1) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23847)
Posted 17 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Great news on both counts!

Thanx Igor!!!

Greetings
Kai
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23839)
Posted 12 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Hi Metalius (and Igor),

these are exactly the users that I found,
list seems to be complete as Bartonn IIRC had 4 WUs with exorbitant claims ;-)
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23831)
Posted 10 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Igor,

first of all, a heartfelt "Thank You!" for making the effort ;-)

The new credit system is in place. Will monitor how it goes.

I have corrected the host and user tables in the sixtrack data base. This is not a simple action, as this may impact the consistency of the data base. I have recalculated the value of total_credit in these two tables. If you know more places, where values should be corrected - let me know.


This and this workunit still seem to be unchanged.

The correction has been done for both cheating episodes, last november and in january. However, for november I have reset only the user, who generated the huge claimed credit values. The reason not to update other host/user tables affected by the huge credit claims, is that it is not obvious how to recalculate the contributions.

One idea that seems fair would be to grant the claimed credit to the users/hosts with reasonable claims.

This is also why we did not do it immediately then.

This time however, I felt that it must be done even at a risk of some inconsistencies.

I hope this will resolve the issue. Thank you.


Once again, thank you very much!
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23828)
Posted 10 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Igor,

thanks from me too for finally responding, what you wrote sounds good to me ;-)

Nonetheless, what´s still unanswered is whether you will "correct" the unruly high credit grants that already happened (Nov 2011 and Jan 2012).

If you would be so kind as to elucidate this (one way or the other), I personally would be completely happy again ;-)))

Kind regards
Kai
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23824)
Posted 10 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Charlie,

I concur with nearly all of the things you said, and till lately this was one of my favorite projects, but:

CERN does not pay my electricity bill, I do, and I´d hope that the project administration would be so appreciative of us crunchers helping them that they would at least offer some statement whatsoever as to what their intents are regarding dealing (or even not dealing) with this issue, in other words, showing some sign of caring.

What really frustrates me is their continued silence, which could be interpreted as something netiquette prevents me from stating here, but which wouldn´t be very complimentary.

So I completely understand KidDoesCrunch´s attitude ...
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23812)
Posted 8 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Hi all,

just for clarification:
When posting the things about the "extraordinarly high" credit grants below, my intent was not to "demand" anything, but just to make my personal opinion known to the powers that be and maybe elicit any reaction whatsoever on their part.

I don´t fancy myself to be sufficiently knowledgeable about BOINC´s internal mechanics to do an analysis as to how the said credit grants occurred, or whether they were the result of deliberate cheating, accidents, bugs in the BOINC code or lightning striking a cluster of virtual Higgs bosons.

My actual concern meanwhile is that nobody "in charge" seems to be interested to the extent of responding to this thread, let alone fixing the issue.
The problem was first reported about 1.5 months ago, which should be sufficient time to show at least a sign of life on part of the admins.

I remember times when the admins of this project were a little bit more interested in the concerns of the crunchers, and it kinda saddens me that this no longer seems to be the case.
That said, I´d very much like to be disabused of this opinion.

Just my two cents ...
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23804)
Posted 6 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Hello admins,

another four (till now) obscene mega-claims for this user:

http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/hosts_user.php?userid=101328

This completely takes the fun out of watching the stats.

Please at least tell me (us) whether you intend to do something about the problem, that should not take to much of your (certainly valuable) time ...

Sincerely
Kai
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits (Message 23803)
Posted 6 Jan 2012 by Kai Strang
Post:
Here´s another one:
http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/workunit.php?wuid=982128

Dear admins, please do something about that issue ...
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Is the board working? (Message 23587)
Posted 25 Oct 2011 by Kai Strang
Post:
All seems to be well :-)
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Claimed 0 credits - still pending after all 5 results received (Message 18554)
Posted 5 Nov 2007 by Kai Strang
Post:
Bump ;-)

I got 58 of those guys (0.00 claimed on pending credit page, precise claim nonzero but zero when rounded to two decimal places) hanging around, the oldest from Feb 6 2007.
Looks to me like the validator doesn´t touch them because the claimed credit is too small but they are not thrown away/purged by whatever process has that task because they are nonzero.
May be a case of unsynchronized threshold values or something like that.
Perhaps Neasan or Alex could have a look at that if they have the time because those WUs probably clutter up the server unnecessarily ;-)

Grtz
Kai

11) Message boards : Number crunching : Claimed 0 credits - still pending after all 5 results received (Message 18151)
Posted 14 Oct 2007 by Kai Strang
Post:
I got 58 of those guys (0.00 claimed on pending credit page, precise claim nonzero but zero when rounded to two decimal places) hanging around, the oldest from Feb 6 2007.
Looks to me like the validator doesn´t touch them because the claimed credit is too small but they are not thrown away/purged by whatever process has that task because they are nonzero.
May be a case of unsynchronized threshold values or something like that.
Perhaps Neasan or Alex could have a look at that if they have the time because those WUs probably clutter up the server unnecessarily ;-)

Grtz
Kai



©2019 CERN