I just hit update and everything got sent ... is "it" fixed??or was I just lucky?

Ed F

Uploading with audible whooshing sounds here ... I'd love to know what uncorked that particular blockage ...

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

high fiber diet?

---

high fiber diet?

That's some serious bran flakes...

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

Simliar result from the Great White North a few minutes ago. Was down to 4 WUs to run, with enough pending uploads to kill any downloads, when it suddenly all went "whoosh". Now have about 3 days worth of work.

Cricket hasn't shown any great change, so I put this down to random luck. whatever, I'll take it!

---

Jepp, it seems to run again. I hope for longer!

---

Well, it took all my uploads but only gave me 3 GPU tasks, that should be good for about an hour. Hopefully it will be my turn again before then. :-)

---

PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC

get 'em while they are hot!! only 62750 WU's at 19:30 and "Master database queries/second" is up to 528 ... if the bottleneck is purged the in-flow/out-flow will stripe the DB clean!!

Ed F
[edit]
at 19:50 we have Master database queries/second at 877 and 53250 WU's left
at 20:10 we have Master database queries/second at 966 and 20131 WU's left
at 20:20 we have Master database queries/second at 917 and 05689 WU's left
at 20:40 we have Master database queries/second at 957 and 07585 WU's left the splitters are holding!!
[/edit]

Cricket graph now showing 28 Mbit/sec uploads - that's more like it.

We'll probably have some genuine good old-fashioned congestion for a while, but that's a much better sort of problem to have.

This looks like one of those 'lightbulb' moments - simple solution that's been staring you in the face all this time, but you just weren't looking at it. I wonder what it was.

Cricket hasn't shown any great change, so I put this down to random luck. whatever, I'll take it!

It's definitely showing now... 28 MB/s.
...no it's record breaking 30.36 and rising...
I wonder why :)

---

Who the hell is General Failure and why is he reading my harddisk?¿

All my WU upload!!!... :)

SETI UP!!!

mine have but they all have come backj with

1512566714 570613191 10 Feb 2010 18:01:58 UTC 22 Feb 2010 19:30:46 UTC Validate error 9,240.25 262.20 113.18 --- SETI@home Enhanced v6.08 (cuda)

heavy sigh.... Internet access OK...... no such luck here, I only got one machine to report and I have a stash of WUs....

---

Just a theory, or perhaps a model to help us have a bit of patience....

Looks like the SETI crew or somebody has cleared whatever was preventing the servers from running at their maximum capacity. Cricket shows the bandwidth is saturated, with several days of pent up demand. A small percentage of us get through, and then things go "whoosh". The rest of the time the servers don't answer your call, and it looks like it has for the last week - but for different reasons.

As those who get through stop calling in so frequently, the rest of the calls will get a chance. but it will take time, probably till after the scheduled outrage tomorrow, for all calls to be answered.

---

Just a theory, or perhaps a model to help us have a bit of patience....

Looks like the SETI crew or somebody has cleared whatever was preventing the servers from running at their maximum capacity. Cricket shows the bandwidth is saturated, with several days of pent up demand. A small percentage of us get through, and then things go "whoosh". The rest of the time the servers don't answer your call, and it looks like it has for the last week - but for different reasons.

As those who get through stop calling in so frequently, the rest of the calls will get a chance. but it will take time, probably till after the scheduled outrage tomorrow, for all calls to be answered.

90Mb out & 30Mb in right now... wait... *does some maths*... well it's close enough to 100Mbs I suppose.

---

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

Just a theory, or perhaps a model to help us have a bit of patience....

Looks like the SETI crew or somebody has cleared whatever was preventing the servers from running at their maximum capacity. Cricket shows the bandwidth is saturated, with several days of pent up demand. A small percentage of us get through, and then things go "whoosh". The rest of the time the servers don't answer your call, and it looks like it has for the last week - but for different reasons.

As those who get through stop calling in so frequently, the rest of the calls will get a chance. but it will take time, probably till after the scheduled outrage tomorrow, for all calls to be answered.

Exactly right.

---

Nice to see my 430 WU's finally go up. :)

Ok, I did my part to help. The downloads got away from me and before I knew it I had around 100 new tasks. I set no new tasks so you guys can have whatever comes down the pike for the next few days. :-)

---

PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC

Hi, pinged the path to boinc2.ssl.berkeley.edu but results are the same as
before the 'congestion'!

Busy tracing route to boinc2.ssl.berkeley.edu [208.68.240.18]
via maximaal 30 hops:
0 Leisure [192.168.2.2]
1 192.168.2.1
2 195.190.249.32
3 iawxsrt-rt2-bb21-ge-3-1-0.wxs.nl [213.75.64.145]
4 ams-ix.he.net [195.69.145.150]
5 10gigabitethernet4-1.core1.nyc4.he.net [216.66.24.153]
6 10gigabitethernet1-2.core1.chi1.he.net [72.52.92.102]
7 10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.sjc2.he.net [72.52.92.73]
8 10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.pao1.he.net [72.52.92.69]
9 64.71.140.42
10 208.68.243.254
11 boinc2.ssl.berkeley.edu [208.68.240.18]

Statistics being calculated for 275 second's....
From source/endpoint. And connection points.
Hop RTT Verl./verzonden Verloren/verz. Adres
0 Leisure [192.168.2.2]
0/ 100 = 0% |
1 7ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.2.1
0/ 100 = 0% |
2 --- 100/ 100 =100% 100/ 100 =100% 195.190.249.32
0/ 100 = 0% |
3 35ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% iawxsrt-rt2-bb21-ge-3-1-0.wxs.nl [213.75.64.145]
0/ 100 = 0% |
4 33ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% ams-ix.he.net [195.69.145.150]
0/ 100 = 0% |
5 122ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 10gigabitethernet4-1.core1.nyc4.he.net [216.66.24.153]
0/ 100 = 0% |
6 145ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 10gigabitethernet1-2.core1.chi1.he.net [72.52.92.102]
0/ 100 = 0% |
7 198ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.sjc2.he.net [72.52.92.73]
0/ 100 = 0% |
8 199ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.pao1.he.net [72.52.92.69]
1/ 100 = 1% |
9 199ms 1/ 100 = 1% 0/ 100 = 0% 64.71.140.42
10/ 100 = 10% |
10 266ms 11/ 100 = 11% 0/ 100 = 0% 208.68.243.254
6/ 100 = 6% |
11 268ms 17/ 100 = 17% 0/ 100 = 0% boinc2.ssl.berkeley.edu [208.68.240.18]

Trace is completed
Don't see any difference, so this is not a reliable way to check to connection, IMHO.

---

Don't see any difference, so this is not a reliable way to check to connection, IMHO.

Doesn't surprise me, but thanks for checking.