.... all these pending results I have? I have some dating back to June 16. This really sucks! >:-( I see others credits going up and mine remain going nowhere. I keep downloading, crunching, uploading, downloading.... But no granted credit. I checked the oldest result and it has 3 pending, one returned too late and one unknown.

Let me know if you need any other information, but, I'm sure it can be found here anyway....

---

CAPT Siran d'Vel'nahr XO
USS Vre'kasht NCC-33187

Siran's website: [ ONLINE! ]

As a beta project, the focus is on testing. Not credits.

If you are concerned with credits, I would suggest sticking to one of the public projects, as beta credits are flushed at the end of the beta anyway.

As a beta project, the focus is on testing. Not credits.

If you are concerned with credits, I would suggest sticking to one of the public projects, as beta credits are flushed at the end of the beta anyway.

I concur. When I made optimized clients, I was wondering I should release or not...personal testing will be ok, but if this prevails, there will be an unexpected mess. As a matter of fact, currently there is a conflict between rev.4.02 and my old client 4.11 (equivalent to 4.00) because custom clients are not updated automatically. I'm afraid this interfares with thie beta testing....

And another concern is if incorrect optimized clients prevail, results are validated among the incorrect clients, the official clients are invalidated, and beta testing has no meaning....

I'll think about it when (if) the next revision is released. I may stop releasing optimized clients. This site isn't for competition; it's for testing. Personally I want to test my optimized client (one user in a workunit won't harm even if the client is wrong), and that beta credits will be cleared.

---

Luckiest in the world. WMD = Weapon of Mass Distraction

As a beta project, the focus is on testing. Not credits.

If you are concerned with credits, I would suggest sticking to one of the public projects, as beta credits are flushed at the end of the beta anyway.

Dang! I understand it's Beta. .o0(Damn, why did it have to be about the credits?) I'm NOT concerned WITH credits. What I'm concerned about IS: The credit granting system IS part of the Beta testing process, is it not? I've seen others credits going up considerably while mine have gone up very, very, very little in the past 3 weeks or so. I've seen one user with, if I remember right, 85 granted credits to date. I saw another user with granted credit at almost 13K to date. Mine went from 126 to 192 since restarting Beta after halting it when a problem was found and needed attention.

Now! Could it POSSIBLY be that the credit granting system has a problem? Thus, my original post on this board. My system is doing what it's supposed to do: download and crunch WU's and upload the results.

Sheesh, this is why I don't like doing betas. I see what seems to be a problem and I'm told it's only credits, it's no problem.

I'm running 4 other projects, currently, and waiting in the wings to start 2 others. I'm not concerned about 'earning credits', I'm for the science....

---

CAPT Siran d'Vel'nahr XO
USS Vre'kasht NCC-33187

Siran's website: [ ONLINE! ]

As a beta project, the focus is on testing. Not credits. If you are concerned with credits, I would suggest sticking to one of the public projects, as beta credits are flushed at the end of the beta anyway.

Isn't SETI II technically still in beta?

---

me@rescam.org

Dang! I understand it's Beta. .o0(Damn, why did it have to be about the credits?) I'm NOT concerned WITH credits. What I'm concerned about IS: The credit granting system IS part of the Beta testing process, is it not?

Not really. The credit system is already functioning over on the public project. We're testing new science apps over here.

Now! Could it POSSIBLY be that the credit granting system has a problem? Thus, my original post on this board. My system is doing what it's supposed to do: download and crunch WU's and upload the results.

Perhaps you could have worded your post to better reflect that? It looks like a complaint, not a query.

Sheesh, this is why I don't like doing betas. I see what seems to be a problem and I'm told it's only credits, it's no problem.

I apologize, but it appeared as though you were complaining that your credits weren't being granted...

In fact, the "This really sucks!" comment made it appear as though you were quite adamant about it. Basically the garden variety whiner complaint we see often. Sorry to have misinterpreted.

Isn't SETI II technically still in beta?

HeHe... No, not "technically". ;)

The original beta project closed shortly after S@H II went live, and now we have this beta project. So I would have to surmise that "technically", S@H II is not beta. :D

....

Not really. The credit system is already functioning over on the public project. We're testing new science apps over here.

....

Perhaps you could have worded your post to better reflect that? It looks like a complaint, not a query.

....

I apologize, but it appeared as though you were complaining that your credits weren't being granted...

In fact, the "This really sucks!" comment made it appear as though you were quite adamant about it. Basically the garden variety whiner complaint we see often. Sorry to have misinterpreted.

Hmmmm.... I had to go re-read my post:

The first 3 short statements were meant to show my frustration about what was happening [or should I say NOT happening]. The next 4 were an attempt at giving my observations, what my PC was doing and what I had seen here [in the results list]. The last statement should have been the clue that I was seeking info and not, as you stated, "whining". Why would a "whiner" say that if more info was needed, to ask?

Yes, I'm frustrated at my credits remaining the same for days upon days with all the pending results, while I see others credits going up. I'm trying to find out why. I understand that this is a testbed for the software. I have not seen any adverse problems save the one I have posted.

---

CAPT Siran d'Vel'nahr XO
USS Vre'kasht NCC-33187

Siran's website: [ ONLINE! ]

I never said you were whining. I said it appeared that you were, and I apologized for misinterpreting your intentions...

Yes, I'm frustrated at my credits remaining the same for days upon days with all the pending results, while I see others credits going up. I'm trying to find out why. I understand that this is a testbed for the software. I have not seen any adverse problems save the one I have posted.

Same problems here, Siran.

-Mr. anon

---

Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Yes, I'm frustrated at my credits remaining the same for days upon days with all the pending results, while I see others credits going up. I'm trying to find out why. I understand that this is a testbed for the software. I have not seen any adverse problems save the one I have posted.

I concur.. very frustrating... Even if this is beta, it's just before the public project.

---

Luckiest in the world. WMD = Weapon of Mass Distraction

I have a lot of results in pending status as well, these are because the quorum has not been met.

I have no issue with this as it is for beta testing, I think a lot of my pending results are from previous client releases, e.g. the first release caused loads of WUs to be downloaded by some systems (I saw 100s on some PCs), no way were they all going to be completed by the deadline. I suspect WUs crunched on one version of the client can not be validated against results from a different client version (Q to the devs is this correct?).

But I would like to see the XML stats page set up. I have no issue with the lost pending units but it would be great to get those that have been validated added into the grand BOINC master total. After all SETI alpha and pirates did that OK. :-)

---

I also have TONS of pending WUs crunched with 4.00, which I'm afraid will never be validated. Nobody is supposed to be using 4.00 now. Another frustration....

---

Luckiest in the world. WMD = Weapon of Mass Distraction

And now all I get are "Client Error - Computing".

---

Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Could someone please either look at or "do something" with these 2 wu's:

49426 & 49344

Like Siran, I am tired of seeing them sit there pending.

---

Kajunfisher, if you look at the server state for all of the hosts on those work units, you'll see that they are all in the "Over" condition. As I understand it, these WU's have effectively been canceled. They will most likely never be granted credit. They were sent out with version 4.00 of the application, which was found to be faulty and was since corrected with another release. Since the new release crunches in a significantly different way, it will produce a different result and will not compare well enough to validate against 4.00.

Any 4.00 WU that you have outstanding that has not yet been granted credit, will most likely never be granted credit. Write it off to a bug that was found, and hopefully is corrected (or being corrected) and move on. It is frustrating not to get credit for work that was done, but there's other ways to find recognition for your contribution here. At least we're contributing to refining a process that produces good science and good credits for those who contribute!

There's been some added frustration with version 4.02 & 4.03 of the Windows application. They were encoded to use a processor feature that not all host computers may have, thus generating many of the ***UNHANDLED EXCEPTION**** errors that you may be seeing yourself or on other host results. This was delaying further delaying the return of complete results that would pass validation. The new v4.04 for Windows should (hopefully!) resolve this problem.

The good news is that we are much closer to having an application version that crunches more efficiently than standard SETI@home, but is much more sensitive in detecting signals. Please keep in mind that I'm just trying to piece things together here and there from what I pick up. I may be completely off base and totally wrong. I'm just trying to help in any way that I can.

---

...Since the new release crunches in a significantly different way, it will produce a different result and will not compare well enough to validate against 4.00.

...The new v4.04 for Windows should (hopefully!) resolve this problem.

The good news is that we are much closer to having an application version that crunches more efficiently than standard SETI@home, but is much more sensitive in detecting signals. ...

I agree with you on this, however there are still WU's that were sent out under 4.00 that are pending and now these WU's are being sent out as 4.04. As you stated, I do not see how they will be validated, and these WU's under 4.04 are taking >30 hours. See this WU.

---

I agree with you on this, however there are still WU's that were sent out under 4.00 that are pending and now these WU's are being sent out as 4.04. As you stated, I do not see how they will be validated, and these WU's under 4.04 are taking >30 hours. See this WU.

You're absolutely right. They shouldn't be resending WU's that have been touched by 4.00 (or the optimized version of it that was labled as 4.11). As we've learned the hard way, this work probably won't have a chance of validating (or having credit awarded). With the crazy way that some WU's now take so long to complete, this can be a senseless waste of time and resources. Ageless is going to send off an email to Eric, hopefully he can take some action to correct this from happening any longer.

---

True, but there are still some out there that are using the optimized 4.11 app. They need to change to the more current one 4.02 optimized app.

Kajunfisher, if you look at the server state for all of the hosts on those work units, you'll see that they are all in the "Over" condition. As I understand it, these WU's have effectively been canceled. They will most likely never be granted credit. They were sent out with version 4.00 of the application, which was found to be faulty and was since corrected with another release. Since the new release crunches in a significantly different way, it will produce a different result and will not compare well enough to validate against 4.00.

Any 4.00 WU that you have outstanding that has not yet been granted credit, will most likely never be granted credit. Write it off to a bug that was found, and hopefully is corrected (or being corrected) and move on. It is frustrating not to get credit for work that was done, but there's other ways to find recognition for your contribution here. At least we're contributing to refining a process that produces good science and good credits for those who contribute!

There's been some added frustration with version 4.02 & 4.03 of the Windows application. They were encoded to use a processor feature that not all host computers may have, thus generating many of the ***UNHANDLED EXCEPTION**** errors that you may be seeing yourself or on other host results. This was delaying further delaying the return of complete results that would pass validation. The new v4.04 for Windows should (hopefully!) resolve this problem.

The good news is that we are much closer to having an application version that crunches more efficiently than standard SETI@home, but is much more sensitive in detecting signals. Please keep in mind that I'm just trying to piece things together here and there from what I pick up. I may be completely off base and totally wrong. I'm just trying to help in any way that I can.

I do not fully agree with you on your assessment of the "Over" state. Observe:

Server states

A result's server state keeps track of whether the result has been sent to a host, and if so whether the host has finished it. Possible values are:

• Inactive - The result is not ready to send (for example, because its input files are unavailable)
  
• Unsent - The result is ready to send, but hasn't been sent yet.
  
• In Progress - The result has been sent; waiting for completion.
  
• Over - The result has been sent to a host and either it has timed out or the host has reported its completion.
  

All of my PENDING results display the "over" state. All of them but 3 have been returned on time.

---

CAPT Siran d'Vel'nahr XO
USS Vre'kasht NCC-33187

Siran's website: [ ONLINE! ]