I am having trouble uploading is it my end or Seti that is causing the problem. getting this 05/09/2014 14:58:43 | SETI@home | Temporarily failed upload of 08jl08ab.7136.5798.438086664205.12.163.vlar_0_0: connect() failed
05/09/2014 14:58:43 | SETI@home | Backing off 00:02:31 on upload of 08jl08ab.7136.5798.438086664205.12.163.vlar_0_0
05/09/2014 14:58:46 | | Project communication failed: attempting access to reference site
05/09/2014 14:58:48 | | Internet access OK - project servers may be temporarily down.
then it waits for the time and uploads this has only happened since 13:45 UK time or 12:45 UTC

---

my work is coming in ok

I am having trouble uploading is it my end or Seti that is causing the problem. getting this 05/09/2014 14:58:43 | SETI@home | Temporarily failed upload of 08jl08ab.7136.5798.438086664205.12.163.vlar_0_0: connect() failed
05/09/2014 14:58:43 | SETI@home | Backing off 00:02:31 on upload of 08jl08ab.7136.5798.438086664205.12.163.vlar_0_0
05/09/2014 14:58:46 | | Project communication failed: attempting access to reference site
05/09/2014 14:58:48 | | Internet access OK - project servers may be temporarily down.
then it waits for the time and uploads this has only happened since 13:45 UK time or 12:45 UTC

I had a "connect() failed" at 13:56:36 UTC, but the retry at 14:01:04 got through. Probably a temporary glitch someplace in the path to the upload server.

                                                                   Joe

I am in uk and its working for me so seti ok to north east uk

As far as I am aware no one in the lab does or has ever read these boards.

Time to time reading these boards I envy those who don't :P

As far as I am aware no one in the lab does or has ever read these boards.

Time to time reading these boards I envy those who don't :P

We know from experience that Eric does sometimes read these boards, most often due to Mark or Fichard or Joe bringing an issue to his attention.

What some folks keep forgetting is that there sre only about 6 people attached to Seti@Home, and NONE of them are full-time. ALL have other duties and projects at the lab. I read these boards daily, but only the threads that pertain to my interests and computer capabilities (none of my crunchers has a GPU, so that eliminates a LOT of threads). To read ALL the threads here in Number Crunching would take hours - almost a full-time job in itself.

Be glad we DO have these forums, and that paid staff DO respond to our concerns and suggestions. And that Joe and Richard and Jason and all the others who have been here awhile are willing to share their knowledge and help solve problems.

---

Donald
Infernal Optimist / Submariner, retired

As far as I am aware no one in the lab does or has ever read these boards.

Time to time reading these boards I envy those who don't :P

We know from experience that Eric does sometimes read these boards, most often due to Mark or Fichard or Joe bringing an issue to his attention.

What some folks keep forgetting is that there sre only about 6 people attached to Seti@Home, and NONE of them are full-time. ALL have other duties and projects at the lab. I read these boards daily, but only the threads that pertain to my interests and computer capabilities (none of my crunchers has a GPU, so that eliminates a LOT of threads). To read ALL the threads here in Number Crunching would take hours - almost a full-time job in itself.

Be glad we DO have these forums, and that paid staff DO respond to our concerns and suggestions. And that Joe and Richard and Jason and all the others who have been here awhile are willing to share their knowledge and help solve problems.

BOINC by design is meant to be low maintenance. So having staff read everything all the time looking for issues would go against that idea. I would imagine they use some level of monitoring to send them an alert when something on the server sides goes completely sideways, but having alerts for issues that are more odd would probably be difficult. Like the recent BOINC versions before x not getting work.
I think the forums are mostly means as self/community help. With many of the issues being able to be solved by others users.

The BOINC devs have the Alpha list that people can join if they wish to contribute more directly or to report bugs.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

I am very glad that Eric receives my messages.
He filters out most, simply due to the overwhelming amount of static he would otherwise have to sort through.

I try not to bother him with things insignificant, but when there is a trend or problem evident, I try to contact him.

And he often answers.

Eric is a busy man...more busy than most might expect.
He should be spending more time with his beloved Angela that I suspect he does.

I have a bit of an edge with the man, and I try not to abuse it.

When an issue comes up, I try to condense it for him.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

APs are being split....On the weekend? That is unusual but I'll take them... :P

AP spliting still producing a lot of error channels.

---

AP spliting still producing a lot of error channels.

Each channel should produce something like 400-450 AP. When it sets "channel finished with errors" that might just be 1 AP had an error being generated rather than the whole channel being unusable.
Every time I look at the server status 50-60% of the channels are flagged with error, but a lot more work is going out than if those channels generated no work. It is hard to determine the exact number of error tasks, but it does look to be a small percentage based on the other db information.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

Hope you are right because that kind of error does not happening in the near past (before 3 weeks ago).

At least our caches are filling with a lot of new AP to crunch.

---

My vista machine is erroring on this latset batch of AP work. I have suspended work untill I find out whats going on. I recently upgraded to the new lunatics AP app.

---

[/quote]

Old James

My vista machine is erroring on this latset batch of AP work. I have suspended work untill I find out whats going on. I recently upgraded to the new lunatics AP app.

I told you what to do.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

My vista machine is erroring on this latset batch of AP work. I have suspended work untill I find out whats going on. I recently upgraded to the new lunatics AP app.

I told you what to do.

Yes I just replyed in the other thread. Was just posting here incase others were having the same disaster I was:)

---

[/quote]

Old James

My vista machine is erroring on this latset batch of AP work. I have suspended work untill I find out whats going on. I recently upgraded to the new lunatics AP app.

James, AP version r2399 in the new Lunatics Installer has that bug with the GTS250 and similar models. All you have to do is go back to the Old AP version r1843 that is in the Old Lunatics Installer.

Or you could download and run the v0.42a installer from the link in my message 1560695

AP spliting still producing a lot of error channels.

Each channel should produce something like 400-450 AP. When it sets "channel finished with errors" that might just be 1 AP had an error being generated rather than the whole channel being unusable.
Every time I look at the server status 50-60% of the channels are flagged with error, but a lot more work is going out than if those channels generated no work. It is hard to determine the exact number of error tasks, but it does look to be a small percentage based on the other db information.

It's still odd, as usually there are only one or 2 channels at most that end in error. When you see 6 channels done, 6 ended in error it's not a good sign.
Even more so when there have been no MB channels split ending in error (that I've noticed) in the same period of time.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

AP spliting still producing a lot of error channels.

Each channel should produce something like 400-450 AP. When it sets "channel finished with errors" that might just be 1 AP had an error being generated rather than the whole channel being unusable.
Every time I look at the server status 50-60% of the channels are flagged with error, but a lot more work is going out than if those channels generated no work. It is hard to determine the exact number of error tasks, but it does look to be a small percentage based on the other db information.

It's still odd, as usually there are only one or 2 channels at most that end in error. When you see 6 channels done, 6 ended in error it's not a good sign.
Even more so when there have been no MB channels split ending in error (that I've noticed) in the same period of time.

I don't recall exactly, but didn't this start after the new MB splitters were added? That might be the i/o issue I seem to recall being mentioned at one point & why 2 of the MB splitter were always not used.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

I don't recall exactly, but didn't this start after the new MB splitters were added? That might be the i/o issue I seem to recall being mentioned at one point & why 2 of the MB splitter were always not used.

Possibly, but even if that were the case, I'd expect some MB channel errors as well.

A quick check would be to reload the previous AP tapes that were erroring, disable the extra MB splitters & see what happens this time through.

---

Grant
Darwin NT