Message boards :
Number crunching :
Stil a pending credit
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 PlaNed Send message Joined: 17 Sep 04 Posts: 18 Credit: 28,898 RAC: 0 |
|
|
Send message Joined: 16 Jan 06 Posts: 5 Credit: 12,082 RAC: 0 |
|
|
Send message Joined: 21 Aug 07 Posts: 46 Credit: 1,503,835 RAC: 0  
|
|
|
Send message Joined: 3 May 07 Posts: 7 Credit: 5,048,809 RAC: 0 |
|
|
Send message Joined: 26 Oct 05 Posts: 1 Credit: 1,369 RAC: 0 |
|
|
Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 3 Credit: 11,368 RAC: 0 |
i have 1 to from 2005 http://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/workunit.php?wuid=680998 greetings |
Conan Send message Joined: 6 Jul 06 Posts: 108 Credit: 663,175 RAC: 0 |
It seems to me that any WU that has completed in such a short time that they generate a credit amount lower than 2 decimal places (as in 0.00236xxxxx) that the validator is unable then to grant any credit and validate the WU. All the Pending WU's that I have are all of this type. So could the pending problem be the validator is just not calibrated enough for this type of result where the claimed points are below 2 decimal places? |
|
Kibble Send message Joined: 14 Jan 07 Posts: 33 Credit: 255,657 RAC: 0 |
I suspect that the deletion of old work units is a lower priority job. There's been a lot of complaints due to the lack of work units available. Now that the project is producing work the team will have to see if things are running smoothly. Perhaps the deletions will take place while the programmers are catching their collective breaths. (And if no other brush fires crop up. Cross yer fingers!) Kibble |
|
Send message Joined: 18 Sep 04 Posts: 47 Credit: 1,886,234 RAC: 0 |
with the WU's available over the last couple weeks, I now have about 20 "pending", where the claimed is of the 0.00xxxx variety. |
|
Send message Joined: 3 Jan 07 Posts: 124 Credit: 7,065 RAC: 0 |
with the WU's available over the last couple weeks, I now have about 20 "pending", where the claimed is of the 0.00xxxx variety. They should probably deal with it sooner rather than later. Database growth has to be becoming a problem now... |
|
Send message Joined: 3 Jan 07 Posts: 124 Credit: 7,065 RAC: 0 |
I hope nothing major breaks. I'd really be whizzed off if I lost my 0.00198303589808177 credit! Yeah yeah... My concern was about the result database having hundreds of thousands of extra rows that should have been transitioned already. Worst thing that would happen is a slowdown in performance and a longer backup time... Now, go back to your bah-humbug thread over at SETI :-P |
|
Send message Joined: 18 Sep 04 Posts: 47 Credit: 1,886,234 RAC: 0 |
Actually, I don't care if I ever see the "credit" from the (now about 30) 0.00xxxx pending WU's, but I'd really like to see them vanish from my pending credit list! Same with the WU's that were granted credit as far back as 2005! |
Irondog Send message Joined: 30 Aug 05 Posts: 11 Credit: 8,208,635 RAC: 5,040 
|
I have 614 pending WU's, 507 with 0 credit. Somebody, PLEASE make them go away. 
|
|
Irondog Send message Joined: 30 Aug 05 Posts: 11 Credit: 8,208,635 RAC: 5,040
|
I now have 937 pending WU's, 662 with 0 claimed credits.....
|
JLDun Send message Joined: 5 Jul 07 Posts: 21 Credit: 12,058 RAC: 0 |
|
|
Conan Send message Joined: 6 Jul 06 Posts: 108 Credit: 663,175 RAC: 0 |
It seems to me that any WU that has completed in such a short time that they generate a credit amount lower than 2 decimal places (as in 0.00236xxxxx) that the validator is unable then to grant any credit and validate the WU. I now have 31 pending and all are showing the above problem (0.00xxxxxx claim). Can these be validated or killed please? |
|
Send message Joined: 3 Jan 07 Posts: 124 Credit: 7,065 RAC: 0 |
I thought about suggesting zapping them all a few weeks ago, but then the thought occurred to me that the results may need to be inserted into the science database. Even if the result indicates an instantaneous containment failure, that's needed to be known so that it doesn't happen in the real-world application... So, Neasan and Alex, what's up? Is someone working on getting the server upgrade performed? Would this by chance be some old validator code? Brian |
|
Send message Joined: 18 Sep 04 Posts: 47 Credit: 1,886,234 RAC: 0 |
Hey, I got some of these 0.00xxx results from April.. If they're not in the DB now, they never will be! In total, I got about 50 of these 0.00xx results, and some that were actually granted real credit back in 2005! Housekeeping time! |
|
Send message Joined: 3 Jan 07 Posts: 124 Credit: 7,065 RAC: 0 |
If the results are listed as pending, this means that the validators have never looked at them. Since the validators never looked at them, they cannot have been fed to the assimilation process to be inserted into the science database. Your computers are hidden, so I can't verify your claim as to results having been issued credit. If so, then you might could look to see if everyone else that was assigned that same WU has been validated / invalidated. Any pending status will probably hold up the process that handles transitioning / assimilation / purging. As I said before, even though the tasks failed very quickly on our machines, the data collected still could be of some worth. It would be far better to get the results to pass through the system the "normal" way than to just flat out delete them. I understand it would be easier for some to have them deleted, particularly those who wish to merge / delete hosts. |
|
Send message Joined: 18 Sep 04 Posts: 47 Credit: 1,886,234 RAC: 0 |
Here's one from 2005 that was granted credit: http://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/result.php?resultid=694330 If you try to look at the WU, you get an error that says "workunit not found" |
©2024 CERN