1) Forums : Technical Support : Test work? (Message 7215)
Posted 7 Sep 2008 by AnRM
Post:
We have reattached our boxes without any apparent problems....good to be back!
Cheers, Rog.
2) Forums : Technical Support : Some information on cosmology@home (Message 7019)
Posted 14 Aug 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Well, if it\'s \'functional\' again, we will reattach and see if we can get work and receive credit for same! Keeping our fingers crossed.....Rog.
3) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 6758)
Posted 26 Jul 2008 by AnRM
Post:
I know, in the past, that people have said this project gives too much credit, but to change it so that it gives even less than WCG does not seem to be the way to resolve credit issues.

That is precisely why I proposed to reward 170 credits in total, which is lower than before but still generally in the current \'middle 80%\' range for any system/OS/person.

We agree and will vote with our virtual feet. Sadly, the communication on this project has also slipped badly.....
4) Forums : Technical Support : Message from Server:Server error: can\'t attach shared memory (Message 6423)
Posted 6 Jul 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Getting more of these error messages again. The weekend must be here!.......... :( ....
5) Forums : General Topics : Downloading CAMB (Message 5231)
Posted 14 Mar 2008 by AnRM
Post:
.......Agreed. I\'ll kick and scream if projects start requiring 5.10.xx or 6.xx.xx. IMO, stuff past 5.8.16 may add some features and fix some bugs, but it introduces as many, if not more, problems than it solves...


Well, Brian I don\'t know if you remember, but we had a similiar discussion re. an upgrade I thought we supposedly had to do to attach to the new Cosmo URL. We went to 5.10.30 from 5.10.13 and you were right! We then had random \'DLL\'errors. So I tip my hat to your caution as we had to revert back to 5.10.13 on all boxes but the WinVista Q6600 Quad. Only the Shadow knows what goes on in BOINC land....Cheers, Rog.
6) Forums : Wish list : Outage Notifications (Message 4856)
Posted 27 Jan 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Well, hindsight is always 100% isn\'t it? This project is still BETA last time I looked and gives compensatory credit because of this fact. ALL projects including those well established ones ie. E@H, LHC, and SETI have had their moments so give the man a break!
7) Forums : Technical Support : Reattachment Snag (Message 4838)
Posted 26 Jan 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Yes, it was an interesting hijacked discussion :) ....all our boxes are attached to \'http//...org\' with BOINC 5.10.30 in place and are crunching happily 50/50 with WCG at present ie. our reattachment problems have been resolved :) .....Cheers, Rog. Hope Scott got some rest...
8) Forums : Technical Support : Reattachment Snag (Message 4827)
Posted 26 Jan 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Not at all.....always intresting reading/information.....Cheers, Rog.
9) Forums : Technical Support : Reattachment Snag (Message 4795)
Posted 25 Jan 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Could you at least mention what you saw when it did not recognize the URL? The reason I\'m asking is that I attached both ways, with and without the www on the front... Both ways worked fine... Is it possible that the machines that had problems used a different DNS?[/quote]

Here\'s some more info for what it\'s worth...all boxes used BOINC 5.10.13. Using URL \'www.....org\' all boxes attached ok but when BOINC attempted to download the first WUs we received \'error 403\' messages. Using URL \'http//.....org\' to reattach the same boxes, we could not attach and received \'The URL is not that of a BOINC based project.... etc\' message ie no joy there either. So...the upgrade to BOINC 5.10.30 was done and using the \'www......org\' URL to attach, everything seems to be processing fine. Of the dozen or so boxes done so far, only one using BOINC
5.10.13 worked ok with the \'www....org\' URL. Go figure. We\'ve decided to upgrade all boxes to BOINC 5.10.30 as the upgrades are overdue anyway....Cheers, Rog.
10) Forums : Technical Support : Reattachment Snag (Message 4786)
Posted 25 Jan 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Just a \'heads up\' for those who are using older BOINC clients...we had some difficulty reattaching to C@H...had to update to to new BOINC client 5.10.30 before some machines recognized the new project URL. We received error messages that inducated that the C@H was not a BOINC project with the older versions of BOINC ie 5.10.13 etc.....Cheers, Rog.


Define \"older\"? I\'m using 5.8.16 and had no problems...


I believe I indicated that it was a quirk on \'some\' of our machines with older versions of BOINC, not all.....Cheers, Rog.
11) Forums : Technical Support : Received a lot of credit? (Message 4781)
Posted 25 Jan 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Possibly the credit was compensation for \'Pending Credit\' lost in the Server Shuffle??
12) Forums : Technical Support : Reattachment Snag (Message 4780)
Posted 25 Jan 2008 by AnRM
Post:
Just a \'heads up\' for those who are using older BOINC clients...we had some difficulty reattaching to C@H...had to update to to new BOINC client 5.10.30 before some machines recognized the new project URL. We received error messages that inducated that the C@H was not a BOINC project with the older versions of BOINC ie 5.10.13 etc.....Cheers, Rog.
13) Forums : General Topics : Why do you participate in Cosmology@Home? Who is the \"most surprising\" participant? (Message 4178)
Posted 6 Dec 2007 by AnRM
Post:
Nothing suprising here as I\'m an old tech type that has been around since rotating magnetic drums were used for memory....We like science projects and this project has great communication from project scientists and admins. We really appreciate this above all else. It creates a sense of team spirit and involvement that will take the project\'s impressive start to new heights. The fact that your project has already published its first scientific result and given some credit the your \'Crunchers\' is outstanding!! Consequently, we have decided to support C@H exclusively. Cheers, Rog.
14) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 3193)
Posted 10 Oct 2007 by AnRM
Post:

The project can lose just as many participants by giving too much credit as giving too little.

How so??


I suggest we not go into this. That would lead the thread away from the purpose it is intended for.


You're right, of course.....my apologies. However, Keck's statement does have a obvious 'spin' to it and I was curious.....Cheers, Rog.
15) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 3190)
Posted 10 Oct 2007 by AnRM
Post:

The project can lose just as many participants by giving too much credit as giving too little.

How so??
16) Forums : Technical Support : Is that a bug? (Message 3116)
Posted 4 Oct 2007 by AnRM
Post:
When I'm reading posts, I can't use the toolbar(the upper toolbar of "join", "Return part.","community",etc.
Is that a bug?

Seems to work OK here....we are using the same setup as you ie. AMD X2 and WinXP.


I should have mentioned that we are using IE 7.0.5730.11 and the upper toolbar seems to work just fine....Cheers, Rog.
17) Forums : Technical Support : Is that a bug? (Message 3110)
Posted 4 Oct 2007 by AnRM
Post:
When I'm reading posts, I can't use the toolbar(the upper toolbar of "join", "Return part.","community",etc.
Is that a bug?

Seems to work OK here....we are using the same setup as you ie. AMD X2 and WinXP.
18) Forums : General Topics : Cosmology@Home credit discussion (Message 3109)
Posted 4 Oct 2007 by AnRM
Post:
It's all part of the discussion as long as there are BOINC stats sites.

The "cross-project stats parity" nutz will always tell you that your credit system either awards too much or too little credit. They are never happy.

I agree with Angus on this one! IMHO your present 50 value is about right. We have some boxes that claim more and some less. There is also some variation in WUs of course. We use the standard BOINC client on all machines....Cheers, Rog.
19) Forums : Announcements : New Website Design, Part Deux (Message 3107)
Posted 4 Oct 2007 by AnRM
Post:
We have no issues with the new web design either.....the contrast seems quite sufficient and the colour selection is very easy on the eyes. Well done, Scott.