Assignment died of dysentery - Page 8

kladner · 2012-03-27, 17:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

Yes, unreserve it through GPU72 to clear the record.

So you know, the sequence of events for this was:

2012-03-22 03:45:02 -- GPU72 issued this to Jerry to DC.
2012-03-23 23:35:48 -- Jerry submitted a bad DC to PrimeNet.
2012-03-24 00:12:11 -- PrimeNet reissued 26229943 to Triple Check to Spidy.
2012-03-24 01:20:21 -- GPU72 issued this to you to DC.
2012-03-27 ??:??:?? -- Jerry submitted a good DC to PrimeNet.

Bad Jerry!!! Bad!

Good to know the sanity check works.

Thanks, chalsall. Will do. As I said, it was just in queue, not started. ;)

Dubslow · 2012-03-27, 20:12

What a remarkable residue, there is only one hexit that is not a letter

ckdo · 2012-03-27, 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubslow

What a remarkable residue, there is only one hexit that is~~[COLOR=Black]not~~ [/COLOR]a letter

Fixed. Chances are 1 in 1153, roughly. "Remarkable" is something different.

davieddy · 2012-03-27, 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

It was assigned to you by the system. Somehow it was "lost" back to PrimeNet and reassigned to another PrimeNet worker. I have updated your records to give you the credit for the P-1 work, as you obviously did the work.

There is. The system had detected that the candidate was no longer owned by us (one of only two), and had marked it for no further assignments after you had completed the P-1. For reasons I won't bore you with, it was watching for you to complete a TF rather than a P-1; that's why it didn't detect that you'd finished the work.

Your powers of organization never cease to amaze me!

x

flashjh · 2012-03-27, 23:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by kladner

Just now I checked my assignments and found the notice that an assigned LLDC had been completed by another user. No harm done as I had not started it.

Should I unreserve it through GPU272? Exponent is 26229943.

I'm sorry...

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

Yes, unreserve it through GPU72 to clear the record.

So you know, the sequence of events for this was:

2012-03-22 03:45:02 -- GPU72 issued this to Jerry to DC.
2012-03-23 23:35:48 -- Jerry submitted a bad DC to PrimeNet.
2012-03-24 00:12:11 -- PrimeNet reissued 26229943 to Triple Check to Spidy.
2012-03-24 01:20:21 -- GPU72 issued this to you to DC.
2012-03-27 ??:??:?? -- Jerry submitted a good DC to PrimeNet.

Good to know the sanity check works.

Whoops. Reference this (and the surrounding posts):

Quote:

Originally Posted by flashjh

The original P95 DC is correct based on my second run, so the P95 DC will be correct.

M( 26229943 )C, 0x76916187254012__, n = 1474560, CUDALucas v1.69

We had to leave town for a family emergency. I logged in remote this morning to upload a DC and inadvertently submitted the whole results file instead of just the most recent results. Hence the 'bad' and the 'good' DC results on the exponent status page.

Quote:

Bad Jerry!!! Bad!

Chastisement accepted ;)

kladner · 2012-03-27, 23:41

No harm. I had not remembered the previous discussion, anyway.

kladner · 2012-05-04, 13:47

This is odd. Looking at the PrimeNet communications thread in P95 this morning I saw the following:

Code:

Sending expected completion date for M45188xxx: Jun 29 2012
Sending expected completion date for M45483xxx: Oct 16 2014
PrimeNet success code with additional info:
WARNING: Estimated completion date is more than one year away.  The assignment may be reassigned to another user after one year.
Unreserving M26161xxx

The DC assignment which was unreserved does not show any assignment on PrimeNet, but the system does not allow me to re-reserve it. GPU to 72 still thinks I own it.

Forcing communication with PrimeNet yielded this:

Code:

Updating computer information on the server
Sending expected completion date for M45188xxx: May 05 2012
Sending expected completion date for M45483xxx: Jun 05 2012

which is approximately what was being reported before today.

There was no work done on the DCLL assignment, so I am not particularly attached to it. Should I unreserve it on GPU to 72?

chalsall · 2012-05-04, 13:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by kladner

There was no work done on the DCLL assignment, so I am not particularly attached to it. Should I unreserve it on GPU to 72?

Yes, this appeared in my Admin "Warnings" page this morning as "Rereserved".

As luck would have it, Spidy managed to grab the candidate back after your system released it. I'll transfer it over to AnonSpidy, and send you the new AID so you can claim it again.

kladner · 2012-05-04, 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

Yes, this appeared in my Admin "Warnings" page this morning as "Rereserved".

As luck would have it, Spidy managed to grab the candidate back after your system released it. I'll transfer it over to AnonSpidy, and send you the new AID so you can claim it again.

Many thanks! I'll unreserve the old version. I have to suppose that something (local) was making my system look much slower than usual to PrimeNet.

chalsall · 2012-05-04, 14:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by kladner

Many thanks! I'll unreserve the old version. I have to suppose that something (local) was making my system look much slower than usual to PrimeNet.

No, don't unreserve it on GPU72. The assignment on the system will remain the same; just the AID in the Candidate table will need to be updated (nothing to do with you).

Edit: Whoops. Too late. You just unreserved it.

No problem, I've un-unreserved it for you.

kladner · 2012-05-04, 14:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

No, don't unreserve it on GPU72. The assignment on the system will remain the same; just the AID in the Candidate table will need to be updated (nothing to do with you).

Ah Sh!t! I misunderstood your response, and ditched the assignment. My bad.

2012-05-04, 13:47	#84
kladner "Kieren" Jul 2011 In My Own Galaxy! 10011110101110₂ Posts	This is odd. Looking at the PrimeNet communications thread in P95 this morning I saw the following: Code: Sending expected completion date for M45188xxx: Jun 29 2012 Sending expected completion date for M45483xxx: Oct 16 2014 PrimeNet success code with additional info: WARNING: Estimated completion date is more than one year away. The assignment may be reassigned to another user after one year. Unreserving M26161xxx The DC assignment which was unreserved does not show any assignment on PrimeNet, but the system does not allow me to re-reserve it. GPU to 72 still thinks I own it. Forcing communication with PrimeNet yielded this: Code: Updating computer information on the server Sending expected completion date for M45188xxx: May 05 2012 Sending expected completion date for M45483xxx: Jun 05 2012 which is approximately what was being reported before today. There was no work done on the DCLL assignment, so I am not particularly attached to it. Should I unreserve it on GPU to 72?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
disk died, prime work lost forever? where to put prime? on SSD or HDD?	emily	PrimeNet	3	2013-03-01 05:49
new assignment	esakertt	PrimeNet	6	2012-11-09 19:51
Want New Assignment	Unregistered	Information & Answers	1	2012-03-28 00:02
Old Assignment	Primeinator	PrimeNet	4	2009-06-04 22:35
How would you know if I died ?	rogue	Soap Box	9	2005-11-08 19:50

2012-03-27, 20:12	#79
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 3·29·83 Posts	What a remarkable residue, there is only one hexit that is not a letter

2012-03-27, 23:41	#83
kladner "Kieren" Jul 2011 In My Own Galaxy! 2·3·1,693 Posts	No harm. I had not remembered the previous discussion, anyway.