• 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.

S@H daily team stats 08/12

Smoke

Smoke

Distributed Computing Elite Member
8/13/01 6:30 AM.............TA Diff....Yesterday....Total....Members...Change

13..IBM.............................285,449......3,035....1,212,177...1,005..........2
14..Seti @ Netherlands....99,466......4,912....1,026,194...1,569.........10
15..Team AnandTech.........................2,225........926,728......990..........2
16..Hewlett-Packard........-14,053.........918........912,675......590..........0
17..Team Slashdot........-175,160.........489........751,568...2,199.........-1

New Members

630) metallibloke +33
990) perdition +0

Name Change

19) The Magicman to TheMagicman
 
4th😱 Mech, what are you doing up so early (er....late?). You emailed me that (awsome) pic -- I've edited it, I'll show you later...at like 4:30am (your time).


Anyhow, lets keep up the pace 🙂
 
uh... fourth-and-a-half! BK, I just didn't feel like sleeping for some reason. 😕 edit: and no starting with the coffee jokes, now...!
 
Nice weekend production but IBM and S@N outdid us. I had 2 of my ships with hung clients and 3 of them were shut down... 🙁 On top of that I've got 5 of my slowest Win98 ships with 0.002-0.014 WU's. 🙁 I wish SetiQ could somehow kick these WU's to my NT clients.

Welcome new members & thanks Smokeball! 🙂

Rob
 
Thanks for the stats Smokeball! I like it that you include the new members with there WU count!

Another great day! WTG TeAm!! 🙂😀

I've added some new boxes, actually moved them over from RC5. So, I might gain a few WU so that I can stay over 50 per day.
 
Thanks Smokeball

Good day for the team, to bad IBM and S@N outdid!

Damn JWMiddleton, you are getting harder to keep behind 😉
 
thanks for the stats smokeball!

IBM beat us, but i'm guessing that was Chuck Renaud's fault, as he has joined them with 1707 WUs. since the last time i saved seti team our friends at S@N got a 3705 new member along with a couple 700s. it musta been a while though since about 20% of their team is new according to my data. and cobra dumped 4020 too.
 


<< Damn JWMiddleton, you are getting harder to keep behind >>


Me? You have been kickin' butt the last month, or so! I do hope that I can catch you with additional output, but not from you slowing down!
 
Thanks for the stats SB 🙂

Good output by us 🙂,and ...

Welcome to metallibloke &amp; perdition 😀

Robor
I wish SetiQ could somehow kick these WU's to my NT clients
Can't you do that with the VLAR rerouting that SETIQ has?
 
I did save IBM's daily data yesterday and ElFenix is correct about &quot;Chuck Renaud's fault, as he has joined them with 1707 WUs&quot;. A little further news on IBM that I just found out is that today they lost a member, &quot;Dave Wild&quot;, with 4,466 WUs. Unless he reappears later in the day as a name change (possible), IBM will take a hit tomorrow.

Also, ElFenix is correct about Cobra dumping 4,020. S@N also got 3 very nice additions (not counting another 7 new members) that combined for an additional 1,069 WUs. There is something sort of screwing with the &quot;New&quot; members when I compare a current update of S@N with the saved file from yesterday. A massive number of reported &quot;NEW&quot; members (by my SetiTeam program) numbering around 337 must be incorrect because there are currently 1,575 members in S@N (6 added so far today) when compared to the numbers I reported at the top of the thread early this morning.
 
Assim1 --


<< Can't you do that with the VLAR rerouting that SETIQ has? >>


The VLAR routing in SetiQueue only routes VLARs by executable name as I understand it. It makes no differentiation between setiathome-3.03.i386-winnt-cmdline.exe running on Win9x/ME or setiathome-3.03.i386-winnt-cmdline.exe running on NT/2000. I can't imagine that it would be too difficult since SetiQueue knows the OS of the client it's running on. (Look at System Type on your client details.) I say that without knowing a thing about the inner workings of SetiQueue.
 
But if you set the individual client computers (the slow ones) to VLAR routing, and don't put that setting on the NT/2K clients, then it should TRY to route the VLARs away from the slow systems...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top