GPU to 72 status... - Page 184

petrw1 · 2013-03-08, 14:35

Personal LL total <> top LL total

I think it is related to me unassigning being counted as completed.

Thought I did it right this time. I unassigned from the client only.

Aramis Wyler · 2013-03-09, 00:56

It is. I had dropped the remaineder of what I had picked up when we were emergency rolling to only 72, and gained about 10,000 GhzDays that day. :)

chalsall · 2013-03-09, 04:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aramis Wyler

It is. I had dropped the remaineder of what I had picked up when we were emergency rolling to only 72, and gained about 10,000 GhzDays that day. :)

OK. I obviously am a Stupid Programmer, and made an Error...

I'll have some cycles to look into this this weekend.

(No data was permanently harmed during the results of this error.)

LaurV · 2013-03-09, 05:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

I'll have some cycles to look into this this weekend.

Oh no! Please don't look into it this weekend, I just need 3-4 days more to be able to point you to this link and say "see what happens when you mix the saved time of LLTF with the saved time of LMHTF? you come on the second place!"

chalsall · 2013-03-09, 05:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurV

Oh no! Please don't look into it this weekend, I just need 3-4 days more to be able to point you to this link and say "see what happens when you mix the saved time of LLTF with the saved time of LMHTF? you come on the second place!"

LOL... James has already given me an elegant solution to this "problem".

Thanks for reminding me....

kracker · 2013-03-09, 21:14

The "GHz Days per Day of Work Saved by x" doesn't seem to be that accurate, as here shows I found 2 factors, one at 03.08, and 03.09, but those two factors have appeared BEFORE 03.07 in the "saved" graph here.

(I remember the graph before, those two bars were NOT there at 03.05 and 06 before the two factors I found today and yesterday)

Antonio · 2013-03-10, 10:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by kracker

The "GHz Days per Day of Work Saved by x" doesn't seem to be that accurate, as here shows I found 2 factors, one at 03.08, and 03.09, but those two factors have appeared BEFORE 03.07 in the "saved" graph here.

(I remember the graph before, those two bars were NOT there at 03.05 and 06 before the two factors I found today and yesterday)

None of the charts are an accurate representation of what and when people have reported anymore, ever since 'somebody' decided it would be a good idea to compensate for those workers who only report results occasionally. From what I've seen all results get 'randomly' spread over several days, if you want an accurate representation of what you have done, you will have to keep your own records and create your own graphs

Chuck · 2013-03-10, 13:18

I want a GPU like Carsten has — he did 17,000+ GHz days yesterday according to the statistics.

chalsall · 2013-03-10, 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antonio

From what I've seen all results get 'randomly' spread over several days, if you want an accurate representation of what you have done, you will have to keep your own records and create your own graphs

When I implemented this, I did say that no information is lost. There's an "adjusted" field in the table which is used to spread the results out over the time they were out.

This has had a very useful effect of removing huge spikes in the overall graphs. However, if people want (and I get the impression they do) I could make available graphs for individuals without the adjustments.

kracker · 2013-03-10, 14:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

When I implemented this, I did say that no information is lost. There's an "adjusted" field in the table which is used to spread the results out over the time they were out.

This has had a very useful effect of removing huge spikes in the overall graphs. However, if people want (and I get the impression they do) I could make available graphs for individuals without the adjustments.

Ah, for like people who don't upload daily?

EDIT: Can/may I have them w/o adjustments? thanks!

kladner · 2013-03-10, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by kracker

EDIT: Can/may I have them w/o adjustments? thanks!

It would be interesting to see, at least.

2013-03-09, 21:14	#2019
kracker "Mr. Meeseeks" Jan 2012 California, USA 2³×271 Posts	The "GHz Days per Day of Work Saved by x" doesn't seem to be that accurate, as here shows I found 2 factors, one at 03.08, and 03.09, but those two factors have appeared BEFORE 03.07 in the "saved" graph here. (I remember the graph before, those two bars were NOT there at 03.05 and 06 before the two factors I found today and yesterday) Last fiddled with by kracker on 2013-03-09 at 21:15

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Status	Primeinator	Operation Billion Digits	5	2011-12-06 02:35
62 bit status	1997rj7	Lone Mersenne Hunters	27	2008-09-29 13:52
OBD Status	Uncwilly	Operation Billion Digits	22	2005-10-25 14:05
1-2M LLR status	paulunderwood	3*2^n-1 Search	2	2005-03-13 17:03
Status of 26.0M - 26.5M	1997rj7	Lone Mersenne Hunters	25	2004-06-18 16:46

2013-03-08, 14:35	#2014
petrw1 1976 Toyota Corona years forever! "Wayne" Nov 2006 Saskatchewan, Canada 2²×3×17×23 Posts	Personal LL total <> top LL total I think it is related to me unassigning being counted as completed. Thought I did it right this time. I unassigned from the client only.

2013-03-09, 00:56	#2015
Aramis Wyler "Bill Staffen" Jan 2013 Pittsburgh, PA, USA 2³×53 Posts	It is. I had dropped the remaineder of what I had picked up when we were emergency rolling to only 72, and gained about 10,000 GhzDays that day. :)

2013-03-10, 13:18	#2021
Chuck May 2011 Orange Park, FL 3×5×59 Posts	I want a GPU like Carsten has — he did 17,000+ GHz days yesterday according to the statistics.