UT theoretical chemistry code forum

If I look at this graph, it seems the current app is not good suited for Win-computers:
http://wuprop.boinc-af.org/results/grap ... l&cpuid=17

It's my Linux-machine against a similar Windows one.

I am now getting really low points for the work my computers are doing on this project, compared to say, SETI, or WCG. By a large percentage. Perhaps something can be done to fix the issue. It's an interesting project you have here, I'd like to keep participating....
Can you please link your ...

Longer WUs are fine, with checkpoints even better, but with this error they are definitely not fine:
<core_client_version>6.10.58</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
Maximum elapsed time exceeded
</message>
<stderr_txt>
SIGSEGV: segmentation violation
Stack trace (2 frames):
[0x4a7ccd ...

I definitely can't confirm that credits per time get down, it's the other way around for my machine. I get more credits with newer versions (exception was the v3.04, that was excessive).

Perhaps it's just that the newer apps are not that effective on windows machines any more, and thus don't ...

Update on new WUs:
Version Runtime CPU-Time Grant C/h clock C/h CPU #WU
V2.04 33919,35 30145,28 293,17 31,12 35,01 462,00
V3.00 14052,25 13021,14 292,70 74,99 80,92 10,00
V3.01 87642,36 80438,70 1035,53 42,54 46,34 60,00
V3.04 183672,24 169940,70 1971,23 38,64 41,76 103,00
V3.05 655,19 643,18 6,57 ...

I posted my experience in regard of credits in the other thread already, but here's now with the 3.04 update:
Version Runtime CPU-Time Grant C/h clock C/h CPU
V2.04 33919,35 30145,28 293,17 31,12 35,01
V3.00 14052,25 13021,14 292,70 74,99 80,92
V3.01 87642,36 80438,70 1035,53 42,54 46,34
V3.04 ...

What about the Credits? I've not crunched that much from the new ones, but it feels like 30% less credit per CPU-time in relation to the former Workunits. Fault or Intention or am i just too impatient ;-)
Lets see how the following workunits are rated on this or any other PC.
I can't confirm that ...

I just crunched the first 3.0, and it was 10 times longer.
I hope it stays this way :)

Hi, i have got the same problem

i am wondering, first i had this issue on primaboinca, a few days later SETI@home refuses to take back the WU's done. Now eOn goes on with that. Which project will be the next??! Maybe it is just bad luck maybe or evil ghosts.

27.05.2011 18:07:07 eon2 [error ...

Now I get some WTs with 6-10 min duration, their names start with 578416205, is there a possibility to get more of them?
Why are most WUs still so ridiculously short?

The WUs are very short, they last less than two minutes on my machine. Is it possible to get a bit longer ones, let's say more than 15 minutes, somehow? I'd like even longer ones, over 1h long, but the actual ones primarily generate traffic, not crunchtime.

Here's an overview of the credits on my machine since September 2010:

Old server version Runtime CPU-Time Claimed Granted C/h claim C/h grant C/h Diff
App name number of WUs CPU
eon client v5.04 156 40688,01 33394,65 255,35 255,35 27,53 27,53 0,00
eon client v5.08 38 12109,15 9730,82 74,44 73,32 ...

If the correlation between crunch time and flops an any given machine is always the same, there is no correlation between flops and credits on my machine from app v2.03.
It was very much the a flat line for the v1.33 app.

BTW: Currently the results make good on the exorbitant granting from the last ...

Credits are behaving very erratic last time and seem to have no connection to work done.
It's something that happened with the appearance of the new application version 2.03, with the old 1.22 everything was smooth, though perhaps not well-paying for some.
Now the amount of credit granted for an ...

Sorry for the long hiatus. I was out of town without internet access over the holidays.

We haven't explicitly changed anything with our credit. We were testing a new type of simulation over the past several weeks. I don't know how this would have affected credit.
Happy new Year!

The old results ...