1) Questions and Answers : Getting started : Can anyone explain (Message 113461) Posted 21 May 2005 by greencreeper Post: Could it be that because your home page is: URL http://homepage.ntlworld.com/dwarfinleopardskin they have a link you clicked on? Not entirely certain what you mean Mikey. A team member has told me that a while back there was a database problem, which may explain how I ended up joining a team in another country! I don't often visit the website - I have BOINC setup for a couple of projects. Every so oft, I change the projects. My aged PC can only cope with 2 :cry:

2) Questions and Answers : Getting started : Can anyone explain (Message 112168) Posted 17 May 2005 by greencreeper Post: Why I've suddenly joined the Netherlands SETI team? I've just noticed and have rejoined my old team. I come from the UK, not Holland. Account hacked? Database corruption? SETI hacked?

3) Message boards : Number crunching : What happened to the cache settings? (Message 28332) Posted 20 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: >So, you will see this "perculation" effect For a moment I thought you said "persecution" and I thought, "It feels like it at times" :P -- john

4) Message boards : Number crunching : What happened to the cache settings? (Message 28235) Posted 20 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: > > "Connect to network about every" is the minimum cache size and 2 times > "Connect to network about every" is the maximum Ah right, thanks. Is there a reason why the flexibility of the cache settings has been limited in this way? And why the difference between LHC and SETI?? The global_prefs.xml file still has min and max values. -- john

5) Message boards : Number crunching : What happened to the cache settings? (Message 28221) Posted 20 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: I went to reduce the cache size and it's not there - just this new setting "Connect to network about every", but I've no idea what that does. The strange thing is that the LHC site still has the cache settings. I wonder what the alcoholism rate is among BOINC users :D Oh - sorry if this question has been asked but the forums are hardly quick to load and easy to search :) -- john

6) Message boards : Number crunching : BOINC 4 and Win98 (Message 25846) Posted 13 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: Small point of order - it is annoying when people dismiss BOINC and SETI's problems are "teething troubles". BOINC was announced on 22nd June this year - almost 3 months ago. Teeth do not take 3 months to come through. The problems should now be referred to as "ongoing" as in "BOINC and SETI have ongoing problems". It's way past the teething stage. -- john

7) Message boards : Number crunching : Wheres my credit?? (Message 25318) Posted 11 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: Any word on when the results page will be re-enabled, or is it the same story as the pending credit page? I'd really like to see if any of my WUs are invalid. -- john

8) Message boards : Number crunching : BOINC 4 and Win98 (Message 25026) Posted 11 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: I'm running 4.06 and it seems that applications are exiting early for no reason. At first I thought it was LHC because it only happened with LHC WUs. The first WU I returned was marked invalid so I was thinking that the early exiting might be the cause. I disconnected from the project, which left only SETI. This morning SETI did the exact same thing. So it now looks like a 4.06 issue - hopefully the *** DEVELOPERS *** (just getting their attention) are aware :) 2004-09-05 01:09:39 [DEBUG_STATE ] set dirty: ACTIVE_TASK_SET::poll 2004-09-05 01:09:39 [DEBUG_STATE ] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Writing state file 2004-09-05 01:09:39 [DEBUG_STATE ] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Done writing state file 2004-09-05 01:22:28 [DEBUG_TASK ] ACTIVE_TASK_SET::check_app_exited(): Process exited with code 0 2004-09-05 01:22:28 [LHC@home] Result v64bbe62s6_8615_1_sixvf_3041_2 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file 2004-09-05 01:22:28 [LHC@home] You may need to restart BOINC to finish this result 2004-09-05 01:22:28 [DEBUG_STATE ] set dirty: ACTIVE_TASK_SET::poll 2004-09-05 01:22:28 [DEBUG_STATE ] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Writing state file 2004-09-05 01:22:28 [DEBUG_STATE ] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Done writing state file .... 2004-09-11 09:18:29 [DEBUG_STATE] set dirty: ACTIVE_TASK_SET::poll 2004-09-11 09:18:29 [DEBUG_STATE] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Writing state file 2004-09-11 09:18:29 [DEBUG_STATE] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Done writing state file 2004-09-11 09:21:54 [DEBUG_TASK] ACTIVE_TASK_SET::check_app_exited(): Process exited with code 0 2004-09-11 09:21:54 [SETI@home] Result 25ap04aa.23553.18402.511086.234_6 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file 2004-09-11 09:21:54 [SETI@home] You may need to restart BOINC to finish this result 2004-09-11 09:21:54 [DEBUG_STATE] set dirty: ACTIVE_TASK_SET::poll 2004-09-11 09:21:54 [DEBUG_STATE] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Writing state file 2004-09-11 09:21:54 [DEBUG_STATE] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Done writing state file 2004-09-11 09:43:27 [DEBUG_STATE] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Writing state file 2004-09-11 09:43:27 [DEBUG_STATE] CLIENT_STATE::write_state_file(): Done writing state file -- john

9) Message boards : Number crunching : BOINC-4.08 (Message 24290) Posted 10 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: >no longer preemted message, now message "paused" while preemting I suggested that "paused" might be better than "pre-empted". >Yes, but it wasn't understood by either the devs or the testers before 4.05 >was released. It appeared to be a rare problem that affected a few computers >randomly. Instead it was common to all Win9x/ME and rarely happened on NT/XP. Probably more accurate to say it wasn't fully tested on Windows 98 et al - that's certainly the impression I had from reading the thread on the Windows 98 problems. >Yes, but if a seriously broken version gets to the public area, you wouldn't >believe the level of whining. It happened with Windows 98 and 4.05 :) I've been using 4.06 on my 98SE PC and it works fine. Initially I was going to drop BOINC until things improved - i.e. SETI up for longer than 2 days at a time and BOINC working on 98SE. Then things improved slightly (4.06 released) and LHC was announced, so I stuck with BOINC. I've taken notice of the warnings re. 4.07 and 4.08 and am waiting for the offical release. Probably version 5 at this rate :P -- john

10) Message boards : Number crunching : BOINC 4 and Win98 (Message 23523) Posted 8 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: When did 4.08 become available? Sheeeesh - it's hard to keep up :) -- john

11) Message boards : Number crunching : BOINC 4 and Win98 (Message 21633) Posted 2 Sep 2004 by greencreeper Post: Isn't open source wonderful? Can you imagine if this was Microsoft? They'd sell you an upgrade - in a years time. And it would have bugs. -- john

12) Message boards : Number crunching : BOINC 4 and Win98 (Message 20308) Posted 31 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: Just for clarification - when you say "Windows 98" do you mean "Windows 98", "Windows 98SE" or "Windows 98 and 98SE"? What's all this talk of winsock? AFAIK that's only of relevance to dial-up users, and who still has dial-up these days? :/ I'm leaving BOINC alone methinks - just have 3 Predictor WUs left to finish. SETI is too unstable to run it as my sole project. I need Predictor as a backup and there's no knowing when it will convert to v4. The fact that it (a) doesn't work on Windows 98 machines; and (b) could trash those machines has pretty much sealed its fate :) Good luck! -- john

13) Questions and Answers : Windows : Disable benchmarks (Message 15048) Posted 9 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: > They are done automatically because people have a tendency not to keep their > benchmarks up to date, skewing the results of others. > And that's worse than having benchmarks that are totally inaccurate because they were taken when the CPU was busy. > The benchmarking during boot up it known, and I'm sure they're working on a > fix. > The list of things to fix is growing fast. God I love BOINC. -- john

14) Questions and Answers : Windows : Disable benchmarks (Message 15025) Posted 9 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: > why do you want it disabled? it only runs once. this is determine the size > of wu's your computer gets so what the deal? It doesn't run once - it runs randomly. Sometimes BOINC starts and the benchmarks run, other times they don't. At boot-up the CPU is busy so the benchmarks are always wrong. Post boot-up benchmarks are about a 1/3 better. So if I didn't re-run the benchmarks my CPU would be assigned WUs that are less than it's capable of processing. -- john

15) Questions and Answers : Windows : Disable benchmarks (Message 15020) Posted 9 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: > No. > Well that was short :D I'll have a go at the developers :P -- john

16) Questions and Answers : Windows : Disable benchmarks (Message 15016) Posted 9 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: The search thing returns nothing so I'm guessing this question hasn't been asked before - apologies if it has. Can automatic benchmarking be disabled? What's the option? TIA -- john

17) Message boards : Number crunching : We're back!!! (Message 13945) Posted 5 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: I'm in two minds about whether to process any more SETI WUs for the moment. First there was a bug in the code that effectively meant loads of returned WUs would have to be sent out again - i.e. the already returned results were scrapped and no credit was given. Heck of a lot of wasted processor power. And now a load of returned WUs, which were processed while SETI was down for a week, are stuck in a folder somewhere with no certainty over when or if they'll be "transitioned" and hence no credit given. Seems that, at the moment, we're processing and re-processing and re-processing WUs for no credit. A sort of BOINC labour camp. Hmmmm. -- john

18) Message boards : Number crunching : question: updating boinc Client 3.19 to 3.20 m$ (Message 13870) Posted 5 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: >Better multi-project-support and such isn't coming before in v4. True but AFAIK it's not a big bang but the end result of a series of changes to the code. Some of those changes were in 3.20. >Is there another url to download the update or is it just too much load on the >sever? I've tried several time over the last few days. It can be downloaded from the Predictor site - http://predictor.scripps.edu/ -- john

19) Questions and Answers : Wish list : Please add "Connect Now" to BOINC (Message 13866) Posted 5 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: > > In short, you can go online when you chose and just select "Retry" > instead of > > timing your being online to that of the automatic retry. > > I believe he's saying he doesn't want BOINC to keep connecting when the > deferrment expires... > Ah. That's a Windows thing - just configure DUN to not dial when a connection is needed. Just means you have to explicitly dial-up and BOINC will fail to connect and back-off (again). -- john

20) Message boards : Number crunching : We're back!!! (Message 13864) Posted 5 Aug 2004 by greencreeper Post: >Actually I was thinking more of this; > >We found a bug in the scheduling code such that returned results were not >being updated in the database. Ah - well that just means (IMHO) that a load of returned WUs have been scrapped and resent, and no credit has been given. Nowt to worry about. After all, it's not about the credit, it's about the science :/ >Thought i'd use my spare crunching time for Predictor, but they've disabled >new account creation. Bummer. I mentioned this on the developer forum. When SETI is down, the demand for WUs spills over to Predictor, which (being an alpha project) just doesn't have the resources to meet the surge in demand, and it goes down. The news says that account creation will be re-enabled when the project is stable. Effectively this means "when Predictor *and* SETI are stable". >Surely the point of the back-off is to spread the load? If everyone is sitting >around pressing "Retry" the it's little wonder that the servers are >overloaded. Yes but the back off computation is a little "weird" and you have to consider that it is possible, given the way SETI is up and down, that BOINC takes weeks to upload completed WUs and retrieve more WUs. I.e. if the calculated back off time keeps coinciding with SETI down time. Most of my WUs to upload had only a few days to go before they expired - I was keen to ensure they were uploaded in time, though the latest news suggests that most recently returned results are now in limbo in a folder somewhere! I'm not too bothered about downloading WUs - I've set a fairly large cache size and so far I've managed to avoid running out of WUs. A few close calls though :) -- john

Next 20

 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.