Hi,

after checking which current WUs have got validated, and which haven't, I came to the above conclusion.

Anybody else?

Regards Hans

P.S: It looks like the validator is a bit confused about the new "4 results" strategy.

---

I was just checking my results, computer by computer, and noticed that no credit is being granted to workunits with 3 returns. Also, there is no additional WU scheduled for client download.

Looks like a serious glitch.

---

<img src="http://www.boincstats.com/stats/teambanner.php?teamname=GasBuddy"> <img src="http://www.boincstats.com/stats/banner.php?cpid=84c0cf7846cbf28338406e54b3eb8a83">

Two out of 4 of my pending results have three returns.......

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/results.php?userid=7819296

---

Looking thru my stuff, I'd tend to agree except for this one, returned yesterday.

Got loads like that.

Validator needs a kick. Or a serious look at.

---

I also have many wu's on all my computers that show Pending with 3 valid results submitted. After reading the Tech News Page, it would appear that things are in a state of disarray.

---

----------<br>
<img src=\"http://boinc.mundayweb.com/seti2/stats.php?userID=924&amp;trans=off\"><br>
<a href=\"http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/team_join_form.php?id=30199\">Join</a> the <a href=\"http://ocforums.com\">Overclockers.com</a> SETI Team!

> I also have many wu's on all my computers that show Pending with 3
> valid results submitted. After reading the Tech News Page, it would appear
> that things are in a state of disarray.
>
>
Three of my five Pending results have three returns.......

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/results.php?userid=7819296

---

> Hi,
>
> after checking which current WUs have got validated, and which haven't, I came
> to the above conclusion.
>
> Anybody else?
>
> Regards Hans
>
> P.S: It looks like the validator is a bit confused about the new "4 results"
> strategy.

Same thing here as I posted yesterday (see following copy/paste):
======

Since 3 days (12.28.04) every result returns with "pending" on two different machines (host: 368059 and 360502); at least three results per WU was success.
What is wrong, what is going on?
How can I see that two results are "enough similar"???

See here for those pending results (over 40 the last two days), look also at the next pages:
http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/results.php?userid=7806448&offset=40
For example this: http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=6884054
or: http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=6837692
on this results-page (there are more...).

Before (12.28.04) all was running fine with Seti, no changes was taken, and now...???
thanks for reply

---

> Before (12.28.04) all was running fine with Seti, no changes was taken, and
> now...???
> thanks for reply

Not so, see the item in technical news. An excerpt:

A few modifications to the database made on Monday caused it to slow down significantly (far more than expected). But this didn't really become noticeable until today. A lot of queries were backing up - at one point this morning we were unable to send out any work due to the backlog. As of now, things are slow but manageable - you may still find the web site a little more sluggish than usual. We're working on it.

>
> > Before (12.28.04) all was running fine with Seti, no changes was taken,
> and
> > now...???
> > thanks for reply
>
======
I was talking about my machines (no changes was taken); "all was running fine with Seti" means: Everytime I reported a result and it was validated, then the scheduler sent me immediately as many new WU's as was granted; instead of: sending a "bunch" of WU's what is the half of #WU from the cache:
An example : Cache is for 5 day; then I have at least 23 WU on my machine, then I receive only WU's (when they are not granted) when I have 11 WU's rest to crunch (That is what I mean with "half the #WU from the cache") and then came a "bunch" of 12 new WU's.
Sorry for my english , perhaps it's not clear unterstandable.
=====

> Not so, see the item in technical news. An
> excerpt:
>
> A few modifications to the database made on Monday caused it to slow down
> significantly (far more than expected). But this didn't really become
> noticeable until today. A lot of queries were backing up - at one point this
> morning we were unable to send out any work due to the backlog. As of now,
> things are slow but manageable - you may still find the web site a little more
> sluggish than usual. We're working on it.
>
Thanks anyway for your reply and happy crunching in the new year after this (Tsunami, Indian Ocean) disaster....

---

Yes, it look like three successful results do not give credit, but three successful results and a "client error" or "past report date" give credit.
I don't think that's what they intended.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

> Yes, it look like three successful results do not give credit, but three
> successful results and a "client error" or "past report date" give credit.
> I don't think that's what they intended.

Like I said earlier in this thread, not necessarily so, some WU's sent out three times are being granted credit. Look here for another WU completed yesterday (Dec 30) and was granted credit some time later.

EDIT: Those aren't unique, I have many more from the same time period that showed "pending" earlier and now have credit.

> > Yes, it look like three successful results do not give credit, but three
> > successful results and a "client error" or "past report date" give
> credit.
> > I don't think that's what they intended.
>
> Like I said earlier in this thread, not necessarily so, some WU's sent out
> three times are being granted credit. Look <a> href="http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=6465495">here[/url] for
> another WU completed yesterday (Dec 30) and was granted credit some time
> later.
>
> EDIT: Those aren't unique, I have many more from the same time period that
> showed "pending" earlier and now have credit.
>
>
>
>


Yes, some of the one's completed are getting credit but many are not. I still suspect a problem with the new code that is being used which is referenced on the Tech Page.
example
example
example

There are many more than the one's I linked above. As I mentioned, I think it is due to the changes made with the validation server that has caused problems. The slow down started right after they changed the validation process.

I am sure they will get this worked out but for now there is some tweaking of these changes that needs to be done.

Main Page News
December 28, 2004
We have decided to send out 4 copies of each workunit and use a quorum size of 3 for validation. Validation should be quick because a single result in error will not delay reaching a quorum.

---

----------<br>
<img src=\"http://boinc.mundayweb.com/seti2/stats.php?userID=924&amp;trans=off\"><br>
<a href=\"http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/team_join_form.php?id=30199\">Join</a> the <a href=\"http://ocforums.com\">Overclockers.com</a> SETI Team!

I'm sure its due to the changes made on Monday to the database server, but not necessarily changes to the validator. Credit is being given, but somewhat slowly. Thats consistent with their statement that Mondays changes to the database slowed things down.

From what I see, "completed' WU's are being validated in the order they were generated. Thats based on my results list, comparing WU's still pending with the ones that were granted credit. The pending ones include not only three hosts, but four and more where it got resent either because someone had problems or just didn't return it.

Certainly the validation process is slow, but that doesn't mean its broken - so far theres nothing to show its not working properly. Better to fix one thing at a time (like the database slowdown) then make changes to everything and not know which tweak had what effect.

> Like I said earlier in this thread, not necessarily so, some WU's sent out
> three times are being granted credit. Look <a> href="http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=6465495">here[/url] for
> another WU completed yesterday (Dec 30) and was granted credit some time
> later.
>
> EDIT: Those aren't unique, I have many more from the same time period that
> showed "pending" earlier and now have credit.

In your example, one of the three WU's was returned before Dec. 27. So far, I haven't seen credit given if one of three WU's was returned before Dec. 27 or if four where sent, one had an error.

Anybody get credit where three WU's were sent and all returned successful (after Dec 26)? I only looked at a few of mine.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

For what it's worth, the Server Status Page says there are 0 validation's pending.

> Anybody get credit where three WU's were sent and all returned successful
> (after Dec 26)? I only looked at a few of mine.

Like this one? Sent out Dec 28, returned Dec 28, three hosts, credit granted.

> For what it's worth, the <a> href="http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_status.html">Server Status Page[/url]
> says there are 0 validation's pending.
==========

Then the 529 Pending Wu's I have in my Account must just be a figment of my imagination ... :/

>
> > Anybody get credit where three WU's were sent and all returned
> successful
> > (after Dec 26)? I only looked at a few of mine.
>
> Like <a> href="http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=6877029">this[/url] one?
> Sent out Dec 28, returned Dec 28, three hosts, credit granted.
>

Hmmm. I guess you're right.

This WU

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=7099908

has 4 results turned in, but hasn't been validated.

So there's a backlog, but validation seems to work.

Regards Hans

---

December 31, 2004
The waiting for validation/transition counts on the server status page are disabled until we diagnose a recent DB slowdown.

---

Fred
BOINC Alpha, BOINC Beta, LHC Alpha, Einstein Alpha