Posts by zombie67 [MM]

1) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Scheduler Disabled? (Message 5046) Posted 22 Jan 2010 by zombie67 [MM] Post: 1) On the front page, it shows "Scheduler disabled". Any ETA for a fix? 2) Also, on the detail page, it shows every box as GREEN. Even though the Scheduler box says "Disabled". That box should be a red color based on how other projects do it.
2) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta 1.99 (Message 4996) Posted 12 Nov 2009 by zombie67 [MM] Post: Anyone home?
3) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta v1.47 bug thread (Message 4436) Posted 19 Dec 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: Yes, I understand that the credit system changed back to pure benchmark. I noticed that too. But the unique method that used to be used here (and still used on Rosetta) is also benchmark based. It just averages with all the previous claims for that particular test. So in theory, as long as we don't mess with the benchmarks, the awarded credits should be about the same either way. Edit: I'm guessing the method changed back to the default when the server upgrade happened.
4) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta v1.47 bug thread (Message 4432) Posted 19 Dec 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: I have been doing both Ralph and Rosetta for quite some time now (was even number 1 in Ralph at one time), and I have noticed on Ralph over the last number of batch jobs that the Granted Credit equals the Claimed Credit and seems based on the Boinc Benchmark system. Why has the Credit system that Rosetta changed to and Ralph was also changed to 6 months to a year ago now reverting back to Benchmark ??? Based on this I am no longer getting due value for the time I spend crunching a work unit. How so? Your machines claim based on benchmarks. If your benchmarks are not tampered with, then you are getting exactly what you are due. You can't just look at run time. Some machines are faster than others. So a fast machine running 4 hours will have done more work than a slower machine running 4 hours. So the faster machine should be awarded more credits, even though the crunch time is equal.
5) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Server upgrade issues (Message 4348) Posted 20 Nov 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: It knows 64 bit OSX now. Thanks!
6) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Message from server: platform \'x86_64-apple-darwin\' not found (Message 4344) Posted 17 Nov 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: If you have 1) 64 bit processor (any core 2 based CPU, including the Xeons) and 2) leopard and 3) 6.2.something+ BOINC client then BOINC sees that you machine is 64 bit, and asks for 64 bit apps. The problem is that the current RALPH BOINC server is so ancient, it doesn't know what 'x86_64-apple-darwin' is. RALPH needs to update their servers. Not only for this issue, but for security issues too.
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Enable RAC Decay please. (Message 4326) Posted 30 Oct 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: I thought RAC decay was fixed? http://ralph.bakerlab.org//forum_thread.php?id=283
8) Message boards : Number crunching : platform x86_64-apple-darwin not found (Message 4325) Posted 30 Oct 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: The server needs to be upgraded.
9) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Rosetta min 1.03 (Message 3674) Posted 27 Jan 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: Thanks for the info! Was this ever a problem for the Mac app? Or only windows?
10) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Rosetta min 1.03 (Message 3671) Posted 25 Jan 2008 by zombie67 [MM] Post: Wow. A week now, and still no response from the project...at all. It's odd that they ask for our participation, yet do not participate themselves. Alpha testing is a two-way street.

Previous 20 · Next 20