Posts by Benjamin Rietveld
|
1)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
And if we DONT run a "FASTER" App.?
(Message 5905)
Posted 4 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: it is per core ps. the ignorance in this thread is really surprising |
|
2)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Ignoranz
(Message 5837)
Posted 3 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: News was posted just today. And i have been very active in the forums resolving any issues that come up. I think this accusation is heavily unfounded. We have not allowed our project to be hijacked. The source code was open and he had every right to do what he did, however we do not recommend it. He helped us immensely in finding bugs and made our program much more efficient. This man is not a bad guy, I would actually consider him a great help. quoted for truth |
|
3)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Server Problems? - currently the U/L one
(Message 5808)
Posted 2 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: That's most likely caused by the servers being overloaded |
|
4)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Server Problems? - currently the U/L one
(Message 5773)
Posted 1 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: I haven't got a workunit or seen work available for hours now. Is that just me or has the workgenerator crashed? |
|
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
parse error on app_info.xml
(Message 5771)
Posted 1 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: BOINC-manager says there's a parse error in the xml, but... That. You can edit it yourself easily using Notepad for example. |
|
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Server Problems? - currently the U/L one
(Message 5766)
Posted 1 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: indeed, and even though the word generator can't keep up we're still doing way way way more crunching than we used to :) |
|
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Server Problems? - currently the U/L one
(Message 5754)
Posted 1 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: I've gotten all kinds of errors today, but at the moment I'm getting 01/11/2008 17:54:40|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: Requested by user. Requesting 876 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks 01/11/2008 17:54:45|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks 01/11/2008 17:54:45|Milkyway@home|Message from server: Server error: can't attach shared memory Also, the feeder and like half of the other stuff is offline? |
|
8)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Credit limits apparently exist ...
(Message 5744)
Posted 1 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: Well I've decided that I would rather have work than credits. Reset one computer and as soon as the other two run out of work going to reset them as well. Would rather have them working instead of waiting for work. That's a pretty strange way of reasoning. You can do a job in five minutes but instead you choose to let it take five hours... The logical thing to do is to do the job in 5 minutes, then do something else useful the other 4 hours 55 minutes, in this case, let it run another project in the time you're waiting for WUs |
|
9)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Credit limits apparently exist ...
(Message 5736)
Posted 1 Nov 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: I agree with him to be honest. If every project would give the exact same credit per second people would chose projects by how interested they are in the science, not, like some are doing now, by which gives most credit |
|
10)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Faster application (links inside)
(Message 5715)
Posted 31 Oct 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: Good for the science you posted this application, shame it kinda ruins keeping track of how much work you're doing (cause you get way too much credit). But of course the science is way more important, so good job! |
|
11)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
I think you made your point !!
(Message 5501)
Posted 17 Oct 2008 by Benjamin Rietveld Post: I really don't see the problem with them running their optimized application as long as it gives the same results as the ordinary one... Give it me too ^_^ |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group