| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: Say No to Schistosoma Forum
Thread: SN2S: General discussion/problems |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 75
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Occasionally WCG inflates the claim (not something the client did), but 5.10.13. There are 7 threads at the developers forum of this seemingly first 5.10 official release... did not last long. I'm still running 5.10.45 without any trouble. However, I have seen some way out claims from other machines. Regarding the AMD issue, it definitely isn't a P3 issue. I have a P3 which has done dozens of these (including betas) without a single error. One wu went inconclusive, but resolved in my favour. |
||
|
|
astroWX
Advanced Cruncher USA Joined: Sep 1, 2007 Post Count: 56 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Apologies to anyone delayed receiving credit because of my delay in returning results. More than half a day ISP outage. (That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!) Caught-up (for now).
The bad news from my end is that I don't keep an extra larder of work and couldn't get more, so I had a lot of unused resource. Oh, well ... |
||
|
|
Laura_Stevens
Cruncher Joined: Mar 12, 2012 Post Count: 3 Status: Offline |
Was there an update to the executable ? My security software put some WU's on hold overnight because it wanted to run them in a virtual thread because it suddenly did not trust the executable. Not a big deal, got an exception in there now for the exe file, but was kind of surprised to see it. If it's an update I can go and add the exception to other machines now too before they get the updated executable, otherwise I'll just chalk it up to a glitch in the scanner on this machine.
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hello Laura_Stevens,
I looked over yesterday's messages on my computer. I do not see any change on the SN2S downloaded executable. Looks like a glitch. Lawrence |
||
|
|
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher USA Joined: Jul 4, 2006 Post Count: 7846 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Was there an update to the executable ? My security software put some WU's on hold overnight because it wanted to run them in a virtual thread because it suddenly did not trust the executable. Not a big deal, got an exception in there now for the exe file, but was kind of surprised to see it. If it's an update I can go and add the exception to other machines now too before they get the updated executable, otherwise I'll just chalk it up to a glitch in the scanner on this machine. I also had the same thing on two separate machines. I am using Avast. One machine is Vista and the other is Win 7. I also put the exceptions in and the units continued fine. Cheers
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers* |
||
|
|
Laura_Stevens
Cruncher Joined: Mar 12, 2012 Post Count: 3 Status: Offline |
Alright, thank you Lawrence and Sgt. Joe.
|
||
|
|
astroWX
Advanced Cruncher USA Joined: Sep 1, 2007 Post Count: 56 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Was there an update to the executable ? My security software put some WU's on hold overnight because it wanted to run them in a virtual thread because it suddenly did not trust the executable. Not a big deal, got an exception in there now for the exe file, but was kind of surprised to see it. If it's an update I can go and add the exception to other machines now too before they get the updated executable, otherwise I'll just chalk it up to a glitch in the scanner on this machine. I also had the same thing on two separate machines. I am using Avast. One machine is Vista and the other is Win 7. I also put the exceptions in and the units continued fine. Cheers Similar issue on a Q9550 (in W7-x64 and 32-bit boinc) but not on my other six boxes (W7/Vista/XP, all 64-bit with 32-bit boinc). All use "Avast!" free version. Boinc folder is excluded from scans and on the problem-box, the "_vina_" file is excluded. Nonetheless, that file remains sandboxed by Avast! and frequent popups complain about the "suspicious program," always re. "_vina_". No problems on the other machines or other WCG work on the troublesome box. All SN2S tasks began to error-off at or near 100% complete, so remaining SN2S tasks were aborted. Ran hours of Memtest-86+ v.4.0, then Prime-95 Torture Test, yesterday, with no errors logged. My "solution," for now, is to micromanage downloads for that box so SN2S can run on the other boxes. "Magic solutions" welcome! |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Running 7.0.1426 with 120426-0 definition on 3 machines. No false positive reports... no exclusions set for specific apps, BOINC data dir excluded from scanning and sandboxing set to ''Ask''. No "Asking" here.
------------------------------------------//-- edit: correct typo in definition number. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Apr 26, 2012 9:06:58 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Bump for the techs: Forgot which bug is the hold-up reason to keep this science at lower than medium level in the hopper. Was it the VINA stuck bug, endlessly looping [not seeing it and either on W7-64 using 80%, nor running 70 or 80% under Linux. Or, was it this BETA in March indicating a Windows shutdown bug issue and a minor graphicsimperfection, but then I thought this tested version had moved into production (or did we not)? There's no follow up message in that thread to say wazzup.
Looking at the years per day plot, link below, it's a very steady but pronounced decline that's continuing http://bit.ly/WCGSNS --//-- |
||
|
|
astroWX
Advanced Cruncher USA Joined: Sep 1, 2007 Post Count: 56 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Tiring of micro-managing one machine (as noted above), prefs were changed to another water project. That was eight days ago. Twenty tasks still await validation. It would be nice if participants sitting on work tweaked their cache value to match machine use and/or capability. (I use 0.01 days and tasks are typically returned during late first or second day.)
|
||
|
|
|