On a very quick'n'dirty comparison, I saw these tapes 'during February' that you didn't:

02jn13ab
09se09af
12mr13ab

and you saw these that I didn't:

23my13ab
31mr13ag

but not bad, overall. The very last one you have as AP only, which may be why I missed it. "During February" is rather a slippery concept: because I'm pulling records from job_log_setiathome.berkeley.edu.txt, I only see tapes after I've completed at least one task: my machines have different cache settings, and in some cases completion might be up to a couple of days after download.

Don't be fooled by the displayed RAC on my account - I have access to more records than that. And since I crunch MB only, my throughput is perhaps closer to yours than you might think - 15,308 tasks added to the database in February.

On a very quick'n'dirty comparison, I saw these tapes 'during February' that you didn't:

02jn13ab
09se09af
12mr13ab

I went ahead and parsed a couple more months of data and found the 02jn13ab in my Jan 2014 files, the 09se09af in Dec 2013, and the 12mr13ab in both Dec 2013 and Jan 2014, so it's just a different methodology shifting a few files from one month to another. You'll probably pick up those other two "February" files that I found as "March" files.

Don't be fooled by the displayed RAC on my account - I have access to more records than that. And since I crunch MB only, my throughput is perhaps closer to yours than you might think - 15,308 tasks added to the database in February.

Okay, that explains why what I thought was my larger sample size didn't really pick up anything significant. It still is a bit larger (27,978 tasks for February) but not as much as it initially appeared. So, since it looks like your sample is big enough to identify everything we're likely to see, I won't bother running the rest of my files. Satisfied my curiosity, at least!

Lot's of new tapes on SSP.

Will be Waiting for the full month March release.

Thanks

---