Folding Forum

Yes, thanks. There's nothing unusual about the 41 sec upload so that should put an end to any speculations concerning your speedy return.

Nice connection!

bowlinra wrote:I've had others point out issues with the server during similar time frame.
128.143.231.201 - Bigadv transfer and assignment failed viewtopic.php?f=18&t=22938

That was a report of a download problem three days after your upload, not related at all. His connection timed out after 75 minutes, a very slow connection. Even his successful download of a SMP WU from a different server was very slow.

So I take it, I'm not going to get credit for a WU that shows completely successful from my side?

You don't get credit for WU's that were never received by the PG servers. There is still just the one report of this WU being turned in and not by your username:

Hi ****** (team ***),
Your WU (P8101 R20 C8 G41) was added to the stats database on 2012-11-08 13:06:30 for 258760 points of credit.

As for using Langouste, given your upload speed it gives you little to no advantage and gives an additional place for failure to occur. You are not the first person to report missing uploads connected to using Langouste. Or you can use the V7 client, it will download a new WU at the same time as it is finishing up the previous one and then uploading.

Joe_H wrote:You are not the first person to report missing uploads connected to using Langouste.

I do not think the issue is with Langouste. I have had several of the beautiful 8101 WUs go MIA just using the standard client for result sending. Considering how often the Stanford servers go down every other weekend, that might be a good place to start investigating. That is just me though.

Nobody can prove whether it's an issue with how Langouste talks to the servers or how the servers interpret the data it receives. Probably the best way to get better data would be to compare a statistically significant number of 8101 uploads using Langouste with an equal number of uploads using V7. Then, too, you could get better support from foldingforum.org.

As I'm sure you know, the Pande Group does not support any 3rd party software, including Langouste. That doesn't mean it doesn't work nor does it mean it's the cause of the problem, but if the same thing happens with V7 they're much more likely to search for and fix a bug in how V7 talks to the servers (even if it happens to be the same bug).

I've successfully upload 337 BigAdv WUs use Langouste and just this one is MIA. Rig in question run a 8101 in 23.5 hrs, like clock work.

bowlinra wrote:I've successfully upload 337 BigAdv WUs use Langouste and just this one is MIA. Rig in question run a 8101 in 23.5 hrs, like clock work.

If you are going by statistical data a whole lot more WU's have been uploaded to the work servers without Langouste and without credit issues.

All we can say is there is an anomaly. We really don't know the cause. Anything further is just speculation. People taking sides and assigning blame: What does that accomplish?

Personally, I'd give you some points (maybe not as many as you'd like, but something, in the spirit of compromise) regardless of cause. However, it is not in my power.

I don't think anyone wins in this discussion. Perhaps the best action is just to move on knowing that the system isn't perfect and injustice can occur. After all, on the scale of what is possible, this is just a minor injustice.

I have had failures without langouste and I can not remember ever having one with Langouste it does not mean I have not had one with Langouste, I just did not see it if I did. An occasional failure is the norm with the bigadv WU's though very rare any more it used to be more prevalent than it is today. It is something that some of us have just come to accept over time unexplainable things can happen. While I believe you completed the WU in question and uploaded it a log while is a record of the successfull work anybody can alter a log and thus lay claim to anything they wanted. I do not think it would be wise to start issuing points based on log's. What PG has done in the past when there have been major problems is use the affected folders average PPD and award them that + or - a few %. but in a case when there have only been an occasional report and no record on the server there is usually nothing done.

To the person that it happens to it does not seem right, I know I have been there myself there is really nothing that can be done without opening a very large can of worms that I do not believe PG really wants to open. All I can really say is sorry for your loss

"It Is Well with My Soul"