Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Anybody else getting a 'parsing error'? on stats connect?

Expand Messages
  • Keith Myers
    Within the past week whenever I launch JBSWU, all I get is a on the line where it says Credits as of .... The credit total for my name is
    Message 1 of 30 , Nov 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Within the past week whenever I launch JBSWU, all I get is a <Parsing
      error> on the line where it says "Credits as of ....

      The credit total for my name is 0.00. The correct credit total does
      show for the host though. Anybody else seeing this anomaly?

      Cheers, Keith
    • John Small
      ** Reply to message from Keith Myers on Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:54:06 -0000 ... The web page JBSWU uses to read the user credit data
      Message 2 of 30 , Nov 1, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        ** Reply to message from "Keith Myers" <keith.myers@...> on Thu, 01 Nov
        2007 11:54:06 -0000


        >Within the past week whenever I launch JBSWU, all I get is a <Parsing
        >error> on the line where it says "Credits as of ....
        >
        >The credit total for my name is 0.00. The correct credit total does
        >show for the host though. Anybody else seeing this anomaly?
        >

        The web page JBSWU uses to read the user credit data changed, breaking JBSWU.

        I have uploaded a new JBSWU which seems to fix the problem. Try it and let me
        know how it works for you.

        --
        John Small
      • Michael Strickland
        ... Same here for the last day or so. Everything seems to be working otherwise, so I wasn t concerned. Later, Mike ... mstrickland3@bellsouth.net
        Message 3 of 30 , Nov 1, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:54:06 -0000, Keith Myers wrote:

          >Within the past week whenever I launch JBSWU, all I get is a <Parsing
          >error> on the line where it says "Credits as of ....
          >
          >The credit total for my name is 0.00. The correct credit total does
          >show for the host though. Anybody else seeing this anomaly?

          Same here for the last day or so. Everything seems to be working
          otherwise, so I wasn't concerned.

          Later, Mike
          -----------------------------------
          mstrickland3@...
          LivinWell@...
          HomePage: GeorgiaNatives.net

          Please send all email as text - HTML is too hard to decipher as text.
        • Keith Myers
          ... breaking JBSWU. ... and let me ... Thanks for the quick remedy John. The new 443 client seems to have put things back right again. I am now not getting
          Message 4 of 30 , Nov 2, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In seti-warp@yahoogroups.com, "John Small" <jsmall@...> wrote:
            >
            > ** Reply to message from "Keith Myers" <keith.myers@...> on Thu, 01 Nov
            > 2007 11:54:06 -0000
            >
            >
            > >Within the past week whenever I launch JBSWU, all I get is a <Parsing
            > >error> on the line where it says "Credits as of ....
            > >
            > >The credit total for my name is 0.00. The correct credit total does
            > >show for the host though. Anybody else seeing this anomaly?
            > >
            >
            > The web page JBSWU uses to read the user credit data changed,
            breaking JBSWU.
            >
            > I have uploaded a new JBSWU which seems to fix the problem. Try it
            and let me
            > know how it works for you.
            >
            > --
            > John Small
            >

            Thanks for the quick remedy John. The new 443 client seems to have
            put things back right again. I am now not getting the parsing error
            and the stats for my name are correct now. Thanks again.

            Cheers, Keith
          • Christer Jacobsson
            ... I can only concur in your experience with the new 443. I closed the current running JBSWU_MONITOR, downloaded the 443 this morning to
            Message 5 of 30 , Nov 2, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Keith Myers wrote:
              > --- In seti-warp@yahoogroups.com, "John Small" <jsmall@...> wrote:
              >
              >>** Reply to message from "Keith Myers" <keith.myers@...> on Thu, 01 Nov
              >>2007 11:54:06 -0000
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>>Within the past week whenever I launch JBSWU, all I get is a <Parsing
              >>>error> on the line where it says "Credits as of ....
              >>>
              >>>The credit total for my name is 0.00. The correct credit total does
              >>>show for the host though. Anybody else seeing this anomaly?
              >>>
              >>
              >>The web page JBSWU uses to read the user credit data changed,
              >
              > breaking JBSWU.
              >
              >>I have uploaded a new JBSWU which seems to fix the problem. Try it
              >
              > and let me
              >
              >>know how it works for you.
              >>
              >>--
              >>John Small
              >>
              >
              >
              > Thanks for the quick remedy John. The new 443 client seems to have
              > put things back right again. I am now not getting the parsing error
              > and the stats for my name are correct now. Thanks again.
              >
              > Cheers, Keith
              >

              I can only concur in your experience with the new 443. I closed the
              current running JBSWU_MONITOR, downloaded the 443 this morning to
              g:\livewire\zoc\2007v44\jbswu_monitor, changed dir to
              g:\os2ut\WarpIn\Apps\Bin and did an unzip
              \livewire\zoc\2004v44\jbswu_monitor.zip telling it to overwrite all
              files. Lastly I entered the following START command

              START "JBSWU_MONITOR" /K /win jbswu_monitor.cmd (the same as I use in
              startup.cmd) and up came the window and after a while the stats on the
              current WU came up and then my credits came up OK (GAEA 15,224.00
              total, average 18.51), so it's a very good chance that the 443 does its
              credit things correctly now.


              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >

              Cul8er alligator!
              gaea - feminist
              --
              *****
              * *
              * *
              *****
              *
              *****
              *


              /GAIA (Insulin User - 11th Anniversary :-) Ex-wife deceased :-(
              Team OS/2 e-mail: cribo.jacobsson@... (Primary)
              Team eCs e-mail: gaianerthus@... (Alternate)
              Chunkawakan
            • WD Loughman
              I ve a new 2-something GHz dual-core Athlon machine now, with 1-GB of RAM. Successfully re-established contact with SETI, ...which _technically_ runs fine.
              Message 6 of 30 , Nov 18, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                I've a new 2-something GHz dual-core Athlon machine now, with 1-GB of
                RAM. Successfully re-established contact with SETI, ...which
                _technically_ runs fine. The WU credits are really piling up. ;)

                BUT... I have 3-1/2 major(?) problems now:

                (1) After a few days of giving me my usual 3-4 WU, SETI suddenly changed
                its ways! It saw my changed set-up?
                Certainly it gave me a new (2nd!) acct# and (2nd?) host CPID#.
                That's reflected in the WU-monitor text below: The (usual) 2nd host now
                *never* has the same credit as the first, and rarely increases. It used
                to change in lock-step with the first.

                (1a) It seems now *resolutely* to give me *no more* than 1-2 WU, almost
                always after I've "run dry" (fast machine). So I spend sometimes
                overnight spinning my wheels so to speak. My client has nothing to do,
                and SETI won't send anything. Shut-down/Reboot sometimes helps.

                What's wrong, and how might I fix it? Please?

                (2) The second problem is with the JBSWU monitor? Look at the output
                below (from shortly ago). Usually my WU completion is c.6hrs (+/-).
                Note the 4-hour "time to go" vs the 54-hour "Est. Total time".
                That's with *one* WU and *nothing* queued. *Some*thing's wrong, is it not?

                ___________________________________________________________
                Host: localhost

                Project: SETI@home

                WU: 21fe07aa.26517.7025.10.6.130

                Percentage done : 85.60%
                CPU time : 15254 04:14:14
                Time to go (Frm 2): 15469 04:17:49
                Est. Total time : 196964 54:42:44

                Queued WU's : 0
                Next benchmark : 1 day 20:45:10

                Credits as of 11-18-07 20:19:44
                Total Average
                WD Loughman : 25717.00 128.25
                Host 3994210 : 674.00 49.39
                ___________________________________________________________


                (3) This one's possibly from the SETI Client itself. Maybe something
                about the dual-core CPU. Yuri?
                The Client always was a cycles-hog. On my old slow 1-CPU machine, it
                gave me occasional minor problems. But always I could run say, Mozilla,
                without serious slow-downs.
                NOW, most often I have to *shut down SETI* to allow Mozilla
                acceptable speed. Sometimes it *cr-a-a-a-awls*. Eh?? With 2-something
                GHz, and a GB of RAM???

                What's this about, and can it be fixed? Please?? Yuri?
                This all is under eCS-1.2R, fully updated.

                - Bill, ...Grateful for any suggestions.

                --
                WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
              • Rodney Pont
                ... Congratulations as I drool over your machine :-)) ... Is it an additional machine? It should be seen as an additional machine if so and the two won t be in
                Message 7 of 30 , Nov 18, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 21:31:24 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:

                  >I've a new 2-something GHz dual-core Athlon machine now, with 1-GB of
                  >RAM. Successfully re-established contact with SETI, ...which
                  >_technically_ runs fine. The WU credits are really piling up. ;)

                  Congratulations as I drool over your machine :-))

                  >(1) After a few days of giving me my usual 3-4 WU, SETI suddenly changed
                  >its ways! It saw my changed set-up?
                  > Certainly it gave me a new (2nd!) acct# and (2nd?) host CPID#.
                  >That's reflected in the WU-monitor text below: The (usual) 2nd host now
                  >*never* has the same credit as the first, and rarely increases. It used
                  >to change in lock-step with the first.

                  Is it an additional machine? It should be seen as an additional machine
                  if so and the two won't be in step once Seti notices. Even if you have
                  retired your old machine Seti may well notice it's a new one and if it
                  gives you a new CPU id you are stuck with it unless it allows you to
                  merge hosts.

                  >(1a) It seems now *resolutely* to give me *no more* than 1-2 WU, almost
                  >always after I've "run dry" (fast machine). So I spend sometimes
                  >overnight spinning my wheels so to speak. My client has nothing to do,
                  >and SETI won't send anything. Shut-down/Reboot sometimes helps.
                  >
                  >What's wrong, and how might I fix it? Please?

                  What are your settings at Seti? It may be that Seti hasn't realised how
                  fast this machine is yet and you are only allowing it to connect, say
                  once a day, and it isn't getting enough workunits. Try setting it to
                  connect to the internet every 0.2 days for a while.

                  >(2) The second problem is with the JBSWU monitor? Look at the output
                  >below (from shortly ago). Usually my WU completion is c.6hrs (+/-).
                  > Note the 4-hour "time to go" vs the 54-hour "Est. Total time".
                  >That's with *one* WU and *nothing* queued. *Some*thing's wrong, is it not?

                  This is simply because it has the benchmark results from your old
                  machine and doesn't realise how fast this one is. Give it time and it
                  should sort itself out. There is a setting in one of the files that has
                  something to do with this but I can't remember which one but time (may
                  take a few weeks) should sort it.

                  >(3) This one's possibly from the SETI Client itself. Maybe something
                  >about the dual-core CPU. Yuri?
                  > The Client always was a cycles-hog. On my old slow 1-CPU machine, it
                  >gave me occasional minor problems. But always I could run say, Mozilla,
                  > without serious slow-downs.
                  > NOW, most often I have to *shut down SETI* to allow Mozilla
                  >acceptable speed. Sometimes it *cr-a-a-a-awls*. Eh?? With 2-something
                  >GHz, and a GB of RAM???

                  I had problems with the client when I wanted to record from my TV card
                  and paused Seti. I recently noticed a Boinc Client update at
                  http://web.os2power.com/yuri/SetiAtHome and downloaded this. It looks
                  as though it's fixed the problem for me. I suggest you try it.

                  --
                  Regards - Rodney Pont
                  E-mail by PMMail - yhlisto4@...

                  really weird out of context words courtesy of PMMail's spellchecker
                • WD Loughman
                  Rodney, thank you. ... [ snip ] ... Just one single machine, through all the years I ve been running SETIatHome. My system now is on its third physical
                  Message 8 of 30 , Nov 19, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Rodney, thank you.

                    Rodney Pont wrote:
                    > On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 21:31:24 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:
                    >>I've a new 2-something GHz dual-core Athlon machine now, with 1-GB of
                    >>RAM.
                    [ snip ]
                    >>(1) After a few days of giving me my usual 3-4 WU, SETI suddenly changed
                    >>its ways! It saw my changed set-up?
                    >> Certainly it gave me a new (2nd!) acct# and (2nd?) host CPID#.
                    >>That's reflected in the WU-monitor text below: The (usual) 2nd host now
                    >>*never* has the same credit as the first, and rarely increases. It used
                    >>to change in lock-step with the first.
                    >
                    > Is it an additional machine? It should be seen as an additional machine
                    > if so and the two won't be in step once Seti notices. Even if you have
                    > retired your old machine Seti may well notice it's a new one and if it
                    > gives you a new CPU id you are stuck with it unless it allows you to
                    > merge hosts.

                    Just one single machine, through all the years I've been running SETIatHome.
                    My "system" now is on its third physical machine and fourth(!) OS
                    update. That's since leaving Warp-3 and going to vanilla Warp-4.50 ;)

                    >
                    >>(1a) It seems now *resolutely* to give me *no more* than 1-2 WU, almost
                    >>always after I've "run dry" (fast machine). So I spend sometimes
                    >>overnight spinning my wheels so to speak. My client has nothing to do,
                    >>and SETI won't send anything. Shut-down/Reboot sometimes helps.
                    >>
                    >>What's wrong, and how might I fix it? Please?

                    NEW today: After changing one profile entry last night (see below).
                    (1) The "2nd account" now displays "zero" credits;
                    (2) I have 2 WU in process and 1 queued. Wheee! ??

                    >
                    > What are your settings at Seti?

                    Oops here. I *had* "every [0.25] days" as contact frequency, for a very
                    long time. Somehow (by me? 'pilot error'?) it had gotten changed to [0]
                    within the last few weeks. Last night I changed it back.

                    > It may be that Seti hasn't realised how
                    > fast this machine is yet and you are only allowing it to connect, say
                    > once a day, and it isn't getting enough workunits. Try setting it to
                    > connect to the internet every 0.2 days for a while.

                    Did that last night. Thanks for the heads-up.

                    On t'other hand, SETI *knows* what I've got. *It* tells me I have this,
                    every time I re-invoke it:
                    "2007-11-19 14:41:46 [---] Processor: 2 Advanced Micro Devices AMD
                    Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4600+"
                    That was today, only a bit ago; but it's *been showing that* for some
                    time now.

                    >
                    >>(2) The second problem is with the JBSWU monitor? Look at the output
                    >>below (from shortly ago). Usually my WU completion is c.6hrs (+/-).
                    >> Note the 4-hour "time to go" vs the 54-hour "Est. Total time".
                    >>That's with *one* WU and *nothing* queued. *Some*thing's wrong, is it not?
                    >
                    > This is simply because it has the benchmark results from your old
                    > machine and doesn't realise how fast this one is. Give it time and it
                    > should sort itself out. There is a setting in one of the files that has
                    > something to do with this but I can't remember which one but time (may
                    > take a few weeks) should sort it.

                    It's been running benchmarks every 4-5 days for the last month!

                    >
                    >>(3) This one's possibly from the SETI Client itself. Maybe something
                    >>about the dual-core CPU. Yuri?
                    >> The Client always was a cycles-hog. On my old slow 1-CPU machine, it
                    >>gave me occasional minor problems. But always I could run say, Mozilla,
                    >> without serious slow-downs.
                    >> NOW, most often I have to *shut down SETI* to allow Mozilla
                    >>acceptable speed. Sometimes it *cr-a-a-a-awls*. Eh?? With 2-something
                    >>GHz, and a GB of RAM???
                    >
                    > I had problems with the client when I wanted to record from my TV card
                    > and paused Seti. I recently noticed a Boinc Client update at
                    > http://web.os2power.com/yuri/SetiAtHome and downloaded this. It looks
                    > as though it's fixed the problem for me. I suggest you try it.

                    Heh! Didn't know about that. Was it announced here? I've record in my
                    "saved email" archives.

                    ANY way..., I got it, did it, and am back up-and-running. It'll be
                    awhile before I'll "see" what it's done for me.

                    Thanks for the heads-up!

                    Before I shut down, I noticed the SETI messages included "The project is
                    down", repeated twice.

                    _UH-OH!!!!_ Just looked and JSBWU monitor shows:
                    ____________________________________________________
                    Host: localhost

                    Project: SETI@home

                    WU: 21fe07ac.14115.4571.11.6.157

                    Percentage done : 91.91%
                    CPU time : 13104 03:38:24
                    Time to go (Frm 2): 6881 01:54:41
                    Est. Total time : 155783 43:16:23

                    Queued WU's : 0
                    Pending report : 1
                    Next benchmark : 1 day 01:58:10

                    Credits as of 11-19-07 15:07:58
                    Total Average
                    WD Loughman : 0.00 0.00 <--- UH-OH!!
                    Host 3994210 : 811.04 61.68
                    ____________________________________________________

                    - Bill

                    --
                    WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                    http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                  • WD Loughman
                    ... [ and snip some more ] ... Appears already to have smoothed-out whatever the problems were. Everything s really *snappy* now. Despite all at once
                    Message 9 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      WD Loughman wrote:
                      > Rodney, thank you.
                      >
                      > Rodney Pont wrote:
                      >>On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 21:31:24 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:
                      >>
                      >>>I've a new 2-something GHz dual-core Athlon machine now, with 1-GB of
                      >>>RAM.
                      >
                      > [ snip ]
                      [ and snip some more ]
                      >>I had problems with the client when I wanted to record from my TV card
                      >>and paused Seti. I recently noticed a Boinc Client update at
                      >>http://web.os2power.com/yuri/SetiAtHome and downloaded this. It looks
                      >>as though it's fixed the problem for me. I suggest you try it.
                      >
                      > Heh! Didn't know about that. Was it announced here? I've record in my
                      > "saved email" archives.
                      >
                      > ANY way..., I got it, did it, and am back up-and-running. It'll be
                      > awhile before I'll "see" what it's done for me.

                      Appears already to have smoothed-out whatever the problems were.
                      Everything's really *snappy* now. Despite "all at once" running
                      BOINC/SETI, Mozilla, auto-downloading apps' updates, and doing big-image
                      edits. All snappy; ...no hiccups.

                      [ snip ]
                      > _UH-OH!!!!_ Just looked and JSBWU monitor shows:
                      > ____________________________________________________
                      > Host: localhost
                      [ snip ]
                      > Credits as of 11-19-07 15:07:58
                      > Total Average
                      > WD Loughman : 0.00 0.00 <--- UH-OH!!
                      > Host 3994210 : 811.04 61.68
                      > ____________________________________________________

                      The main entry's now fixed (non-zero), and tracking as it should. The
                      BOINC site reflects this as well. I didn't do anything; BOINC did it?

                      That "2nd" Host 3994210 actually is shown by the BOINC site as being one
                      the two cores in my dual-core processor, with separate accounting!
                      Instead of my machine *sharing* its load *among* the cores, BOINC
                      seems to have convinced the CPU to *split* the chores *between* the
                      cores. Each core is running a separate WU - it looks like.

                      I'm still not getting more than two WU at a time. That is, *rarely* do
                      I have as many as *one* WU queued. So there's a certain amount of CPU
                      power going begging, 'cause SETI/BOINC isn't keeping up with me.

                      Do you think it would help to cut the "connect interval" even lower - to
                      maybe 0.1 or 0.15 days (instead of 0.2 or 0.25)??

                      - Bill

                      --
                      WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                      http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                    • John Small
                      ** Reply to message from WD Loughman on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 00:58:17 -0800 ... I think you going in the wrong direction on this. If you
                      Message 10 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        ** Reply to message from WD Loughman <wdloughman@...> on Wed, 21 Nov
                        2007 00:58:17 -0800


                        >WD Loughman wrote:

                        >I'm still not getting more than two WU at a time. That is, *rarely* do
                        >I have as many as *one* WU queued. So there's a certain amount of CPU
                        >power going begging, 'cause SETI/BOINC isn't keeping up with me.
                        >
                        >Do you think it would help to cut the "connect interval" even lower - to
                        >maybe 0.1 or 0.15 days (instead of 0.2 or 0.25)??

                        I think you going in the wrong direction on this. If you want more queued WU's
                        then you have to tell the software that there are LONGER periods of time
                        between connections to the Internet. This way it will queue up more work to
                        keep it busy during the time you are not connected.

                        By having the connect interval set to 0.2 you are telling the Seti software:
                        "Don't bother queuing up more than 0.2 days worth of work because you'll be
                        able to get more work before you run out."

                        However the reality is that the servers do not always have WU's to assign when
                        the clients ask for them. So if you want to "keep busy" then you should
                        overstate your interval.

                        I have my interval set to 8 days even though I rarely go more than 24 hours
                        without being online (Yes, I do still use dial-up!?). I currently have about
                        200 hours of work queued up.

                        So increase, not decrease, your interval to get more queued WU's.

                        --
                        John Small
                      • Andreas Ludwig
                        ... That s correct. Same thing happens here for the last 2 years - with 2 physical CPUs that is ;o) Cheers Andreas -- Andreas Ludwig Kitsilano, Vancouver, BC
                        Message 11 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 00:58:17 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:

                          >Each core is running a separate WU - it looks like.

                          That's correct. Same thing happens here for the last 2 years - with 2 physical
                          CPUs that is ;o)

                          Cheers
                          Andreas

                          --

                          Andreas Ludwig
                          Kitsilano, Vancouver, BC
                          using PMMail/2 on eComStation 1.2MR on a Dual Opteron 244
                          http://Andreas-Ludwig.info
                        • David Raison
                          ... Two reasons I know of for this: 1. The idea is that each WU can run (as much as possible) in the onchip cache of a single CPU. If one unit were split
                          Message 12 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 07:16:12 -0800 (PST), Andreas Ludwig wrote:

                            >That's correct. Same thing happens here for the last 2 years - with 2 physical
                            >CPUs that is ;o)

                            Two reasons I know of for this:
                            1. The idea is that each WU can run (as much as possible) in the onchip cache of a single CPU.
                            If one unit were split between two (or more CPUs) it would have to keep migrating from one chip cache to another - negating the benefit of that cache.
                            2. The WU algorithm would have to be made multi-threaded to benefit from the extra CPUs - which is in itself a non-trivial task :)


                            Rgds.
                            David Raison.
                            Hampshire, UK
                          • Rodney Pont
                            ... I m glad it s not just me seeing things improving on ,my computer then ... I ve got a dual processor system and it does two work units at a time and only
                            Message 13 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 00:58:17 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:

                              >>>I had problems with the client when I wanted to record from my TV card
                              >>>and paused Seti. I recently noticed a Boinc Client update at
                              >>>http://web.os2power.com/yuri/SetiAtHome and downloaded this. It looks
                              >>>as though it's fixed the problem for me. I suggest you try it.
                              >>
                              >> Heh! Didn't know about that. Was it announced here? I've record in my
                              >> "saved email" archives.
                              >>
                              >> ANY way..., I got it, did it, and am back up-and-running. It'll be
                              >> awhile before I'll "see" what it's done for me.
                              >
                              >Appears already to have smoothed-out whatever the problems were.
                              >Everything's really *snappy* now. Despite "all at once" running
                              >BOINC/SETI, Mozilla, auto-downloading apps' updates, and doing big-image
                              >edits. All snappy; ...no hiccups.

                              I'm glad it's not just me seeing things improving on ,my computer then
                              :-)

                              >That "2nd" Host 3994210 actually is shown by the BOINC site as being one
                              >the two cores in my dual-core processor, with separate accounting!
                              > Instead of my machine *sharing* its load *among* the cores, BOINC
                              >seems to have convinced the CPU to *split* the chores *between* the
                              >cores. Each core is running a separate WU - it looks like.

                              I've got a dual processor system and it does two work units at a time
                              and only shows up as 1 machine on the Seti stats page. It's easier to
                              run a work unit on each processor than try to break the calculations
                              for one unit into multiple threads I suspect.

                              >I'm still not getting more than two WU at a time. That is, *rarely* do
                              >I have as many as *one* WU queued. So there's a certain amount of CPU
                              >power going begging, 'cause SETI/BOINC isn't keeping up with me.
                              >
                              >Do you think it would help to cut the "connect interval" even lower - to
                              >maybe 0.1 or 0.15 days (instead of 0.2 or 0.25)??

                              No, as John says if you extend the connect interval you will get more
                              work when it does connect. I suggested reducing it to see if the system
                              then connected more often since you were running out of work and it
                              sounded as though your system wasn't even attempting to connect.

                              Boincmenu.cmd has an option to (U)pdate and that will force Boinc to
                              connect and perform any transfers. If you run this check that the
                              Network mode is auto, run mode should be auto too. Have you restricted
                              when it's allowed to connect to the internet?

                              I run with a connect interval of 5 days and it does seem to give me
                              about 5 days of work so I can just get through the long outages and
                              don't run out of work very often.

                              --
                              Regards - Rodney Pont
                              E-mail by PMMail - yhlisto4@...

                              really weird out of context words courtesy of PMMail's spellchecker
                            • John Small
                              ** Reply to message from David Raison on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:39:05 +0000 ... Still working with a single processor system I have no
                              Message 14 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                              • 0 Attachment
                                ** Reply to message from "David Raison" <djr@...> on Wed, 21 Nov 2007
                                15:39:05 +0000


                                >On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 07:16:12 -0800 (PST), Andreas Ludwig wrote:
                                >
                                >>That's correct. Same thing happens here for the last 2 years - with 2 physical
                                >>CPUs that is ;o)
                                >
                                >Two reasons I know of for this:
                                >1. The idea is that each WU can run (as much as possible) in the onchip cache of a single CPU.
                                >If one unit were split between two (or more CPUs) it would have to keep
                                >migrating from one chip cache to another - negating the benefit of that cache.
                                >2. The WU algorithm would have to be made multi-threaded to benefit from the
                                >extra CPUs - which is in itself a non-trivial task :)

                                Still working with a single processor system I have no experience in this
                                matter. But it looks like if you go to
                                <http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/prefs.php?subset=global> and then click on
                                "Edit Preferences" there is a setting "On multiprocessors, use at most x
                                processors" which looks like you can control the number of processors used by
                                Seti.

                                --
                                John Small
                              • Andreas Ludwig
                                ... physical ... of a single CPU. ... migrating from one chip cache to another - negating the benefit of that cache. ... extra CPUs - which is in itself a
                                Message 15 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:39:05 +0000, David Raison wrote:

                                  >>That's correct. Same thing happens here for the last 2 years - with 2
                                  physical
                                  >>CPUs that is ;o)
                                  >
                                  >Two reasons I know of for this:
                                  >1. The idea is that each WU can run (as much as possible) in the onchip cache
                                  of a single CPU.
                                  >If one unit were split between two (or more CPUs) it would have to keep
                                  migrating from one chip cache to another - negating the benefit of that cache.
                                  >2. The WU algorithm would have to be made multi-threaded to benefit from the
                                  extra CPUs - which is in itself a non-trivial task :)

                                  And I completely agree that this is how it should be done. I just wanted to
                                  point out that it has always been that way.

                                  Cheers
                                  Andreas

                                  (Happy camper with SETI on his dual Opteron - which was once a pretty
                                  impressive workstation ;o)


                                  --

                                  Andreas Ludwig
                                  Kitsilano, Vancouver, BC
                                  using PMMail/2 on eComStation 1.2MR on a Dual Opteron 244
                                  http://Andreas-Ludwig.info
                                • WD Loughman
                                  ... John, Rodney, ...others : I hear you. BUT... At the approximate time of my original queries the interval *had* been set (for a year-plus) at 6 days.
                                  Message 16 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    John Small wrote:
                                    > ** Reply to message from WD Loughman <wdloughman@...> on Wed, 21 Nov
                                    > 2007 00:58:17 -0800
                                    >
                                    >>WD Loughman wrote:
                                    >>I'm still not getting more than two WU at a time. That is, *rarely* do
                                    >>I have as many as *one* WU queued. So there's a certain amount of CPU
                                    >>power going begging, 'cause SETI/BOINC isn't keeping up with me.
                                    >>
                                    >>Do you think it would help to cut the "connect interval" even lower - to
                                    >>maybe 0.1 or 0.15 days (instead of 0.2 or 0.25)??
                                    >
                                    > I think you going in the wrong direction on this. If you want more queued WU's
                                    > then you have to tell the software that there are LONGER periods of time
                                    > between connections to the Internet. This way it will queue up more work to
                                    > keep it busy during the time you are not connected.
                                    >
                                    > By having the connect interval set to 0.2 you are telling the Seti software:
                                    > "Don't bother queuing up more than 0.2 days worth of work because you'll be
                                    > able to get more work before you run out."
                                    >
                                    > However the reality is that the servers do not always have WU's to assign when
                                    > the clients ask for them. So if you want to "keep busy" then you should
                                    > overstate your interval.
                                    >
                                    > I have my interval set to 8 days even though I rarely go more than 24 hours
                                    > without being online (Yes, I do still use dial-up!?). I currently have about
                                    > 200 hours of work queued up.
                                    >
                                    > So increase, not decrease, your interval to get more queued WU's.
                                    >

                                    John, Rodney, ...others :

                                    I hear you. BUT... At the approximate time of my original queries the
                                    interval *had* been set (for a year-plus) at 6 days. When I first
                                    brought this really-fast machine online, it was 6 days. I wasn't
                                    getting enough (some times *no*) WUs.
                                    When Rodney talked about re-setting the interval, I found it had
                                    somehow "become" 0, =zero. So I reset it to 0.2(x).

                                    I'm *still* not getting enough to keep the machine busy reliably.

                                    6-days or 0.2 days -- it seems not to matter.

                                    I wonder how my machine speed "interacts" with the interval.
                                    So many of my WU are finished in well under 6-hours, sometimes as
                                    little as 1-plus hours. With *never* more than 2 queued, more often
                                    only one or none, I'm guaranteed to run out of work often.
                                    If I use a 6-day interval, and I "usually" have no WUs queued, I'm
                                    still guaranteed to run out of work frequently. ...??

                                    LogView allows me to monitor stdoutdae.txt and stderrdae.txt on-the-fly.
                                    I see SETI itself is having troubles. Is it just that? Or my
                                    interval setting? (What !will! work?) Or my machine, somehow?

                                    - Bill

                                    --
                                    WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                    http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                  • Rodney Pont
                                    ... If you go into your account at Seti what s the turn around time like? It may still be high from the original slower machine ... The longer the better for
                                    Message 17 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:42:25 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:

                                      >John, Rodney, ...others :
                                      >
                                      >I hear you. BUT... At the approximate time of my original queries the
                                      >interval *had* been set (for a year-plus) at 6 days. When I first
                                      >brought this really-fast machine online, it was 6 days. I wasn't
                                      >getting enough (some times *no*) WUs.
                                      > When Rodney talked about re-setting the interval, I found it had
                                      >somehow "become" 0, =zero. So I reset it to 0.2(x).

                                      If you go into your account at Seti what's the turn around time like?
                                      It may still be high from the original slower machine

                                      >I'm *still* not getting enough to keep the machine busy reliably.
                                      >
                                      >6-days or 0.2 days -- it seems not to matter.

                                      The longer the better for the number of units you download. I hoped
                                      trying a shorter time would lower the min_rpc_time (which I couldn't
                                      remember when I posted).

                                      >LogView allows me to monitor stdoutdae.txt and stderrdae.txt on-the-fly.
                                      > I see SETI itself is having troubles. Is it just that? Or my
                                      >interval setting? (What !will! work?) Or my machine, somehow?

                                      I'm not seeing any troubles at Seti myself. If you are having trouble
                                      downloading it will increase the min_rpc_time each time a download
                                      attempt fails (I think - don't shoot me if I've got that wrong :-))

                                      Look at client_state.xml (stop your seti client before changing
                                      anything). Min_rpc_time controls how long the wait is for the client to
                                      contact Seti (unless you force an update). You can try lowering this
                                      right down.

                                      <min_rpc_time>1195675899.305000</min_rpc_time>

                                      Duration correction factor affects how long the client thinks it's
                                      going to take to complete a workunit. I've had it go up to several
                                      hundred and it then thought a unit would take 80 days at one point. I
                                      lowered this to about 1 and restarted seti. After doing for the third
                                      time it was giving more reasonable estimates. I haven't worked out how
                                      these are updated. They are saved in the seti site but sometimes seem
                                      to be gotten from the client and sent there and at others it seems that
                                      they are downloaded from the site and the file is updated with those
                                      values. I just checked them and changed them every day and after aboiut
                                      three days my values seemed to stick.

                                      <duration_correction_factor>1.111232</duration_correction_factor>

                                      There are other things in there that affect the time to completion
                                      estimates but I've not played with them. It's got these values from
                                      your old installation when you migrated and it will take some time for
                                      them to reflect what the new machine can do.
                                      --
                                      Regards - Rodney Pont
                                      E-mail by PMMail - yhlisto4@...

                                      really weird out of context words courtesy of PMMail's spellchecker
                                    • WD Loughman
                                      ... [ snip ] ... No. ... As I mentioned a bit ago, it seems to make no difference. 6-days or 0.2(x)-days is all the same -- little or nothing queued and
                                      Message 18 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Rodney Pont wrote:
                                        > On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 00:58:17 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:
                                        [ snip ]
                                        >>Do you think it would help to cut the "connect interval" even lower - to
                                        >>maybe 0.1 or 0.15 days (instead of 0.2 or 0.25)??
                                        >
                                        > No, as John says if you extend the connect interval you will get more
                                        > work when it does connect. I suggested reducing it to see if the system
                                        > then connected more often since you were running out of work and it
                                        > sounded as though your system wasn't even attempting to connect.
                                        >
                                        > Boincmenu.cmd has an option to (U)pdate and that will force Boinc to
                                        > connect and perform any transfers. If you run this check that the
                                        > Network mode is auto, run mode should be auto too. Have you restricted
                                        > when it's allowed to connect to the internet?

                                        No.

                                        >
                                        > I run with a connect interval of 5 days and it does seem to give me
                                        > about 5 days of work so I can just get through the long outages and
                                        > don't run out of work very often.

                                        As I mentioned a bit ago, it seems to make no difference. 6-days or
                                        0.2(x)-days is all the same -- little or nothing queued and (often)
                                        longish waits before I get more work.

                                        I'll play with boincmenu - haven't used it before now.

                                        NB and FWIW:
                                        _____________________________________________________
                                        11-21-2007 c.12:45 hrs ex JBSWU :

                                        WU: 01dc06ab.25143.2526.7.6.213

                                        Percentage done : 62.55% <--
                                        CPU time : 1304 00:21:44 <--
                                        Time to go (Frm 2): 3479 00:57:59
                                        Est. Total time : 16496 04:34:56
                                        Est. Queue time : 16496 04:34:56

                                        Queued WU's : 0
                                        Pending downloads : 1
                                        Pending report : 1
                                        Next benchmark : 4 days 04:07:30
                                        _____________________________________________________
                                        11-21-2007 c.13:05 hrs ex JBSWU :

                                        WU: 01dc06aa.2462.11933.11.6.118

                                        Percentage done : 1.64% <--
                                        CPU time : 91 00:01:31 <--
                                        Time to go (Frm 2): 10850 03:00:50
                                        Est. Total time : 16496 04:34:56

                                        Queued WU's : 0
                                        Pending report : 1
                                        Next benchmark : 4 days 03:59:20

                                        _____________________________________________________

                                        SETI is feeding me *one* WU at a time...

                                        I'm off to rest interval to 6-days, as it had been "before"...

                                        - Bill

                                        --
                                        WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                        http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                      • WD Loughman
                                        ... FWIW, It might default to 2? It s been 2 for me since forever, and I ve never touched it. - Bill -- WD Bill Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                        Message 19 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          John Small wrote:
                                          > ** Reply to message from "David Raison" <djr@...> on Wed, 21 Nov 2007
                                          > 15:39:05 +0000
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >>On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 07:16:12 -0800 (PST), Andreas Ludwig wrote:
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          >>>That's correct. Same thing happens here for the last 2 years - with 2 physical
                                          >>>CPUs that is ;o)
                                          >>
                                          >>Two reasons I know of for this:
                                          >>1. The idea is that each WU can run (as much as possible) in the onchip cache of a single CPU.
                                          >>If one unit were split between two (or more CPUs) it would have to keep
                                          >>migrating from one chip cache to another - negating the benefit of that cache.
                                          >>2. The WU algorithm would have to be made multi-threaded to benefit from the
                                          >>extra CPUs - which is in itself a non-trivial task :)
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Still working with a single processor system I have no experience in this
                                          > matter. But it looks like if you go to
                                          > <http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/prefs.php?subset=global> and then click on
                                          > "Edit Preferences" there is a setting "On multiprocessors, use at most x
                                          > processors" which looks like you can control the number of processors used by
                                          > Seti.
                                          >

                                          FWIW, It might default to 2? It's been 2 for me since forever, and I've
                                          never touched it.

                                          - Bill

                                          --
                                          WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                          http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                        • Rodney Pont
                                          ... Typical, I post that and then see a dowload that s really slow. Looking at the server status http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_status.html they don t have
                                          Message 20 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:09:56 +0000 (GMT), Rodney Pont wrote:

                                            >I'm not seeing any troubles at Seti myself.

                                            Typical, I post that and then see a dowload that's really slow. Looking
                                            at the server status http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_status.html
                                            they don't have many workunits ready to download. Their web site also
                                            seems very slow at the moment.

                                            It may just be that you are seeing the results of problems they are
                                            having and don't have a queue of work to buffer you. Looking at the
                                            technical news they had a big cleanout of the server closet yesterday
                                            and nearly ran out of workunits as a result.

                                            --
                                            Regards - Rodney Pont
                                            E-mail by PMMail - yhlisto4@...

                                            really weird out of context words courtesy of PMMail's spellchecker
                                          • Bob
                                            ** Reply to message from WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net |SetiAtHome| on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:42:25 -0800 ... In one of the XML control files
                                            Message 21 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net |SetiAtHome|"
                                              <...> on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:42:25 -0800

                                              > I hear you. BUT... At the approximate time of my original queries the
                                              > interval *had* been set (for a year-plus) at 6 days. When I first
                                              > brought this really-fast machine online, it was 6 days. I wasn't
                                              > getting enough (some times *no*) WUs.
                                              > When Rodney talked about re-setting the interval, I found it had
                                              > somehow "become" 0, =zero. So I reset it to 0.2(x).
                                              >
                                              > I'm *still* not getting enough to keep the machine busy reliably.
                                              >
                                              > 6-days or 0.2 days -- it seems not to matter.

                                              In one of the XML control files for seti is a <time_statistics> (or something
                                              similar I currently do not have access to seti file as I am not home). Some
                                              times this get set incorrectly and the server will not download files because
                                              it does not think they will finish on time. Find the time setting and post
                                              them here.

                                              --
                                              Robert Blair
                                            • WD Loughman
                                              ... I would, if I could: :( _______________________________________________________ [e: boinc5]ffind /s /v /t time_statistics *.xml 0 lines in 0 files
                                              Message 22 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Bob wrote:
                                                > ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net |SetiAtHome|"
                                                > <...> on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:42:25 -0800
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >>I hear you. BUT... At the approximate time of my original queries the
                                                >>interval *had* been set (for a year-plus) at 6 days. When I first
                                                >>brought this really-fast machine online, it was 6 days. I wasn't
                                                >>getting enough (some times *no*) WUs.
                                                >> When Rodney talked about re-setting the interval, I found it had
                                                >>somehow "become" 0, =zero. So I reset it to 0.2(x).
                                                >>
                                                >>I'm *still* not getting enough to keep the machine busy reliably.
                                                >>
                                                >>6-days or 0.2 days -- it seems not to matter.
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > In one of the XML control files for seti is a <time_statistics> (or something
                                                > similar I currently do not have access to seti file as I am not home). Some
                                                > times this get set incorrectly and the server will not download files because
                                                > it does not think they will finish on time. Find the time setting and post
                                                > them here.
                                                >

                                                I would, if I could: :(
                                                _______________________________________________________

                                                [e:\boinc5]ffind /s /v /t"time_statistics" *.xml

                                                0 lines in 0 files

                                                [e:\boinc5]ffind /s /v /t"time_statistics" *.*

                                                0 lines in 0 files

                                                _______________________________________________________

                                                I tried the same searches on "time" alone and "statistics" alone, but
                                                found nothing useful. [NB: "seti" is a sub-dir of "boinc5"]

                                                - Bill

                                                --
                                                WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                                http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                              • WD Loughman
                                                ... [ snip ] ... Lotsa food for thought there. Thanks! In the meantime, just now, I don t know if this is Wheeee or UH-oh , but:
                                                Message 23 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Rodney Pont wrote:
                                                  > On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:42:25 -0800, WD Loughman wrote:
                                                  >>John, Rodney, ...others :
                                                  >>
                                                  >>I hear you. BUT... At the approximate time of my original queries the
                                                  >>interval *had* been set (for a year-plus) at 6 days.
                                                  [ snip ]
                                                  >>LogView allows me to monitor stdoutdae.txt and stderrdae.txt on-the-fly.
                                                  >> I see SETI itself is having troubles. Is it just that? Or my
                                                  >>interval setting? (What !will! work?) Or my machine, somehow?
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > I'm not seeing any troubles at Seti myself. If you are having trouble
                                                  > downloading it will increase the min_rpc_time each time a download
                                                  > attempt fails (I think - don't shoot me if I've got that wrong :-))
                                                  >
                                                  > Look at client_state.xml (stop your seti client before changing
                                                  > anything). Min_rpc_time controls how long the wait is for the client to
                                                  > contact Seti (unless you force an update). You can try lowering this
                                                  > right down.
                                                  >
                                                  > <min_rpc_time>1195675899.305000</min_rpc_time>
                                                  >
                                                  > Duration correction factor affects how long the client thinks it's
                                                  > going to take to complete a workunit. I've had it go up to several
                                                  > hundred and it then thought a unit would take 80 days at one point. I
                                                  > lowered this to about 1 and restarted seti. After doing for the third
                                                  > time it was giving more reasonable estimates. I haven't worked out how
                                                  > these are updated. They are saved in the seti site but sometimes seem
                                                  > to be gotten from the client and sent there and at others it seems that
                                                  > they are downloaded from the site and the file is updated with those
                                                  > values. I just checked them and changed them every day and after aboiut
                                                  > three days my values seemed to stick.
                                                  >
                                                  > <duration_correction_factor>1.111232</duration_correction_factor>
                                                  >
                                                  > There are other things in there that affect the time to completion
                                                  > estimates but I've not played with them. It's got these values from
                                                  > your old installation when you migrated and it will take some time for
                                                  > them to reflect what the new machine can do.

                                                  Lotsa food for thought there. Thanks!

                                                  In the meantime, just now, I don't know if this is "Wheeee" or "UH-oh", but:
                                                  ________________________________________________________
                                                  11-21-07 11:36 375,299 124 01dc06ab.25143.2526.7.6.213
                                                  11-21-07 11:39 21,793 124 01dc06ab.25143.2526.7.6.213_0_0
                                                  11-21-07 13:04 375,147 124 01dc06aa.2462.11933.11.6.118
                                                  11-21-07 13:06 21,632 124
                                                  01dc06aa.2462.11933.11.6.118_0_0
                                                  11-21-07 14:03 375,296 124 20fe07af.23491.175535.9.6.230
                                                  11-21-07 14:08 0 124 01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.56
                                                  11-21-07 14:10 0 124 01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.65
                                                  11-21-07 14:10 375,296 124 21fe07ae.5661.25021.9.6.52
                                                  11-21-07 14:11 0 124 01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.63
                                                  11-21-07 14:12 0 124 01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.34
                                                  11-21-07 14:13 0 124 21fe07ab.17566.139280.9.6.194
                                                  11-21-07 14:14 375,275 124 01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.40
                                                  11-21-07 14:14 0 124 01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.112
                                                  ________________________________________________________

                                                  ...and they're still coming! The floodgates are open fershur.

                                                  Also:
                                                  ________________________________________________________
                                                  WU: 01dc06aa.2462.11933.11.6.118

                                                  Percentage done : 45.05% <--
                                                  CPU time : 2055 00:34:15 <--
                                                  Time to go (Frm 2): 5425 01:30:25
                                                  Est. Total time : 15182 04:13:02
                                                  Est. Queue time : 338336 93:58:56
                                                  Queued WU's : 3
                                                  Suspended : 1
                                                  Pending downloads : 5
                                                  Pending uploads : 1
                                                  Next benchmark : 4 days 02:45:20

                                                  Credits as of 11-21-07 14:02:36
                                                  Total Average
                                                  WD Loughman : 26295.00 159.11
                                                  Host 3994210 : 1208.00 82.13
                                                  ________________________________________________________

                                                  - Bill

                                                  --
                                                  WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                                  http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                                • Bob
                                                  ** Reply to message from WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net |SetiAtHome| on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:53:57 -0800 ... Try searching for
                                                  Message 24 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net |SetiAtHome|"
                                                    <...> on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:53:57 -0800

                                                    > I would, if I could: :(
                                                    > _______________________________________________________
                                                    >
                                                    > [e:\boinc5]ffind /s /v /t"time_statistics" *.xml
                                                    >
                                                    > 0 lines in 0 files

                                                    Try searching for <time in the bonic directories.

                                                    --
                                                    Robert Blair
                                                  • WD Loughman
                                                    ... 11-21-2007 c.1900 hrs [e: boinc5]ffind /s /v /t
                                                    Message 25 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      Bob wrote:
                                                      > ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net |SetiAtHome|"
                                                      > <...> on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:53:57 -0800
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >>I would, if I could: :(
                                                      >>_______________________________________________________
                                                      >>
                                                      >>[e:\boinc5]ffind /s /v /t"time_statistics" *.xml
                                                      >>
                                                      >> 0 lines in 0 files
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > Try searching for <time in the bonic directories.
                                                      >

                                                      11-21-2007 c.1900 hrs

                                                      [e:\boinc5]ffind /s /v /t"<time" *.* > junk
                                                      __________________________________________________________

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\boinc_client.exe
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      <time>%d</time>
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      <time_so_far>%f</time_so_far>
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\boinc_cmd.exe
                                                      /> <persistent_file_xfer> <file_xfer> <num_retries> <first_request_time>
                                                      <next_request_time> <status> <time_so_far> <last_bytes_xferred>
                                                      <file_offset> <xfer_speed> <hostname>
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      </host_info> <timezone> <domain_name> <ip_addr> <host_cpid> <p_ncpus>
                                                      <p_vendor> <p_model> <p_fpops> <p_iops> <p_membw> <p_calculated>
                                                      <os_name> <os_version> <m_nbytes> <m_cache> <m_swap> <d_total> <d_free>
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\client_state.xml
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>
                                                      <time_stats>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\client_state0.xml
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>
                                                      <time_stats>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\client_state_prev.xml
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>
                                                      <time_stats>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\sched_request_setiathome.berkeley.edu.xml
                                                      <time_stats>
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06aa.2462.11933.11.6.118
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 05:49:43 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7428589</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7428589</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.34
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.34_1_0
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.40
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.40_1_0
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.56
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.56_0_0
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.63
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.65
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.65_1_0
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.112
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.14415.7025.15.6.225
                                                      <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 07:02:21 2006</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7933074</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454070.7933074</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\20fe07af.23491.175535.9.6.230
                                                      <time_recorded>Tue Feb 20 21:16:35 2007</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454152.3865163</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454152.3865163</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\21fe07ab.17566.139280.9.6.194
                                                      <time_recorded>Wed Feb 21 19:03:01 2007</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454153.293766</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454153.293766</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ----
                                                      E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\21fe07ae.5661.25021.9.6.52
                                                      <time_recorded>Thu Feb 22 04:35:13 2007</time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd>2454153.6911264</time_recorded_jd>
                                                      <time>2454153.6911264</time>
                                                      [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\seti_boinc.exe
                                                      <time> </time>
                                                      <time_recorded> </time_recorded>
                                                      <time_recorded_jd> </time_recorded_jd>
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      </host_info> <timezone> <domain_name> <ip_addr> <host_cpid> <p_ncpus>
                                                      <p_vendor> <p_model> <p_fpops> <p_iops> <p_membw> <p_calculated>
                                                      <os_name> <os_version> <m_nbytes> <m_cache> <m_swap> <d_total> <d_free>
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\0\init_data.xml
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\1\init_data.xml
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\1\state.sah
                                                      <time>2454070.7794647</time>
                                                      <time>0</time>
                                                      <time>2454070.7794572</time>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\2\init_data.xml
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\3\init_data.xml
                                                      <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\3\state.sah
                                                      <time>2454070.7794258</time>
                                                      <time>0</time>
                                                      <time>2454070.7794488</time>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\include\BOINC\boinc_win.h
                                                      #include <time.h>

                                                      ---- E:\boinc5\lib\libboinc.a
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      </host_info> <timezone> <domain_name> <ip_addr> <host_cpid> <p_ncpus>
                                                      <p_vendor> <p_model> <p_fpops> <p_iops> <p_membw> <p_calculated>
                                                      <os_name> <os_version> <m_nbytes> <m_cache> <m_swap> <d_total> <d_free>
                                                      [ binary code here ]
                                                      <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                      1,731 lines in 32 files
                                                      __________________________________________________________

                                                      Seemed odd, that "<time" was found but "time" [my earlier search] was not.

                                                      So I re-ran " ffind /s /v /t"time" *.* > junk ". It found the above
                                                      and a few more. My bad; I must have been mistaken about running it.
                                                      Gettin' old.

                                                      - Bill

                                                      --
                                                      WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                                      http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                                    • WD Loughman
                                                      ... 11-21-2007 c.1900 hrs [e: boinc5]ffind /s /v /t
                                                      Message 26 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        Bob wrote:
                                                        > ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net |SetiAtHome|"
                                                        > <...> on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:53:57 -0800
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        >>I would, if I could: :(
                                                        >>_______________________________________________________
                                                        >>
                                                        >>[e:\boinc5]ffind /s /v /t"time_statistics" *.xml
                                                        >>
                                                        >> 0 lines in 0 files
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        > Try searching for <time in the bonic directories.
                                                        >

                                                        11-21-2007 c.1900 hrs

                                                        [e:\boinc5]ffind /s /v /t"<time" *.* > junk
                                                        __________________________________________________________

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\boinc_client.exe
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        <time>%d</time>
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        <time_so_far>%f</time_so_far>
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\boinc_cmd.exe
                                                        /> <persistent_file_xfer> <file_xfer> <num_retries> <first_request_time>
                                                        <next_request_time> <status> <time_so_far> <last_bytes_xferred>
                                                        <file_offset> <xfer_speed> <hostname>
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        </host_info> <timezone> <domain_name> <ip_addr> <host_cpid> <p_ncpus>
                                                        <p_vendor> <p_model> <p_fpops> <p_iops> <p_membw> <p_calculated>
                                                        <os_name> <os_version> <m_nbytes> <m_cache> <m_swap> <d_total> <d_free>
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\client_state.xml
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>
                                                        <time_stats>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\client_state0.xml
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>
                                                        <time_stats>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\client_state_prev.xml
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>
                                                        <time_stats>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\sched_request_setiathome.berkeley.edu.xml
                                                        <time_stats>
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06aa.2462.11933.11.6.118
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 05:49:43 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7428589</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7428589</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.34
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.34_1_0
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.40
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.40_1_0
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.56
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.56_0_0
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.63
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.65
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.65_1_0
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.4919.890.12.6.112
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 06:40:55 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7784161</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7784161</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\01dc06ab.14415.7025.15.6.225
                                                        <time_recorded>Fri Dec 1 07:02:21 2006</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454070.7933074</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454070.7933074</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\20fe07af.23491.175535.9.6.230
                                                        <time_recorded>Tue Feb 20 21:16:35 2007</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454152.3865163</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454152.3865163</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\21fe07ab.17566.139280.9.6.194
                                                        <time_recorded>Wed Feb 21 19:03:01 2007</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454153.293766</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454153.293766</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ----
                                                        E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\21fe07ae.5661.25021.9.6.52
                                                        <time_recorded>Thu Feb 22 04:35:13 2007</time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd>2454153.6911264</time_recorded_jd>
                                                        <time>2454153.6911264</time>
                                                        [plus *dozens* of lines like preceding]

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu\seti_boinc.exe
                                                        <time> </time>
                                                        <time_recorded> </time_recorded>
                                                        <time_recorded_jd> </time_recorded_jd>
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        </host_info> <timezone> <domain_name> <ip_addr> <host_cpid> <p_ncpus>
                                                        <p_vendor> <p_model> <p_fpops> <p_iops> <p_membw> <p_calculated>
                                                        <os_name> <os_version> <m_nbytes> <m_cache> <m_swap> <d_total> <d_free>
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\0\init_data.xml
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\1\init_data.xml
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\1\state.sah
                                                        <time>2454070.7794647</time>
                                                        <time>0</time>
                                                        <time>2454070.7794572</time>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\2\init_data.xml
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\3\init_data.xml
                                                        <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\bin\slots\3\state.sah
                                                        <time>2454070.7794258</time>
                                                        <time>0</time>
                                                        <time>2454070.7794488</time>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\include\BOINC\boinc_win.h
                                                        #include <time.h>

                                                        ---- E:\boinc5\lib\libboinc.a
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        </host_info> <timezone> <domain_name> <ip_addr> <host_cpid> <p_ncpus>
                                                        <p_vendor> <p_model> <p_fpops> <p_iops> <p_membw> <p_calculated>
                                                        <os_name> <os_version> <m_nbytes> <m_cache> <m_swap> <d_total> <d_free>
                                                        [ binary code here ]
                                                        <timezone>%d</timezone>

                                                        1,731 lines in 32 files
                                                        __________________________________________________________

                                                        Seemed odd, that "<time" was found but "time" [my earlier search] was not.

                                                        So I re-ran " ffind /s /v /t"time" *.* > junk ". It found the above
                                                        and a few more. My bad; I must have been mistaken about running it.
                                                        Gettin' old.

                                                        - Bill

                                                        --
                                                        WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                                        http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                                      • Bob
                                                        ** Reply to message from WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 19:20:30 -0800 ... This is the file. What is the data between the
                                                        Message 27 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net" on Wed, 21
                                                          Nov 2007 19:20:30 -0800

                                                          > ---- E:\boinc5\bin\sched_request_setiathome.berkeley.edu.xml
                                                          > <time_stats>
                                                          > <timezone>-28800</timezone>

                                                          This is the file. What is the data between the <time_stats> and >
                                                          </time_stats>?

                                                          --
                                                          Robert Blair
                                                        • WD Loughman
                                                          ... 0.578214 -1.000000 0.999826
                                                          Message 28 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            Bob wrote:
                                                            > ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net" on Wed, 21
                                                            > Nov 2007 19:20:30 -0800
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            >>---- E:\boinc5\bin\sched_request_setiathome.berkeley.edu.xml
                                                            >><time_stats>
                                                            >> <timezone>-28800</timezone>
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            > This is the file. What is the data between the <time_stats> and >
                                                            > </time_stats>?
                                                            >

                                                            <time_stats>
                                                            <on_frac>0.578214</on_frac>
                                                            <connected_frac>-1.000000</connected_frac>
                                                            <active_frac>0.999826</active_frac>
                                                            <cpu_efficiency>0.451739</cpu_efficiency>
                                                            </time_stats>

                                                            I'd be grateful if you'd provide an explanation of each line's meaning.
                                                            ...In addition to whatever you advise I do. TIA

                                                            - Bill

                                                            --
                                                            WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                                            http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                                          • Bob
                                                            ** Reply to message from WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:38:10 -0800 First a disclaimer. I have no direct knowledge of the
                                                            Message 29 of 30 , Nov 21, 2007
                                                            • 0 Attachment
                                                              ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net" on Wed, 21
                                                              Nov 2007 21:38:10 -0800

                                                              First a disclaimer. I have no direct knowledge of the internals if Bonic or
                                                              Seti. What I say here is just information I have come by trying to figure out
                                                              why I could not get my computer to keep a backlog of work. I am not home now
                                                              so this is from memory as I don't have access to the computer that runs Bonic.

                                                              I don't know why this data gets garbage in it and I don't how often it gets
                                                              recalculated as it is server data. The <cpu_efficiency> is calculated on the
                                                              client and uploaded to the server.



                                                              > <time_stats>
                                                              > <on_frac>0.578214</on_frac>
                                                              > <connected_frac>-1.000000</connected_frac>
                                                              > <active_frac>0.999826</active_frac>
                                                              > <cpu_efficiency>0.451739</cpu_efficiency>
                                                              > </time_stats>
                                                              >
                                                              > I'd be grateful if you'd provide an explanation of each line's meaning.
                                                              > ...In addition to whatever you advise I do.

                                                              <on_frac> 0.578214 -- this is the percentage of time the computer is doing
                                                              Bonic work.
                                                              <connected_frac> 1.000000 -- I do not know what this is
                                                              <active_frac> 0.999826 -- the percentage of time that seti gets of the
                                                              <on-frac> time
                                                              <cpu_efficiency> 0.451739 -- percentage of the CPU that Bonic gets when it is
                                                              running (on_frac).

                                                              This is information only for the client and is downloaded every time the client
                                                              uploads/downloads work from the server. So the server thinks that Bonic gets
                                                              45% (the idle CPU time) of the 57% of the time Bonic is running, of that time
                                                              it Seti gets 99%. This is not too bad as mine is much worse. Edit your
                                                              profile and set "Computer is connected to the Internet about every" to 10
                                                              (which is max) and see how many work units get download ahead, then adjust so
                                                              that it keeps a reasonable backlog.

                                                              To fix the problem you need to wait until the server recalculates the numbers
                                                              or create a new account and merge your current history to the new account.

                                                              When I first noticed the problem my stats were <on_frac> 0.01 and
                                                              <active_frac> 0.01. With setting "Computer is connected to the Internet about
                                                              every" to 10 days I could not get the server to download any work units except
                                                              for the one being worked on. I have no idea how long this was happening as
                                                              Bonic runs on a server/gateway computer on my home network. I started asking
                                                              questions on this list and other lists and came across some information so I
                                                              have been tracking this data daily when I am at home. After a few months my
                                                              stats went from 1% / 1% / 90% to 30% / 30% / 90%. It has been about 6 months
                                                              since that changed. So with a 10 day connect time I can get the server to
                                                              allow 1 and sometimes 2 extra work units.

                                                              I hope my explanation is clear.

                                                              --
                                                              Robert Blair
                                                            • WD Loughman
                                                              ... [ snip ] ... Hmm. At the moment I seem to be doing OK. Something got fixed, and my machine is really steaming along like there s no tomorrow. ;) I ll
                                                              Message 30 of 30 , Nov 22, 2007
                                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                                Bob wrote:
                                                                > ** Reply to message from "WD Loughman wdloughman-at-earthlink.net" on Wed, 21
                                                                > Nov 2007 21:38:10 -0800
                                                                [ snip ]
                                                                > I don't know why this data gets garbage in it and I don't how often it gets
                                                                > recalculated as it is server data. The <cpu_efficiency> is calculated on the
                                                                > client and uploaded to the server.
                                                                >
                                                                >><time_stats>
                                                                >> <on_frac>0.578214</on_frac>
                                                                >> <connected_frac>-1.000000</connected_frac>
                                                                >> <active_frac>0.999826</active_frac>
                                                                >> <cpu_efficiency>0.451739</cpu_efficiency>
                                                                >></time_stats>
                                                                >>
                                                                >>I'd be grateful if you'd provide an explanation of each line's meaning.
                                                                >> ...In addition to whatever you advise I do.
                                                                >
                                                                > <on_frac> 0.578214 -- this is the percentage of time the computer is doing
                                                                > Bonic work.
                                                                > <connected_frac> 1.000000 -- I do not know what this is
                                                                > <active_frac> 0.999826 -- the percentage of time that seti gets of the
                                                                > <on-frac> time
                                                                > <cpu_efficiency> 0.451739 -- percentage of the CPU that Bonic gets when it is
                                                                > running (on_frac).
                                                                >
                                                                > This is information only for the client and is downloaded every time the client
                                                                > uploads/downloads work from the server. So the server thinks that Bonic gets
                                                                > 45% (the idle CPU time) of the 57% of the time Bonic is running, of that time
                                                                > it Seti gets 99%. This is not too bad as mine is much worse. Edit your
                                                                > profile and set "Computer is connected to the Internet about every" to 10
                                                                > (which is max) and see how many work units get download ahead, then adjust so
                                                                > that it keeps a reasonable backlog.
                                                                >
                                                                > To fix the problem you need to wait until the server recalculates the numbers
                                                                > or create a new account and merge your current history to the new account.

                                                                Hmm. At the moment I seem to be doing OK. Something got fixed, and my
                                                                machine is really steaming along like there's no tomorrow. ;) I'll wait
                                                                until that last sudden flood of WUs (eight at once!) is nearly, er,
                                                                ...dissipated before doing anything more.

                                                                Thanks much for your time and valuable info.

                                                                >
                                                                > When I first noticed the problem my stats were <on_frac> 0.01 and
                                                                > <active_frac> 0.01. With setting "Computer is connected to the Internet about
                                                                > every" to 10 days I could not get the server to download any work units except
                                                                > for the one being worked on. I have no idea how long this was happening as
                                                                > Bonic runs on a server/gateway computer on my home network. I started asking
                                                                > questions on this list and other lists and came across some information so I
                                                                > have been tracking this data daily when I am at home. After a few months my
                                                                > stats went from 1% / 1% / 90% to 30% / 30% / 90%. It has been about 6 months
                                                                > since that changed. So with a 10 day connect time I can get the server to
                                                                > allow 1 and sometimes 2 extra work units.
                                                                >
                                                                > I hope my explanation is clear.
                                                                >

                                                                Plenty clear enough. Thanks!!

                                                                I'll have to spend a little more time (as you did) looking at the *.sah
                                                                files, etc.

                                                                - Bill

                                                                --
                                                                WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA
                                                                http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm
                                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.