Even so, it requires a BOINC mechanism, even if that mechanism can be
modified by flags at the server.
jm7
Richard
Haselgrove
<r.haselgr...@bti To
nternet.com> "Lynn W. Taylor" <[email protected]>,
Sent by: <[email protected]>
<boinc_dev-bounce cc
[email protected]
u> Subject
Re: [boinc_dev] host punishment
mechanism revisited
05/28/2010 07:53
AM
That's a question for each project, not BOINC centrally.
It comes in two parts:
Does it need fast (valid results)?
(e.g. to generate dependent work, or to purge processed files from a small
server)
Can it cope with fast errors?
(does the demand for new work from a fast-erroring host cause server
problems)
> Seems to me that the really fast methods of catching a broken host
> aren't very good, and the good methods aren't very fast.
>
> Does BOINC need fast?
>
> On 5/27/2010 7:19 PM, Josef W. Segur wrote:
>> I certainly agree, and even were it a perfect method of finding problem
>> hosts the best method of minimizing their damage to the project is
>> uncertain. Your inputs along that line have seemed very good to me.
> _______________________________________________
> boinc_dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
> To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
> (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
>
_______________________________________________
boinc_dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.
_______________________________________________
boinc_dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.
