Dropped WCG. Seems the GPU server can't do it's job handing out tasks properly.
Everything stalls with transient errors.
Oh well...something else then.

Not sure why you need to drop it. You're not getting runnable tasks anyway...
But I sympathise. I'm getting the same thing and it's driving me nuts.

On the plus side, while Rosetta has some tasks, hits on WCG have reduced and it's not <quite> as bad as it has been.
Still terrible though, I accept

I don't get their rah rah text all over the place but yet they can't send any work?
Maybe CPU fairs better, but GPU is nuts.

Explain why I got nearly 3 million credits per day and kept 12 GPUs running on WCG 24/7. Maybe that's why you got no work? If you don't ask (repeatedly) you don't get.

You are beginning to remind me of the people I've fought with over the past few years, who actually believe that H.264 and x.264 are different video codecs.
But on to the present, and your apparent attention deficit disorder.

Thanks for the history lesson, but I actually don't need it. I've been in this game since the IBM/XT was born. I've done my stint in IT, back when ethernet was barely a rumour and ARCnet was all the rage. A colleague at the time was all hot about ethernet, as the rumours suggested that ethernet would be capable of a whole 2 Mbps whereas ARCnet could only do 1!! Talk about progress!!

BTW, you forgot to mention SCSI, and SATA was not "previously IDE" -- SATA means "serial ATA", while another name for IDE is "parallel ATA".

So, once again -- SSD simply means the device uses solid state electronics as its storage medium. it absolutely does NOT refer to the device/host interface, which must be specified separately.

ROTFPMSL. Let me explain again, I'm talking about what people call them, not precise OCD terminology. Again, would you tell me you've just bought a car or you've just bought a Ferrari?

Anyone saying they have an SSD clearly has a SATA attached one, or they would say NVME, just take a look at the ads for new computers containing them. You don't undersell what you're advertising.

SATA was IDE. It was the successor to it. They made it faster and serial.

No. Not even close. The SSD I run my OS on is no more or less a solid state drive than the SSD I have my games library on despite the OS being on a NVMe drive and the games being on a SATA III drive. I have a HDD on a SATA III interface as well as a DVD-RW. The interface does not determine what the drive is and vice versa. I have other devices that use PCIe connections besides video cards, does that mean they're all the same thing because they're all PCIe? No. it doesn't.
If you really want to be genuinely pedantic, NVMe isn't even an interface, it's a protocol. The drive connects to the PCIe interface.
People who say they have SSDs say they have SSDs, that includes SATA ,SATA II, SATA III, SCSI, SAS, and NVMe devices. You will only find out what kind of SSD if you ask them specifically AND if they even know. All the general punter knows when they buy a system from a retailer is that "it has a SSD". Enthusiasts and professionals understand the different interfaces and any worth talking to will specify which. If someone bought a Ferrari they would say so, but that's the same as saying you bought a Samsung or a Western Digital. The generic form would be to say they bought a "sports car" or "supercar". That's not OCD, it's the real world. If you're going to have a tantrum about other people not understanding something, try not to make a fool of yourself by demonstrating it's you that doesn't understand.

No. Not even close. The SSD I run my OS on is no more or less a solid state drive than the SSD I have my games library on despite the OS being on a NVMe drive and the games being on a SATA III drive. I have a HDD on a SATA III interface as well as a DVD-RW. The interface does not determine what the drive is and vice versa. I have other devices that use PCIe connections besides video cards, does that mean they're all the same thing because they're all PCIe? No. it doesn't.
If you really want to be genuinely pedantic, NVMe isn't even an interface, it's a protocol. The drive connects to the PCIe interface.
People who say they have SSDs say they have SSDs, that includes SATA ,SATA II, SATA III, SCSI, SAS, and NVMe devices. You will only find out what kind of SSD if you ask them specifically AND if they even know. All the general punter knows when they buy a system from a retailer is that "it has a SSD". Enthusiasts and professionals understand the different interfaces and any worth talking to will specify which. If someone bought a Ferrari they would say so, but that's the same as saying you bought a Samsung or a Western Digital. The generic form would be to say they bought a "sports car" or "supercar". That's not OCD, it's the real world. If you're going to have a tantrum about other people not understanding something, try not to make a fool of yourself by demonstrating it's you that doesn't understand.

I'm not pedantic at all because I have a brain. Nobody calls an NVME connected SSD an SSD because it's several times faster than the original SATA shit SSDs.

Can you really not understand you don't call something by the original inferior version?

And don't copy other people's icons, I can see right through you.

@Peter the Huckster

If I bought a Ferrari, I sure wouldn't be running around telling everyone that I bought "a car", but what has that got to do with any of this? Nada.

As for the rest of your AHD-driven post, by all means continue to perpetuate the errors that "people" make. I really don't care anymore, but on a technical board you could at least demonstrate that you know a bit more than the average computer user.

Nice to have lots of R4.2 work without problematic pythons eating my ssd :-)

Wow , and holy shit load , I shure kicked over a jar of `worms` {the game} when I posted that one line ~ ~ ~ ~
Note to all , I don't think I have ever started such a good rant session on any forum ever before ;-)
And as far as what PATAIDESATSSASSCSINVMEPCIe do , the new ones are `better` than the old and I don't give rats ass about the rest .
And if anyone wants to have a go at me for starting it I will continue to drink my tea in my pink fluffy slippers make spelling mistakes and use bad English all over the internet and not give a dam about it .
Now then , what kind of shaped charge shall I use in my next forum IED .

Dropped WCG. Seems the GPU server can't do it's job handing out tasks properly.
Everything stalls with transient errors.
Oh well...something else then.

Not sure why you need to drop it. You're not getting runnable tasks anyway...
But I sympathise. I'm getting the same thing and it's driving me nuts.

On the plus side, while Rosetta has some tasks, hits on WCG have reduced and it's not <quite> as bad as it has been.
Still terrible though, I accept

When I got home earlier tonight, WCG tasks were uploading and downloading with almost no failures.
They seem to have sorted out whatever problems they had.

Meanwhile, whatever I said about responses I get from the admin staff seems to have got blown out on this occasion.
I wish I'd never said anything.

But at least further new tasks seem to have come available before the previous batch ran out, so we have continuity of processing for the first time in a very long while.
Small mercies.

---

Were download and upload speeds fast or were they 0.5 mbit?

Were downloaв and upload speeds fast or were they 0.5 mbit?

Some of the downloads are of files that are too small to get any idea of speed.
On Africa Rainfall project, many files are 10Mb and more. They started slowly at just 50k but increased to nearer 500k on further files.
I was quite surprised to see it.

---

Work doesn't tend to get lost unless there's some catastrophic disk error. If you look at the specs of Rosetta's Servers, I very much doubt that would happen.

Don't speak about R@H server.
They are VERY old, not updated, etc

I'm not sure this is true, I've just had a quick look and can't find when they were upgraded.
If I were to guess I'd say 4-5yrs ago. We had lots of problems just before then and everything got solved with the upgrade.

---

On windows 11 22h2 boinc reports incorrect cpu time.

On windows 11 22h2 boinc reports incorrect cpu time.

Is it?
Check Task Manager to see what is actually happening.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

For me 10 year old is from 2010.

For me is from 2012 :-P

---

I'm not sure this is true, I've just had a quick look and can't find when they were upgraded.
If I were to guess I'd say 4-5yrs ago.

My fault. I've said 10 yeas ago, but the latest (public) news about hw is January 2014:

We will be moving the hardware that supports Rosetta@Home on Tuesday, Feb 4th within the datacenter here at the UW. This will require that the entire project be taken offline for the duration. While we will try to minimize the down-time, we are planning for the system being offline from 0800 PST until 1500 PST on the fourth. -KEL & DOVA

---

I doubt the 72TB of SSD is 10 years old. My equipment is made of old and new stuff, you upgrade the bits that are the bottleneck.

The latest news (public) about hardware - that i find - was Jan 2014.
Maybe disks are changed without news....
The sw is under fee, but we don't know if they pay for that

I repeat: it's not a problem, if there are correct backup and infrastructure is solid.

---

Workunits waiting for validation are over 1 million, mine are currently 563.
Nothing I have run for a week have been validated.
has anyone looked into this?

---

I also have a bunch pending validation, like 15 or so, nothing validated for days.

However, something odd just happened.

Rosetta 4.20 was running a task with 5:28:45 elapsed, showing 83% progress with 1 hour + remaining.

Then, it suddenly changed to 5:33:27 elapsed, 27.799% progress, and 5:44:20 remaining.

Never saw that before.

What would cause it to cut progress made and increase the time remaining?

Addendum: Then it disappeared altogether. Now it shows ready to start, nothing elapsed and 7:59:59 remaining.

Strange.

S. Gaber

@Peter the Huckster

If I bought a Ferrari, I sure wouldn't be running around telling everyone that I bought "a car", but what has that got to do with any of this? Nada.

As for the rest of your AHD-driven post, by all means continue to perpetuate the errors that "people" make. I really don't care anymore, but on a technical board you could at least demonstrate that you know a bit more than the average computer user.

Wow, you actually admit you would say "Ferrari" and not "car", yet you would call you NVME an "SSD"? You really haven't grasped this simple concept at all. And BTW nada isn't a word in English. Maybe you meant nothing.

And if anyone wants to have a go at me for starting it I will continue to drink my tea in my pink fluffy slippers make spelling mistakes and use bad English all over the internet and not give a dam about it .
Now then , what kind of shaped charge shall I use in my next forum IED .

Please post a picture of you in pink fluffy slippers and nothing else.

Workunits waiting for validation are over 1 million, mine are currently 563.
Nothing I have run for a week have been validated.
has anyone looked into this?

It's the weekend, the tech guy is probably not at work?

I also have a bunch pending validation, like 15 or so, nothing validated for days.

However, something odd just happened.

Rosetta 4.20 was running a task with 5:28:45 elapsed, showing 83% progress with 1 hour + remaining.

Then, it suddenly changed to 5:33:27 elapsed, 27.799% progress, and 5:44:20 remaining.

Never saw that before.

What would cause it to cut progress made and increase the time remaining?

Addendum: Then it disappeared altogether. Now it shows ready to start, nothing elapsed and 7:59:59 remaining.

Strange.

S. Gaber

The exact same task? Are you sure you're not using the "show only active tasks" feature and thus the tasks are running normally and are replaced in the BOINC view by new ones every time one finishes?
Looking at your task list, everything seems fine.

---