upload problem

Message boards : Number crunching : upload problem
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
morgan

Send message
Joined: 14 Sep 17
Posts: 10
Credit: 7,358,614
RAC: 315
Message 755 - Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 12:37:43 UTC

I can´t upload wu´s !

Transient http problem -- Peer certificate cannot be authenticated with given CA certificates

Anyone else, or is it a local problem here ?
ID: 755 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Johannes Elsner

Send message
Joined: 14 Apr 18
Posts: 5
Credit: 8,060,688
RAC: 0
Message 756 - Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 12:59:52 UTC - in response to Message 755.  

Yupp, same here.
ID: 756 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
hoarfrost
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Help desk expert

Send message
Joined: 11 Aug 17
Posts: 477
Credit: 13,790,167
RAC: 4,595
Message 757 - Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 13:50:11 UTC

Thank you! Now, as I see - problem source are detected and problem solved. Can you confirm that tasks sent and reported normally?
ID: 757 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
JohnMD
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 17
Posts: 6
Credit: 2,592,816
RAC: 0
Message 758 - Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 14:04:39 UTC - in response to Message 757.  

Thank you! Now, as I see - problem source are detected and problem solved. Can you confirm that tasks sent and reported normally?

Confirmed here
ID: 758 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
morgan

Send message
Joined: 14 Sep 17
Posts: 10
Credit: 7,358,614
RAC: 315
Message 759 - Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 14:22:44 UTC

Thank´s for quickfix :-)
ID: 759 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Johannes Elsner

Send message
Joined: 14 Apr 18
Posts: 5
Credit: 8,060,688
RAC: 0
Message 760 - Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 15:39:02 UTC - in response to Message 759.  

+1
ID: 760 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
VietOZ

Send message
Joined: 26 Mar 18
Posts: 8
Credit: 247,395,533
RAC: 0
Message 794 - Posted: 3 Mar 2019, 16:22:47 UTC

problem seems to be back. Upload got to 100% then backed off ... had to retry several times to go thru.Website is also very sluggish to access.
ID: 794 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
hoarfrost
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Help desk expert

Send message
Joined: 11 Aug 17
Posts: 477
Credit: 13,790,167
RAC: 4,595
Message 795 - Posted: 4 Mar 2019, 9:58:11 UTC - in response to Message 794.  

problem seems to be back. Upload got to 100% then backed off ... had to retry several times to go thru.Website is also very sluggish to access.

Yes, during heavy operations like data archiving we see a similar problem from time to time.
ID: 795 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
UBT - Timbo

Send message
Joined: 27 Oct 17
Posts: 6
Credit: 1,377,609
RAC: 1,996
Message 874 - Posted: 12 Apr 2019, 15:47:18 UTC - in response to Message 795.  

Yes, during heavy operations like data archiving we see a similar problem from time to time.


Hi

Maybe you should consider doing what SETI@home does and switch their website and upload/download servers OFF on the same day/time each week (Tuesday in SETI's case) and then any back-office data archiving can be done at minimal disruption to users.

I'm not a fan of this option, but it would maybe mean that 160-164 of 168 hours per week, the project is 100% functional and for 4-8 hours it is offline. Simple compromise but it might help and saves people complaining all the time about inaccessible server.

regards
Tim
ID: 874 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
jozef j
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 17
Posts: 50
Credit: 188,056,407
RAC: 3,524
Message 875 - Posted: 12 Apr 2019, 16:57:18 UTC

ITS becouse formula, all work before start "sprint in formula for this project" they have to do something with this stupid chalenges" and not to server of rakesearch. Why hell have they increase capacity of servers ?becouse some unkown private person from internet create stipd formula or other "chalenges"
Poject need in forst STABLE SUPPORT from users and not shocking overload ..this have nothing with "science" or just brain cells..)

Upload problem for becouse back up ?? i dont see... but some preson write some here if they see few finnished task in ko ..panicking
now is whoel server completly dont respond or zero download upload becouse stupid formula .... "scientific" ...., fffgf
ID: 875 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
pschoefer

Send message
Joined: 1 Jan 19
Posts: 4
Credit: 32,381,006
RAC: 12,838
Message 877 - Posted: 13 Apr 2019, 6:38:02 UTC - in response to Message 875.  

Well, from a purely scientific point of view, it doesn't really matter who crunches the tasks and when. It would be a problem if a project server completely goes down for extended periods of time so that the net amount of work done becomes negative. Yes, those who have been crunching along here before that sprint started (like you and me) are doing less work now than they used to, and those who (re-)joined the project because of the sprint are not doing as much work as they potentially could. But this is not a net loss of computing power, and yesterday was in fact the best day in the history of RakeSearch.

You might argue that those server problems are bad in the long term, as regular participants might decide to quit the project. But I don't think there has ever been any evidence of this happening to a significant extent (just look at how many stability issues SETI@home has even during normal operation without any "stupid challenges", and still they have a very solid user base). On the other hand, the "stupid challenges" attract new participants who would not have joined otherwise, and some of them might stick with the project after the Competition to finish a milestone, collect run time at another app for WUProp, earn a badge, or because they just like the project. I don't have a proof that this really leads to a significant long-term increase of the user base, either (although I have seen this causing a higher overall throughput for at least a few days after the competition), so my best guess is that the long-term effects of the "stupid challenges" are negligible.

So all in all, the impacts of the "stupid challenges" are more work done for a short period of time and nothing significant in the long run, so there's no real downside. This probably explains why the project administrators do not share your view and rather see them as a chance to identify problems and increase the stability of the project also under very high-load conditions (see hoarfrost's latest comment, and I know from private communication with other project administrators that they have a similar opinion).
ID: 877 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Magiceye04

Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 18
Posts: 2
Credit: 313,873
RAC: 0
Message 878 - Posted: 13 Apr 2019, 16:26:00 UTC

What exactly is the problem of the server?
Is it just to small to manage all the requests, if more than x people are participating on the project?
The amount of data shoud not be a problem, we are talking about max. 2,5kB per Work unit.
ID: 878 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : Number crunching : upload problem

©2022 The searchers team, Karelian Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences