On 31.07.2016 23:00, John Hardin wrote:
Folks:
It looks like we didn't get another successful weekly masscheck again,
even though if you check the counts today they are above the thresholds.
I suspect this is happening due to some results being submitted "late".
Imo, what would solve the problem is having more cpu cycles available
for the larger masscheckers and more independent masscheckers so the
delay doesn't depend on one or two fat processors.
Mine is one of the fatter spam corpus which I will reduce to make it on
time. Will also try to move to a box with more cores or split to be able
to increase the amount of simultaneous jobs.
Axb
