Reply With QuoteI got that a while ago too. what I did is change the username from EatMaDustCh to eatmadustch (different capitalization), that seemed to work. You will have to clear the cache, though.
I seem to have a re occuring problem with some of my clients sending units to some other account than mine.
I have 4 total computer, 3 Win XP 1 Linux
After upgrading the 3 Windows Clients, only 1 or 2of them is sending units under my username. THe only way I can find out is to shutdown each one manually and look at my stats page to see if its affected my total cem/s for the duration.
All the WIn XP clients are setup the same way, but unlike Linux install there is no "configuration" file so to speak. Looks like the program pulls info from the registry.
Each client shows the same username to crunch under...
/shrug
I got that a while ago too. what I did is change the username from EatMaDustCh to eatmadustch (different capitalization), that seemed to work. You will have to clear the cache, though.
EatMaDust
Stop Microsoft turning into Big Brother!
http://www.againsttcpa.com
i don't think that's happening. check out your pending block summary under the "Preferences menu on the site. Expire out the tests you're not doing anymore and then add up the cEMs/s of the ones left. it looks like you've submitted for all of your tests today so it should show up on your personal graphs.
-Louie
Hmm ok all is good with the clients using the correct host..
now the problem is that they are reporting far less cem/s than they should be .. i have one cpu that avgs 350,000 cem/s
2 that run aroun 280,000 cem/s
and 1 that manages a measly 120,000 cem/sec
but its far lower than what it should be.
Now that my Linux box has started transmitting, it now seems as if the new client is bugged in regards to correct cem/s reporting as far as I can tell..
has anybody lese noticed this?
[k] [n] [%] [cEM/s] [CPU & OS]
28433•2^3851617+1 0% 7047 <Celeron 1.2ghz (XP)
5359•2^3777606+1 2% 10142 <AMD XP 2.2ghz (XP)
27653•2^3857325+1 2% 139180 <AMD 1.5ghz (XP)
28433•2^3858025+1 0% 263433 <AMD 1.5ghz (Linux)
The 1.5ghz Linux box is showing on the website. The 1.5ghz XP box shows 279,000 cEM/s in the actual program window, but only shows 139,000 cEM.s on the website.
Any ideas?
yeah, it shows that because you haven't been runing 24/7. your cem rate online is based on your real output, not the instantaneous rate in the client. as you continue to have it running, the rates will climb.
there is no bug.
-Louie
can someone explain why it would take 6 hours to run just 1 block
grandmother. ver 3.0
you were playing quake3.Originally posted by dragongoddess
can someone explain why it would take 6 hours to run just 1 block
or your computer was off.
or you were doing something else on your computer that used up your cpu.
-Louie
there is nothing on the computer to run
no games and the computer was on
again why would it take 6 hours to run 1 block
grandmother. ver 3.0
if it's upgraded to v1.10, then I'd like to see the log and know the system specs.
if not, it could have been a network bug from v1.0.
-Louie
Its the new client v1.10
os is WinME
mobo: biostar m7VIT pro
xp 1800
2 sticks (256 meg) of pc2700
look for block 221
[Tue Jun 10 15:25:07 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 15:25:11 2003] error creating username
[Tue Jun 10 15:25:15 2003] connecting to server
[Tue Jun 10 15:25:16 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 15:25:16 2003] requesting a block
[Tue Jun 10 15:25:20 2003] got proth test from server (k=5359, n=3773662)
[Tue Jun 10 15:41:02 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 15:41:02 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 15:41:02 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 15:41:02 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 15:41:02 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 15:41:03 2003] n.high = 17555 . 214 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 17:51:33 2003] block processing paused
[Tue Jun 10 17:51:35 2003] block processing resumed
[Tue Jun 10 17:52:37 2003] connecting to server
[Tue Jun 10 17:52:38 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 17:52:38 2003] requesting a block
[Tue Jun 10 17:52:43 2003] got proth test from server (k=21181, n=3858332)
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:24 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:24 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:24 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:25 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:25 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:25 2003] n.high = 16793 . 229 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 17:10:59 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 17:10:59 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 17:11:00 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 17:11:00 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 17:11:00 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 17:11:00 2003] n.high = 33586 . 228 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 17:25:34 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 17:25:34 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 17:25:34 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 17:25:35 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 17:25:35 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 17:25:35 2003] n.high = 50379 . 227 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 20:05:10 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 20:05:10 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 20:05:10 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 20:05:10 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 20:05:11 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 20:05:11 2003] n.high = 67172 . 226 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 20:19:41 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 20:19:41 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 20:19:42 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 20:19:45 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 20:19:45 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 20:19:46 2003] n.high = 83965 . 225 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 21:13:17 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 21:13:17 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 21:13:17 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 21:13:18 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 21:13:18 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 21:13:18 2003] n.high = 100758 . 224 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 22:54:16 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 22:54:16 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 22:54:16 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 22:54:16 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 22:54:20 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 22:54:20 2003] n.high = 117551 . 223 blocks left in test
[Tue Jun 10 23:08:49 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 23:08:49 2003] opening connection
[Tue Jun 10 23:08:49 2003] receiving from server
[Tue Jun 10 23:08:50 2003] logging into server
[Tue Jun 10 23:08:50 2003] login successful
[Tue Jun 10 23:08:50 2003] n.high = 134344 . 222 blocks left in test
[Wed Jun 11 00:45:50 2003] resolving hostname
[Wed Jun 11 00:45:50 2003] opening connection
[Wed Jun 11 00:45:50 2003] receiving from server
[Wed Jun 11 00:45:51 2003] logging into server
[Wed Jun 11 00:45:51 2003] login successful
[Wed Jun 11 00:45:51 2003] n.high = 151137 . 221 blocks left in test ********** look here
[Wed Jun 11 06:40:56 2003] resolving hostname
[Wed Jun 11 06:40:56 2003] opening connection
[Wed Jun 11 06:40:56 2003] receiving from server
[Wed Jun 11 06:40:58 2003] logging into server
[Wed Jun 11 06:40:58 2003] login successful
[Wed Jun 11 06:40:58 2003] n.high = 167930 . 220 blocks left in test
[Wed Jun 11 06:55:45 2003] resolving hostname
[Wed Jun 11 06:55:45 2003] opening connection
[Wed Jun 11 06:55:45 2003] receiving from server
[Wed Jun 11 06:55:45 2003] logging into server
[Wed Jun 11 06:55:45 2003] login successful
[Wed Jun 11 06:55:46 2003] n.high = 184723 . 219 blocks left in test
[Wed Jun 11 07:31:42 2003] resolving hostname
[Wed Jun 11 07:31:42 2003] opening connection
[Wed Jun 11 07:31:42 2003] receiving from server
[Wed Jun 11 07:31:42 2003] logging into server
[Wed Jun 11 07:31:43 2003] login successful
[Wed Jun 11 07:31:43 2003] n.high = 201516 . 218 blocks left in test
[Wed Jun 11 07:46:17 2003] resolving hostname
[Wed Jun 11 07:46:17 2003] opening connection
[Wed Jun 11 07:46:17 2003] receiving from server
[Wed Jun 11 07:46:18 2003] logging into server
[Wed Jun 11 07:46:18 2003] login successful
[Wed Jun 11 07:46:18 2003] n.high = 218309 . 217 blocks left in test
[Wed Jun 11 08:25:10 2003] got k and n from cache
[Wed Jun 11 08:25:11 2003] restarting proth test from cache (k=21181, n=3858332) [5.9%]
[Wed Jun 11 08:32:46 2003] resolving hostname
[Wed Jun 11 08:32:47 2003] opening connection
[Wed Jun 11 08:33:07 2003] temporarily unable to connect to server -- block added to submit queue
[Wed Jun 11 08:34:42 2003] block processing paused
grandmother. ver 3.0
There is a big difference between blocks. Some only take 15 minutes, others a couple of hours.
And at one point the log goes back in time!
[Tue Jun 10 17:52:38 2003] requesting a block
[Tue Jun 10 17:52:43 2003] got proth test from server (k=21181, n=3858332)
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:24 2003] resolving hostname
[Tue Jun 10 16:56:24 2003] opening connection
Originally posted by smh
There is a big difference between blocks. Some only take 15 minutes, others a couple of hours.
And at one point the log goes back in time!
Thats easy to explain. I noticed that the clock needed to be set to the correct time and I did so.
grandmother. ver 3.0
But there are still enormous variances in the time it takes to complete a test.
I'm not sure whether or not WinME can already show CPU time. If yes, just compare the time the SB client shows you to the CPU time the client got.
The only thing in my systray is the sb icon. In the config menu the priority is set to normal.
grandmother. ver 3.0
DG, that machine is a dsl/cable connection and not dial-up, yes?
I notice that on my ME machine(s), depending on what I'm doing, even with the new version, the 17orbust client may effectively slow - and in turn the cEMs/sec counter decreases - and even tho I may finish what I'm doing, it takes it awhile to build up steam again unless I physically "select" the client window...
when I get back to the office to that particular machine, I'll figure out a good example so you can acutally see what I mean...
yep a cable connection and the rate is over 299,000 cEMS/sec
grandmother. ver 3.0
well DG, I've tried to find a constant but couldn't...I've got two ME machines tied together on a sometimes dial-up using internet connection sharing...one box, the celeron 700 (think it is) gives me no trouble connected or not...
the amd-1900 sometimes will go into the stall routine unless the window is selected...now it will continue to work as it slows and where the old version would hang when it tried to connect and couldn't, the new version will continue to run slow until it can send the block. I haven't actually seen it but my guess is that once it sends the block, it speeds up again.
When it's in this mode so to speak, if I click on the desktop (or do anything else), it starts slowing. If I click on the client window, it starts speeding up.
Anywho, having said all that...your log to me shows a slow down speed up pattern...I'd keep an eye on it for a couple of days...just take a look at it before you call it a day and make sure the counter isn't going in reverse...if by morning it has slowed down, my guess is that something in the background is interferring...
are you running the service?
no
grandmother. ver 3.0
2 days and counting Website shows:
185295 5359•2^3777606+1 48 % 91259
91,259 cEM/s on website 351,000 cEM/s on client window
I cant run Linux right bnow because every 6 hours or so it just quits working..waiting on the linux version of 1.1.0
but what about the two columns on the pending test script that you didn't post... the start and report times. you've been working on that test for over 3 days.Originally posted by Hawkeye
2 days and counting Website shows:
185295 5359•2^3777606+1 48 % 91259
91,259 cEM/s on website 351,000 cEM/s on client window
the server isn't doing it's math wrong. doing 50% of a test that size in 3.5 days gives you an average speed of 92kCEMs/s.
your speed for that system is increasing. it's already higher then when you posted. it will keep going up until you finish if you don't turn the machine off again. when you get assigned your next test, as long as you run it 24/7, then your instantaneous speed will be equal to your average speed again.
-Louie
Posting Permissions
