1) Forums : Technical Support : URGENT Problems Thread (Message 7909)
Posted 9 Mar 2009 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
anyone else notice \"9/03/2009 3:21:37 PM|Cosmology@Home|Message from server: Server error: can\'t attach shared memory\"

Yes been getting that ever since the site came back up a little while ago.
2) Forums : Technical Support : Work units not being reissued? (Message 6195)
Posted 15 May 2008 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
I am pleased to say that these work units were all reissued a few days ago and all have now reached quorum and validated.
3) Forums : Technical Support : Work units not being reissued? (Message 6012)
Posted 26 Apr 2008 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Today I was looking through some results which have been pending now for a month or so. In each case I successfully completed the result; the number 2 cruncher detached without completing the task, and the third shows \"unsent\". It has not been issued again.

I am wondering if these will ever be reissued so that you can reach a quorum and issue credit. Some examples are:

http://www.cosmologyathome.org/workunit.php?wuid=1839215
http://www.cosmologyathome.org/workunit.php?wuid=1824849
http://www.cosmologyathome.org/workunit.php?wuid=1824356

Any comments appreciated.
4) Forums : General Topics : Deja Vu all over again. (Message 1607)
Posted 27 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Hi everyone,

I'm late to this thread, though not to alpha testing (nor to kabooming for that matter - nice to see you here James).

I'm content to be an invisible "Volunteer Tester" and ATA member. ;-)
5) Forums : Technical Support : 2 successful result but still pending (Message 1505)
Posted 25 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Is that the same thing with this one?

http://cosmos.astro.uiuc.edu/cosmohome/workunit.php?wuid=299014
6) Forums : Technical Support : MD5 Checksum Fail (Message 1400)
Posted 23 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Well spotted. You must be from Queensland too, eh? Good-onya mate.


About 1000km south of the border, actually. ;-)
7) Forums : Technical Support : MD5 Checksum Fail (Message 1370)
Posted 22 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Looks like two others had the same problem with that one, and the 4th aborted it. Definitely looks like a bad WU that one.
8) Forums : Technical Support : Error on longer WU (Message 1364)
Posted 22 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Hey folks, please look also to the date of WU before you abort it.

http://cosmos.astro.uiuc.edu/cosmohome/workunit.php?wuid=325295
http://cosmos.astro.uiuc.edu/cosmohome/workunit.php?wuid=326438

Theses were created long time after the timestamp of 20 july 20:00. wu_072107_XXXXXX ;)


A VERY good point Svenie, and one I was just about to make. I'm going a bit blind after aborting lots of work units, and had accidentally aborted a couple of work units beginning with wu_072107_1 thinking they were wu_072007_1. I won't make that mistake again, and was just going to post to try to help others avoid the same mistake!
9) Forums : Technical Support : Host Limit @ 25 Now ... !!! (Message 1194)
Posted 20 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
I'm not getting workunits anymore.

anyone else confirming this?

regards,

Sysfried


Thanks for the heads up on this - I just checked and found several PCs had run dry, so yes, I can confirm the issue too.
10) Forums : Technical Support : Host flying solo (Message 1138)
Posted 19 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Try detaching and reattaching and see if that makes a difference?
11) Forums : Technical Support : WU limit discrepancy (Message 1031)
Posted 16 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
I agree - I am not entirely sure why there is a limit of 50 WUs on a PC at one time. Even a Core2Duo can get through them all in 2 hours or so, meaning to work constantly you need to be permanently connected, and you run out very quickly if no work is available on the server.

If a limit is required for some reason, wouldn't a per-CPU limit be more logical?
12) Forums : Technical Support : Comments on Fixed Credit System (Message 1002)
Posted 14 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
I have to agree with that said above. At 6 with the faster app the credit is now the highest and so needs to be addressed. But 3 would put it at the lowest of any project on my machines. At 4.5 it would not be nearly the highest, nor the lowest - indeed about average. I think it is about the right figure.
13) Forums : Technical Support : Download Errors ... !!! (Message 981)
Posted 13 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Is the error only occurring on PCs using BOINC 5.10.13 (which as I understand it is still a beta release)?
14) Forums : Technical Support : Linux/Windows speed difference? (Message 959)
Posted 12 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
I am also finding that most of the invalid results are where they are the third result, particularly when the first two have been one windows machine and one Linux machine. Not sure what the current HR status is but would not be surprised if this was a factor.
15) Forums : Technical Support : Linux/Windows speed difference? (Message 951)
Posted 12 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
With the new app I am seeing a significant shortening of run times on Windows, so that they are now within a minute of the times on Linux on a same clock basis.

However I am also noticing about a 20% increase in invalid results, and results pending due to lack of consensus have skyrocketed.
16) Forums : Technical Support : http file not found (Message 921)
Posted 11 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
I am still getting it too, but only on some computers - mainly those on windows with BOINC 5.8.15 as far as I can tell. And it is not happening every time now.

Makes me wonder about the function of the other line of code in the site just below the tag that has been changed. Wondering if it could be moved up above the other piece of code, or even removed altogether?? Not every BOINC site has that line (though many do) so I am not entirely sure what it does...

<link rel="boinc_scheduler" href="http://cosmos.astro.uiuc.edu/cosmohome_cgi/cgi"/>
17) Forums : General Topics : Team Recruitment Thread (Message 907)
Posted 10 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
If you would like to be a part of the top team in Cosmology and the first to pass the 100,000 credit mark then you need to join Boinc@AUSTRALIA!
18) Forums : Technical Support : http file not found (Message 906)
Posted 10 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Many of us have been seeing this message whenever a scheduler request is made on this and some other projects. On 5.8 and later BOINC versions, it is usually immediately followed by a successful request.

It is probably not a big issue, but one which has been puzzling me - and I have a theory about what might be causing it. I believe it is to do with how the scheduler tag is embedded into the index page of a project's website.

There are three main ways that this is done:

1) The tag is incorporated in normal text, but disguised by making the text the same colour as the background. For example:

<font color=ffffff>
<scheduler>http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta_cgi/cgi </scheduler>
</font>


This is how it is done on Rosetta and SETI, for example.

2) The tag is incorporated in normal text, but disguised by using a div tag to make it not display. For example:
<div style="display:none">
<scheduler>https://secure.worldcommunitygrid.org/boinc/wcg_cgi/fcgi</scheduler>
</div> 
</font>


This is how it is done at ABC and WCG, for example.

I have not noticed the problem occurring with any project using either of the above methods.

3) The tag is included in normal text, but the text is then commented out. For example:

<!--<scheduler>http://www.apsathome.org/APS_cgi/cgi</scheduler>-->

Examples include APS and Cosmology.

It is my belief that it is the use of this method that causes difficulties with BOINC connecting at the first attempt. Indeed, with previous versions of BOINC connection might not be possible at all.

Scott, if you try changing this element in the project home page, you might find that these http errors disappear, and you might also find that pre-5.8 BOINC versions work.

Of course, I could be totally wrong too! :-)
19) Forums : Technical Support : Linux/Windows speed difference? (Message 871)
Posted 8 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:


P.S. @Wang I like your profile. Amusing. :)


Thanks Acme :-)

The sad part is that it is true! ;)
20) Forums : Technical Support : Linux/Windows speed difference? (Message 869)
Posted 8 Jul 2007 by Profile Wang Solutions
Post:
Two comments from me:

1) Yes, there are definitely two different sets of WUs, the short ones being always roughly half the time of the long ones. This applies regardless of processor and operating system.

2) CAMB 1.19 is roughly 15-20% faster than 1.18 on my AMD machines, particularly on an X2, but is no faster and in fact slightly slower on the Intel machines. This suggests to me something to do either with L2 cache utilisation, or integer calculations.


Next 20