Thanks for the update, Matt.
And good luck with Bruno.

---

.:morpheus:.

...we'll still be here looking forward to business as normal. :-)

This is business as usual/normal. LOL

Good luck!!! Whether with Synergy or another machine, hope things go relative smoothly.

I have a question...Is it possible to separate uploads/downloads?

If the uploads could also be routed through the new lab Gbit line. This could leave the Hurricane Elec. line purely for downloads...

??

---

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, 'hmm... that's funny...'" -- Isaac Asimov

Sounds like Synergy got there not a moment too soon!)

Or bruno, knowing synergy was on the way, held out as long as he could before crashing. Either way, bruno has been a good soldier, hope you can get him back in business again.

---

Donald
Infernal Optimist / Submariner, retired

When is looking like this is going to get back online?

Hi
Server status shows ONLY AP Splitters
Lando and Vader not running ,both are doing other
tasks
Is the Server Status page affected ?

---

Make sure and check the date/time on the Server Status page:

[As of 18 Jan 2011 17:10:05 UTC]

It is 20 Jan 2011 06:11 UTC as I am posting this.

---

I gotta fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.

It's good to hear that everything's correctable, Matt. Is there an updated hardware requirement list that's available? Looking to donate some more parts in the spring. :)

---

Computer nut, Distributed Computing freak, Jeeper and Dodge Ram driver.

Life is worth living... and worth discovering.

I run VMWare ESXi Free - why don't you?

Keep up the excellent work, Matt and let's try to revive Bruno before his untimely demise ??? All in fun though, I was just wondering why my uploads were just sitting here and now I know, and can stop worrying ...

Jaye Ellen

At least when Synergy (New Bruno) comes up it will be a true test to see if it can handle the load of the project with everyone uploading their completed WU's. I have over 4k to report alone.

Todd

---

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

Everything on the BOINC side of the house is a single point of failure. The only system that has a hot backup is the science database.

---

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

BOINC is supposed to make it possible to do big science on a vanishingly small budget. That means redundant servers are often out of the question.

So instead of redundant servers so that something can always take work, we have a client that handles outages gracefully.

It has to be that way because the standard solution (throw money at the problem) is not available to BOINC projects.

I would disagree with the statement that we can make do without redundant servers for this project. Considering the number of hosts are now over 2 million for just this project that is an incredible amount of computing power and really was the spirit of the architectural design. The work still needs to go somewhere.

I don't think some people here realize the scope of the data returned and the impact of the loss of storage devices. To serve the project as has been demanded by the users, some are very vocal, there does need to be many factors considered.

It isn't about throwing money at a problem in hopes of a resolution. Things break and need to be replaced over time - requiring money or donations to achieve the goal. Not much different that expecting to drive your new car with the same tires for 150k miles or not getting an oil change.

When your dataset increases, your load and time between failures also increases. When trying to make do with piecemeal equipment it can be very challenging to make a go of it.

Todd

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

BOINC is supposed to make it possible to do big science on a vanishingly small budget. That means redundant servers are often out of the question.

So instead of redundant servers so that something can always take work, we have a client that handles outages gracefully.

It has to be that way because the standard solution (throw money at the problem) is not available to BOINC projects.

---

Aye, Capn' Todd....

I face challenges just keeping 8 crunching rigs online some days.

Power supplies age, motherboard components age, things change.
Adjustments to settings are required.

Of course, the kitties push the rigs pretty hard, so any change in tolerances can sometimes throw things outta whack.

I suspect that Eric, Matt, and crew sleep much better recently with the new servers at work.....

I know that even with the latest short outage, we are enjoying the longest streak of uptime in Seti history for many moons.

You and all other contributors have done well.

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

I would disagree with the statement that we can make do without redundant servers for this project. Considering the number of hosts are now over 2 million for just this project that is an incredible amount of computing power and really was the spirit of the architectural design. The work still needs to go somewhere.

I don't think some people here realize the scope of the data returned and the impact of the loss of storage devices. To serve the project as has been demanded by the users, some are very vocal, there does need to be many factors considered.

It isn't about throwing money at a problem in hopes of a resolution. Things break and need to be replaced over time - requiring money or donations to achieve the goal. Not much different that expecting to drive your new car with the same tires for 150k miles or not getting an oil change.

When your dataset increases, your load and time between failures also increases. When trying to make do with piecemeal equipment it can be very challenging to make a go of it.

Todd

Bruno hardware failure - this suggests bruno (the upload server) is a single point of failure, is it feasible to have two systems performing the same function here?

Perhaps bruno should have a companion, borat (I'm probably thinking of the wrong bruno here.)

BOINC is supposed to make it possible to do big science on a vanishingly small budget. That means redundant servers are often out of the question.

So instead of redundant servers so that something can always take work, we have a client that handles outages gracefully.

It has to be that way because the standard solution (throw money at the problem) is not available to BOINC projects.

They do have some redundancy. The DB is mirrored in real time. They have raid for their drive arrays. But having completely redundant servers is too expensive.

---

BOINC WIKI

[snip]

When your dataset increases, your load and time between failures also increases. When trying to make do with piecemeal equipment it can be very challenging to make a go of it.

Todd

It's been my experience that when the dataset increases, MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) decreases... and your load increases by a factor of two or more (for a dataset double, your load quadruples... not saying that the increase is always exponential, though...)

---

.

Hello, from Albany, CA!...