When corrupted results get validated...

[Josef W. Segur]

Perhaps a host which got in a bad state trying to run 6.08 on a GTX 4xx will need a reboot to clear the problem. If so, automatically updating a host to 6.10 wouldn't help.

I've not seen anything like that, and my GTX 470 has tried them all (6.09, 6.08, v12b). They just fail in their various ways, and move on to the next task. It's very different from the 'sporadic error state' on older GPUs, where the failure persists from task to task until reboot.

Thanks, I had missed that very important difference. Now that the project is flowing data again perhaps we'll be able to figure out what they had to modify.
                                                                                    Joe

[perryjay]

Well, this should be interesting.All the work units I've downloaded since we came back up have been showing as "not in DB" on my SETI website tasks page instead of anonymous platform. I mentioned it in a post on the NC forum and Skildude posted he is getting it too.  Mine are showing up as 6.03s and 6.08s on my Manager's task list though. It will be awhile before I get to them so I hope they will run ok.

[sunu]

Well, this should be interesting.All the work units I've downloaded since we came back up have been showing as "not in DB" on my SETI website tasks page instead of anonymous platform. I mentioned it in a post on the NC forum and Skildude posted he is getting it too.  Mine are showing up as 6.03s and 6.08s on my Manager's task list though. It will be awhile before I get to them so I hope they will run ok.

Yes, I'm getting that too. On another note, another valid result got invalidated by two fermi cards using wrong app. Link and printed.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=615573439

[Raistmer]

Same here. Anonymous platform replaced with new (in my case it's even translated to "Нет в ДБ") message. For CPU-assigned tasks too.

[_heinz]

On my machine all looks like normal
get 6.03 wu's and one 6.10 (cuda fermi)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On my result page I see 10 entries not in DB

[sunu]

Much more disturbing message:

Your app_info.xml doesn't have a usable version of Seti@hpme enhanced.
Reached daily quota of 100 tasks

Well, until yesterday, berkeley liked my app_info.xml.

[Richard Haselgrove]

They're obviously making rather wider changes to the work scheduling process, incorporating some of the improvements which have been tested at SETI Beta recently. But it doesn't seem to be going very smoothly.

There's not supposed to be any change to the app_info format, so I suggest you treat that as a server error: don't mess around with app_info in a vain attempt to get it working!

There's no work available today anyway, so I suggest we all just sit back and watch until the dust settles.

[sunu]

We've got again those validate errors with no apparent reason http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=559969383

[Richard Haselgrove]

We've got again those validate errors with no apparent reason http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=559969383

The reason is it was reported on 7 February. I don't see how you can call that "again": I would accept "still". It's those AWOL wingmates who stopped any work happening from January to April that we should be concerned about.

[sunu]

The reason is it was reported on 7 February. I don't see how you can call that "again": I would accept "still". It's those AWOL wingmates who stopped any work happening from January to April that we should be concerned about.

No, it was invalidated after that June 12 (or maybe 16) result. Before that date it wasn't in my invalid list.

[Richard Haselgrove]

The reason is it was reported on 7 February. I don't see how you can call that "again": I would accept "still". It's those AWOL wingmates who stopped any work happening from January to April that we should be concerned about.

No, it got invalidated after that June 12 (or maybe 16) result. Before that date it wasn't in my invalid list.

It wouldn't even have been looked at until 12 June. When that second 'success' report came in, the validator will have tried to find the uploaded result file that should have preceded the 7 February report - and presunably it wasn't there.

Without a result file, that one could never be validated: presumably the file associated with the 12 June report was findable, but there was nothing to compare it with, hence 'inconclusive' and 'pending'.

[sunu]

Why it wasn't there?

[Claggy]

I had a look at the list of hosts i posted earlier in this thread, some of the Fermi's are still trying to do Cuda23 work and don't have the Fermi app,
then there's smithwr3 who still using the optimised V12 app.

Claggy

Edit: I retract that, i was talking out of my A*se, they had done Cuda23 work at the beginning of June, and haven't done any since.

[Claggy]

Got a false Invalid task today, wingmen are smithwr3 and Fabio Chimienti, both running V12 still, both produced -9's, 

wuid=646519895

Claggy

[perryjay]

That smithwr has 18,000 tasks on his list. It's scary thinking how many of those are returning -9.