.

The 140733193388045 is hexadecimal 7FFF0000000D so the excess is only in the upper 32 bits, I'm reasonably sure the proper channel indicator would be hex D or decimal 13 for that WU. For mental conversion, subtract 32 from the last two digits.

My guess is it's a small problem where although they're using 64 bit server builds, a variable is only initialized with a 32 bit value. But it certainly could be a deliberate addition of a particular value for obscure purposes.

                                                                    Joe

My guess is it's a small problem where although they're using 64 bit server builds, a variable is only initialized with a 32 bit value. But it certainly could be a deliberate addition of a particular value for obscure purposes.

                                                                    Joe

Maybe a "preview" of the MB 7.0 tasks ? As I recall they should have been rolled out to the crunchers some time ago...

Edit : I got some of them too this morning, so I guess it's an entire channel full of these.

I have just noticed that these new WU's take a lot longer to process on the GPU.

The WU's on my computer states that the expected time is around 13 minutes to complete, but it takes me around 30 minutes for the GTX670, running 4 tasks per GPU, to complete the task.

I first thought that the new nVidia drivers could be causing problems, but looking that old fashioned WU's they process at the normal rate that it states. I just hope that these are not some form of VLAR WU's that are pretending to be normal tasks.

Has anyone else notices the run-time difference, running them on the CPU looks to run at the estimated time.

Arvid

---

Arvid Almstrom

My GPU is just getting its teeth into the first few "long file specials".
Crunching time is about the same as "normal file name" shorty. The initial estimated time was about four times as long as real time, but that disparity is decreasing as few get "chewed and spat".
So I don't foresee any problems here with chewing them up at a suitable rate.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

I have seen no problem with these new filename WUs, on both of my GPU systems they have predicted and actual run times exactly the same as WUs with the older style filenames.

---