I have set the runtime to two days. That have two benefits. First of all, less of network traffic for download of new WUs. And, less of wasted time for finishing one WU and start of another. Means, more time for number crunching.
In addition, it reduces the space on my disc which is needed for the project.

I'm not criticising - fair enough if that's your preference - I run above the default run-time for a similar reason, but there's a trade off when problems occur. It's just that there was a discussion of a bug that applied to 2 day runs that didn't apply to any of the lower settings. It may apply to validation errors that aren't in this faulty batch of FFD tasks, which is a legitimate concern.

I notice the option of 2 days has been removed from current settings. 1 day is now the maximum.

---

I have set the runtime to two days. That have two benefits. First of all, less of network traffic for download of new WUs. And, less of wasted time for finishing one WU and start of another. Means, more time for number crunching.
In addition, it reduces the space on my disc which is needed for the project.

There is no 2 day setting, you must mean 1 day as it is the maximum duration.

Edit to add:

Sorry, Sid already posted that, didn't notice at first.

Just another example of why it's about time to finally discard support for ancient CPUs.

There's no need at all to discard support for older CPUs. Different code paths for different instruction sets in same application is nothing impossible or special. And different applications for different CPUs are also possible with BOINC (but not with so ancient BOINC version like Rosetta is using).

---

.

Just another example of why it's about time to finally discard support for ancient CPUs.

There's no need at all to discard support for older CPUs. Different code paths for different instruction sets in same application is nothing impossible or special. And different applications for different CPUs are also possible with BOINC (but not with so ancient BOINC version like Rosetta is using).

I remember that upgrading the server version was a priority. This was back like a year ago tho.

---

I remember that upgrading the server version was a priority. This was back like a year ago tho.

Another indication of the "importance" that is placed on this project by the people who own/run it. https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=6707&nowrap=true#78764

Even the forum has a very weak pulse, if it were a human we'd be calling in the relatives.

I prefer, when dealing with people from all walks of life to follow this, "Listen to what people do and not what they say"

Is this a problem at my end? It's happening on a problematic laptop (hard disk errors)

rb_08_17_58352_103163_ab_stage0_h001___robetta_IGNORE_THE_REST_11_15_303197_48_0

<core_client_version>7.6.9</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
couldn't start app: Input file minirosetta_database_f386b3c.zip missing or invalid: RSA key check failed for file
</message>
]]>

YFHP_cst__t000___krypton_SAVE_ALL_OUT_03_09_277585_1936_1

<core_client_version>7.6.9</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
app_version download error: couldn't get input files:
<file_xfer_error>
<file_name>minirosetta_database_f386b3c.zip</file_name>
<error_code>-120 (RSA key check failed for file)</error_code>
<error_message>signature verification failed</error_message>
</file_xfer_error>

</message>
]]>

---

Sid, one possible to see such errors is anti-virus modifying the downloads if it triggers a false positive. Also, if the HDD actually corrupted the file.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Got many validate errors. :(

[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

ALL of my Rosetta WU blow up immediately on my PIII-1400S Win 2003 R2 system.

---

Professor Ray:
I use an AMD Athlon XP 1700+ with SSE but without SSE2. From 3.62 Rosetta updating, nothing works for me. Everything worked before me.

Your old PIII not have SSE2 so I recommend leaving Rosetta and switch to WCG cancer, for example, because it is similar and it work.

---

I'm very sad to see that my darling Rosetta - of 10 years - has broken up with me - throwing me under the bus - akin to a Twitter / Facebook break-up posting. It is presently the 5th best producing project behind Cosmology, Leiden, SETI & WCG. Over the last decade we've had some good times though; 23379 WU credits worth.

FWIW: Einstein recently did the same thing to me. It STILL is my second best WU cruncher - despite abandoning me in favor of GPU centric cruncher hosts - nearly a 1 1/2 years after their hardware efficiency optimization.

I foresee a day in the near future when I'm going to take all my old electronic equipment - old motherboards, video cards, RAM, power supplies, VCR, TV, et ali - and toss it all into a 55 gal drum supported by cinder-blocks. I'm going to light a charcoal fire underneath, douse the barrel contents with lighter fluid, and cook it for a week. The slag that comes out of that kiln I'll sell to a recycler.

That's what I think of your project 'upgrades' requiring new hardware.

---

For all of you tech snobs out there, keep your condescending, denigrating, snarky, belittling, and superior comments to yourself; contact me via private mail for the particulars on sending me the hardware that meets your minimum standards of acceptance to be cool as a humanitarian aide gesture.

There's a reason that I'm running the hardware platform that I am. Instead of snarking down at me, and people like me, why don't you offer a helping hand and send us all that glorious hardware that meets the requirements to be cool enough to be in the same room as you?

---

@Professor Ray

It sounds like your heart is in the right place man, but given that a) your hardware is easily 13 to 17 years old and b) your electricity has a good chance of coming from coal-fired power given that you live in the US, the cost-benefit of crunching for BOINC vs. the generated carcinogens, pollution, heavy metals, and other cancer-causing air particles spewing out of the power plant that powers the incredibly inefficient rig you're running just doesn't make sense to me when even modestly newer hardware would deliver an order of magnitude more science for the same or less wattage.

Let's be creative and think long-term for a second: If money is the issue (I think that's what you alluded to here), then why not shut off this machine for a year, put the savings from not paying for the power to run it for the year into a savings account every month, and in a year from now come back with a newer machine that will easily close the gap in terms of lost credits in a couple of months, and will keep crunching at a much higher productivity going forward?

That's what I think of your project 'upgrades' requiring new hardware.

With all due respect but you have been crunching since Dec 7 05.

Your results so far: Credit: 27,379 / RAC: 15

The moderator is of course invited to throw this posting in the trash.

I am more interested in the new extensions for my Haswells. Rosetta can keep either the new hardware crunchers or the old ones happy, but probably not both.

---

updated to 3.62 ran a set of jobs, seemed quite stable no errors but it is a small set opensuse 13.2 linux 3.16 x86_64 i7 4771

Sid, one possible to see such errors is anti-virus modifying the downloads if it triggers a false positive. Also, if the HDD actually corrupted the file.

Thanks. I think it's the latter on this occasion. The laptop can barely cope with anything bar one job at a time right now. Even a mouse-click is causing a 5 minute hang... Attempting to salvage what I can :(

---

With all due respect but you have been crunching since Dec 7 05.
Your results so far: Credit: 27,379 / RAC: 15
The moderator is of course invited to throw this posting in the trash.

+1
I've also a little hw, but 1M here and 500K in ralph.
And, if possible, i'll buy a new hw in 2016 (i'm waiting for Zen)

---

Professor Ray wrote:

That's what I think of your project 'upgrades' requiring new hardware.

New software versions require new hardware in some cases, this is nothing unusual. You can't expect software developers to support old hardware forever. And I say that as someone sitting in front of a soon 10 years old laptop.

However what I do expect, is that the project admins configure the servers properly (or even upgrade them if necessary) and stop sending work to computers, which can't run the science application.



Dr. Merkwürdigliebe wrote:

That's what I think of your project 'upgrades' requiring new hardware.

With all due respect but you have been crunching since Dec 7 05.

Your results so far: Credit: 27,379 / RAC: 15

The moderator is of course invited to throw this posting in the trash.

To be fair: he is also running 4 other projects and has a total RAC of 106.

---

.

However what I do expect, is that the project admins configure the servers properly (or even upgrade them if necessary) and stop sending work to computers, which can't run the science application.

Looking at past history "Some Chance" they are wating to lose all their supporters because this project is of no importance to them. Until you start banging the drum you will never know how "uninportant" you are https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=6707&nowrap=true#78764