From the technical news page:

February 20, 2005 - 18:45 UTC
The data server NAS box may be OK at this point, although we have not subjected it to the full production load yet. We currently have the data server turned off so that the file deleter can at least partially clear a large backlog of workunit and result files that are scheduled for deletion. This backlog is a hold over problem from when our database server was on a slow machine. Validation and assimilation are both currently on.

---

Aloha, Uli

>
> Once again things are green, but still no response from the Scheduler &
> still unable to return results.
>

Same problem here. :-(

---

Regards

> From the technical news page:
>
> February 20, 2005 - 18:45 UTC
> The data server NAS box may be OK at this point, although we have not
> subjected it to the full production load yet. We currently have the data
> server turned off so that the file deleter can at least partially clear a
> large backlog of workunit and result files that are scheduled for deletion.
> This backlog is a hold over problem from when our database server was on a
> slow machine. Validation and assimilation are both currently on.


That was at 18:45 UTC - February 20, 2005
As of 20 Feb 2005 22:40:08 UTC all is green other than the splitters.

Maybe they need another status box?

---

Grant
Darwin NT

> That was at 18:45 UTC - February 20, 2005
> As of 20 Feb 2005 22:40:08 UTC all is green other than the splitters.
>
> Maybe they need another status box?
>

I think the whole system is running normal (hence the green statii) but is disconnected from the net to play 'catch up' with the back log.

---

Aloha, Uli

> I think the whole system is running normal (hence the green statii) but is
> disconnected from the net to play 'catch up' with the back log.

It looks like the NAS box can't take the heat. They're trying to get rid of completed results to lower the load.

I'm wondering what kind of cr*p is sold as professional hardware nowadays.


Regards Hans

P.S:
Yep I'm getting kinda angry now.

---

> I think the whole system is running normal (hence the green statii) but is
> disconnected from the net to play 'catch up' with the back log.

If it's not online, then it should be Red IMHO.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Nuttins workin on seti. Been lookin at same numbers for a week now. Everything says failed messages. No uploads. No downloads. Goin to bar and think this over. Couple of beers never hurt anyone but I think if I drink til this is fixed, I'll be a mess.

---

The status page says all is OK, and the validation backlog has certainly been going down (which has given me some credit from the pending). But the schedulers haven't responded for me, much the same as everyone else is seeing.

I've pretty much suspeded SETI (a 4.20 and 4.22 feature) and resume it once a day to try uploading what I have. I've got enough work from other projects to keep my CPU busy. If some people are getting something uploaded occassionally, I might just let it keep connecting the last day or 2 before deadline to see if those results can get reported before deadline though.

---

[As of 21 Feb 2005 0:20:09 UTC]
Ready to send 202,023
In progress 1,414,052
Waiting for validation 3,866
Waiting to transition 0

The "Ready to send"-number is not changing...
Does this mean they're not sending any WU's out from BOINC SETI?

And what does "In progress" means? This number is increasing...

---

>
> > I think the whole system is running normal (hence the green statii) but
> is
> > disconnected from the net to play 'catch up' with the back log.
>
> It looks like the NAS box can't take the heat. They're trying to get rid of
> completed results to lower the load.
>
> I'm wondering what kind of cr*p is sold as professional hardware nowadays.
>
>
> Regards Hans
>
> P.S:
> Yep I'm getting kinda angry now.
>
>
>
I dont think that any of the hardware they are useing is bought it is all donated its free. Even with vendor support the hardware seems to keep coming up with new issues. I think seti@home 2 is the favored program. If the vendors are donating hardware to see how they will handle under extreme conditions they picked the right program. Hope they fix enough issues to get us going again. I am going to be scaleing back my operation to 5 computers give the new guys a chance to try this out. When they swap over seticlassic we will probably be having these upsets alot.

---

> That was at 18:45 UTC - February 20, 2005
> As of 20 Feb 2005 22:40:08 UTC all is green other than the splitters.
>
> Maybe they need another status box?

We know that they need a bigger server closet before they can add another status box.

I suspect that when Classic ends they'll have more hardware and more room.

---

> We know that they need a bigger server closet before they can add another
> status box.

Nah, by a another status box i was refering to the red/green indicator boxes on the Server Status page.
Might be worth adding one specifically for the NAS- when it falls over it doesn't matter if the Schedulers are working or not, no data can move in either direction.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

I finally got to ULDL a few WU today for the first time in a week. I guess the servers may actually be up for real.

---EDIT---
Looks like I was premature in my exuberance.
I cleared an WU that had previously been ULed, but no new upload.
I DL a WU, but it ended with
2/21/05 10:47:56 AM|SETI@home|signature verification error for setiathome_4.09_windows_intelx86.pdb
2/21/05 10:47:56 AM|SETI@home|Checksum or signature error for setiathome_4.09_windows_intelx86.pdb
2/21/05 10:47:56 AM|SETI@home|Unrecoverable error for result 04ja05aa.28108.10001.229830.102_4 (app_version download error: couldn't get input files: setiathome_4.09_windows_intelx86.pdb -120 signature verification error)
2/21/05 10:47:57 AM|SETI@home|Deferring communication with project for 59 seconds

Three attempts have now failed.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

Nothing working here...i still can compute some undone WU but i cant upload finished WU'S


SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:46:10 - Giving up on download of 04ja05aa.28108.9712.140892.151: Downloaded file had wrong size: expected 361971, got 0
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:46:10 - MD5 computation error for 04ja05aa.28108.9712.140892.151: -108
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:46:10 - Checksum or signature error for 04ja05aa.28108.9712.140892.151
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:46:10 - Unrecoverable error for result 04ja05aa.28108.9712.140892.151_6 (WU download error: couldn't get input files:
04ja05aa.28108.9712.140892.151: MD5 computation error
)
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:46:13 - Scheduler RPC to http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi failed
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:46:13 - No schedulers responded
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:46:13 - Deferring communication with project for 1 minutes and 0 seconds
--- - 2005-02-21 16:47:14 - May run out of work in 1.00 days; requesting more
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:47:14 - Requesting 71382 seconds of work
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:47:14 - Sending request to scheduler: http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:47:21 - Scheduler RPC to http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi succeeded
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:47:21 - Message from server: Not sending work - last RPC too recent: 92 sec
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:47:21 - No work from project
SETI@home - 2005-02-21 16:47:21 - Deferring communication with project for 10 minutes and 0 seconds



What the heck ?

Is that normal ? Whats going on ?

---

http://www.martin-karch.de

Maybe it is good idea to upgrade the client to 4.19 before trying to UL. 4.19 can handle better ULs and DLs.

---

In the last 10 minutes I have gotten a full download to and upload from all 5 of my computers ... It looks like things are working ...

EdwardPF

> Maybe it is good idea to upgrade the client to 4.19 before trying to UL. 4.19
> can handle better ULs and DLs.
>
>
I'm already using 4.22. No joy for now.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

> > Maybe it is good idea to upgrade the client to 4.19 before trying to UL.
> 4.19
> > can handle better ULs and DLs.
> >
> >
> I'm already using 4.22. No joy for now.
>
>
>
Strange. For me 4.19 is fine on Windows XP. Ive UL-ed more than 40 WUs. Most of them had personal time-counter above 35 mins and UL-ed wo errors...

---

> Strange. For me 4.19 is fine on Windows XP. Ive UL-ed more than 40 WUs. Most
> of them had personal time-counter above 35 mins and UL-ed wo errors...
>
>

Same here. Took about 3 hours but I have managed to upload about 35 WUs and download another 20

---

> > > Maybe it is good idea to upgrade the client to 4.19 before trying to
> UL.
> > 4.19
> > > can handle better ULs and DLs.
> > >
> > >
> > I'm already using 4.22. No joy for now.
> >
> >
> >
> Strange. For me 4.19 is fine on Windows XP. Ive UL-ed more than 40 WUs. Most
> of them had personal time-counter above 35 mins and UL-ed wo errors...
>
>

i have different client version 4.16 / 4.19 / 4.66 on different computers and none of them can comunicate

---

http://www.martin-karch.de