gpu72.com reserving exponents under my account that were not given to me

[wfgarnett3]

Hello,

I have been reserving manually exponents from the gpu72.com website for almost a year with no issues.

However for the second time in about as many weeks when I request exponents the gpu72.com website gives me the number of exponents I have requested but has additional exponents I did not request.

For instance I requested 2 exponents and was given 92218351 and 92218537 which I am now submitting the results.txt file manually on mersenne.org now that they are done.

However at gpu72.com it shows 4 exponents as reserved rather than 2.

When I log in it shows 92218177 and 92218349 in addition to the above 2 -- it did not give me these 2 in the worktodo text that I copied -- it only gave me 2 exponents which is the number I requested.

I will unreserve these 2 additional exponents but just making you aware this is the second time recently and this has never happened before.

See attached images -- thanks.

William

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by wfgarnett3

However at gpu72.com it shows 4 exponents as reserved rather than 2.

I'm not quite sure what you are complaining about. Please see what the DB is reporting happened:

select Noted,Note from Note where Sender="[UID]" order by Noted desc limit 10;
+---------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Noted               | Note                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |
+---------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2019-03-19 03:04:50 | LF(3) -- N:    2 G:    0 P: 76 L:         0 H: 9900000000 -- n:    2 p: 76 l:         0 h: 9900000000 -- A: 2                                                                                                                    |
| 2019-03-19 03:04:49 | select * from (select Exponent,FactTo,P1,Wabbit from GPU where Exponent>=0 and Exponent<=9900000000 and FactTo<76 and WorkTypePN=200 and Status=0 and Wabbit<100 and Back=0  order by Exponent limit 2) as G  order by Exponent  |
| 2019-03-18 06:28:54 | LF(3) -- N:    2 G:    0 P: 76 L:         0 H: 9900000000 -- n:    2 p: 76 l:         0 h: 9900000000 -- A: 2                                                                                                                    |
| 2019-03-18 06:28:53 | LF(3) -- N:    2 G:    0 P: 76 L:         0 H: 9900000000 -- n:    2 p: 76 l:         0 h: 9900000000 -- A: 2                                                                                                                    |
| 2019-03-18 06:28:50 | select * from (select Exponent,FactTo,P1,Wabbit from GPU where Exponent>=0 and Exponent<=9900000000 and FactTo<76 and WorkTypePN=200 and Status=0 and Wabbit<100 and Back=0  order by Exponent limit 2) as G  order by Exponent  |
| 2019-03-18 06:28:50 | select * from (select Exponent,FactTo,P1,Wabbit from GPU where Exponent>=0 and Exponent<=9900000000 and FactTo<76 and WorkTypePN=200 and Status=0 and Wabbit<100 and Back=0  order by Exponent limit 2) as G  order by Exponent  |
| 2019-03-17 08:38:25 | LF(3) -- N:    1 G:    0 P: 76 L:         0 H: 9900000000 -- n:    1 p: 76 l:         0 h: 9900000000 -- A: 1                                                                                                                    |
| 2019-03-17 08:38:23 | select * from (select Exponent,FactTo,P1,Wabbit from GPU where Exponent>=0 and Exponent<=9900000000 and FactTo<76 and WorkTypePN=200 and Status=0 and Wabbit<100 and Back=0  order by Exponent limit 1) as G  order by Exponent  |
| 2019-03-11 06:01:23 | LF(3) -- N:   12 G:    0 P: 76 L:         0 H: 9900000000 -- n:   12 p: 76 l:         0 h: 9900000000 -- A: 12                                                                                                                   |
| 2019-03-11 06:01:21 | select * from (select Exponent,FactTo,P1,Wabbit from GPU where Exponent>=0 and Exponent<=9900000000 and FactTo<76 and WorkTypePN=200 and Status=0 and Wabbit<100 and Back=0  order by Exponent limit 12) as G  order by Exponent |
+---------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Edit: Ah... Did you "double click" at 2019-03-18 06:28:50 UTC?

[wfgarnett3]

Nope I didn't double-click

[wfgarnett3]

Hmm there may be something with my mouse going on -- mersenne rejected my results I just submitted and shows I already submitted even though I clicked once..

Thanks for the help -- I will get a new mouse...

[Thecmaster]

Originally Posted by wfgarnett3

Hmm there may be something with my mouse going on -- mersenne rejected my results I just submitted and shows I already submitted even though I clicked once..

Thanks for the help -- I will get a new mouse...

Are you computing with GPU while you report your results? My computer lags pretty much while running mFaktc and that CAN make you double click with one click.

If you running program try stopping it and see if your problem is still there.

If not you might need a new mouse.

[LaurV]

This problem is very frequent if you use cheap mouses, and you use them a lot.. hehe..

If you only use the mouse for "normal work", i.e. not playing games or so, and have access to a soldering iron, then opening the mouse and exchanging the two switches (from right click to left click) will "fix it" for a while. I did this in the past when my "inventory" (I work in the field) didn't include the proper switches (otherwise I would just replace the damage one and throw away the bad one). The reason is that cheap mouses have cheap switches whose metal blades inside are partially broken after a while, and the switch needs a more firm press to make a reliable contact. After exchanging the switches, the mouse still can be used reliable for months or longer (because the right click is rarely used, and usually pressed firmer when used). Some mouses have a middle button which is similar to the other two, which is almost never used (press on the roll wheel). For some brand mouse you can fix the "bouncing" from the driver or provided application (like Logitech, Feonix, etc., they may have a "debouncing time" which you can set. usually 30 ms is perfect, as a double click takes 100 to 150 ms).

This process takes less than 5 minutes for a guy for who "soldering" is part of the daily job.

My former boss always got extremely angry when he saw me repairing mouses (at the time no optics, the rolling ball, always getting dirty, needing periodically open/clean). The mouses (mice?) were cheap and he always said that if I spend more than 15 minutes to repair a mouse I make a loss for the company, because my salary for 15 minutes was more than the mouse price. Just buy a new one (for that, a Chinese guy, a (car) driver would go to the store, and he was paid miserably).

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by LaurV

This problem is very frequent if you use cheap mouses, and you use them a lot.. hehe..

The plural is mice. A wonderful hold over from the history of English (before it was 'simplified').

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

The plural is mice. A wonderful hold over from the history of English (before it was 'simplified').

Not for _computer_ mouses....

[Thecmaster]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Not for _computer_ mouses....

The Internet dissagrees with you there. There are more instances of "computer mice" than "computer mouses". However the use of "mouses" are used as a verb. "She mouses over the..." also mouse is used as verb. But many agrees that you can use both mouses and mice for computer mouse in plural.

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

The plural is mice. A wonderful hold over from the history of English (before it was 'simplified').

Yeah, we know (and used it in the last paragraph, if you had the patience to read the whole post), but it sounds extremely odd for us (non-native speaker).

[Uncwilly]

I read the first sentence of the last paragraph.....