• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Please downgrade your d.net clients to v2.8010 or before

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Doh!!
I just upgraded them all 🙁
At least the downgrade should be easy.
Do I have to uninstall and reinstall the service on NT4/5 boxes?
 
I have a bunch at work on 8011. Can we confirm is these clients will be eventually put on the 'Do not accept work' list as the 8012 will be?

Thanks.

Jay
 
Humm, this is one of those shoot the messenger messages Moose, so if you'll come over here quickly😉.Seriously though, thanks for the warning. However, I, like most people. have a few questions.

First, what exactly is wrong? Is it an OGR problem, RC5 problem,or what? Second of how, how did this slip. I know you guys suposedly have some pretty tight testing procedures, so I'm not angry as much as I am shocked. Thirdly, wht kind of damage are we looking at here? 463b is 7 moths old, so have we just lost 7 moths of possile both RC5 and OGR work, or is it(hopefully) smaller? Lastly, what will be done to prevent this in the future. Will it be another step in the tests, more user testing, or something else?

Anyways Moose, thanks for at least sooner, than what may have been much latter. While we're obviously dissapointed(and some others are beyond that), we can live with it, adn hopefully learn from it. Just one thing though, please give whoever's falut this is, a swift kick in the pants.😉
 
v2.8012 is the only version that will be marked. However v2.8011 was never released due to other reasons. Please do not use them any longer than you need to.

As far as the questions about shouldn't we have found these in pre-release? well of course we should of. but we didn't. nothing we can do about that now. this is the worst thing to ever have to do. marking a version as bad is not a fun thing to do.

Once again we are truely sorry about this. This is the worst thing to have to do.

Thanks
paul
 
Actually we are talking about about 2 months worth of work. Remember the bad client in question is v2.8012 not v2.8010. And truely not everyoe has updated to the v2.8012 clients.

The bug is really split between the 2. Basicly what happens the an RC5 block gets loaded while the OGR cruncher thread is still running. This then appears to set the finished flag. Causing the RC5 block to be finished right away. This can also happen the other way. Actually not a very easy situation to find.

Goes to prove what 1 line of code can do.

paul
 
Thanks Paul/Moose. No one expects you to be perfect. I'm not following you regarding the 8011 though. I rmember it being on the download page, so I would think it is considered a 'released' client. Then again, the memory is fading, so I could be mistaken. 😉

Jay
 
Thanks for the info Moose! I'll switch two of my machines that I know are running a 8011 clients back to 8010. :frown: Lets just hope a majority of the people contributing never got around to running 8011 or newer clients. :Q
 
v2.8011 was only on the pre-release download page. But i can understand how the versions all run together...

paul
 
Ahh, 2 months sounds a whole lot better than 7. Thanks for the heads up Moose.🙂
 
Well, luckily a lot of my heard is remote so I hadn't got around to upgrading them all yet but I still have a few I need to sort.

Thanks for the heads up Moose.
 
well, so far I have just about half (53 of about 120) of my herd downgraded .. the nasty part is i just upgraded them all about 3 or 4 days ago... thought that the client had been out long enough to have been well tested. oh well..

talk about timing..

how long will work be accepted from the old clients? its going to take me a while to migrate all my herd back the older clients. (its too bad, since i should not affected by the bug seeing as I only do OGR and have RC5=0 in my ini file)..

/me is getting too old for this .. 😉
 
A suggestion.

Why not give the client the option to upgrade itself (or downgrade as the case may be). Add the function to the client and put a control switch in the ini file to either allow auto-updates or not too. The proxyper can hold the file in their directory for downloading so that all clients connecting to the proxyper's can download from there.

Just a suggestion.

Jay
 
A long time ago I read something (in the D.net FAQ-O-Mag) they didn't build in a auto update feature for security reasons.
 
still, im sure that the feature could be initiated. perhaps with some sort of password or key needed to enable the feature on both ends..

it would have made it alot easier for me.. 😉

maybe we'll see that in the 3.x versions of the client.. heh.

but i really do miss the graphical output that the 466 clients had.. really made life more interesting around here.. 🙂

 
Downgrade completed. Fortunatey, I only had to downgrade 2 cows at home. I hadn't upgraded to the new client yet at work. THAT would have been a pain. :Q
 
Oh one other thing... Those of you who save up for flushes should flush ASAP. once we reject work, if you have work with v2.8012 even if it was finished before we start rejecting, you will not get credit for it in stats.

just want everyone to be prepared.

paul
 
Ottawanker-

Hmmm, a 7% difference on a Duron, and about 5% on a K6-2.

Unfortunately, all my Celeron/P2 clients are losing 10% by going back to the 8010-463b....

viz
 
If any of you remember the old 3.x docs, I belive auto-updating was a feature on the list. However, since the lead programmer left(I belive his ocde is now the cosmo project), I haven't seen much about 3.x. Is Dnet still working on a 3.x series, or are we sticking with 2.x for now, Moose?
 
Virge: Just a minor point of order.. It's COSM not cosmo.. cosmo was an SGI opengl viewer for windows at one point in time I think...

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top