0
Cajones

Saving lives with your computer.

Recommended Posts

Ok, I sent this e-mail and have not gotten a response. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks!

I have two completed WU's that have not sent results because of periodically online. Is there a way for me to manually send you results. Or manually initiate a transfer of information?
Thank you, Raefordite Team #31515


[21:32:04] - Couldn't send HTTP request to server
[21:32:04] + Could not connect to Work Server (results)
[21:32:04] - Error: Could not transmit unit 02 (completed April 20). Keeping unit in queue.



[06:11:38] + Attempting to send results
[06:11:38] - Couldn't send HTTP request to server
[06:11:38] + Could not connect to Work Server (results)
[06:11:38] - Error: Could not transmit unit 03 (completed April 23). Keeping unit in queue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A few ideas...

It looks like you are running the console version.

Are you on dial-up? If you are, you may want to configure your version to [Yes] for "Ask before fetching data?" (I think that's the dialog - it's something to that effect)

The other possibility is you jut happened to try to send during a server outage. The servers do periodically go down, but usually come back up after 10-15 minutes.

The laws of physics are strictly enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I did reconfigure it so it asks me before trying to upload/download. I hope once my present work is complete I can get all the information sent.

I know they have recognized the problem with dial up (like I haven't :P) and will hopefully add to the software so I can manually tell it when to go get and when to give me more!

Thanks for the help

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I have 2 machines running this program now, but I fear that signing up so late will put me out of contention.



I started late too. We may not get to the top of our teams ranking but we are helping the team as a whole kick ass;) Looks like we'll be moving into the top 100 soon. Besides the friendly competition going on here it feels nice to be doing something positive with all the bad things happening in the sport lately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Quote

Quote

I have 2 machines running this program now, but I fear that signing up so late will put me out of contention.



I started late too. We may not get to the top of our teams ranking but we are helping the team as a whole kick ass;) Looks like we'll be moving into the top 100 soon. Besides the friendly competition going on here it feels nice to be doing something positive with all the bad things happening in the sport lately.



Too True, still it would be nice to drive the competition further in the name of science. More competition mean helping more people, and THAT is the great to see. Good Job Guys


"Impossible is a word to be found only in the dictionary of fools." Napoleon Bonaparte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I started late too.



Me too. The leader had a several thousand points when I started. I didn't let it discourage me. Every bit helps. Thanks for joining in! :)

:)connection 1.9 meg./DSL working fine.
-Grant
_______________________________
If I could be a Super Hero,
I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year.
http://www.hangout.no/speednews/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Question: Would it be more productive to run FAH console on a Linux partition or FAH Graphical (minimized) on a ME partition? Anybody know? Any opinions?



Opinion only:

Run it in the console under Linux. First off, ME is the abomination OS. Talk about unstable crap. I'm not in the "Linux or die" camp, but even as a Wintel guy, I'd avoid that one. Next, in general, the performance of any console version will edge out the graphical version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I assume that running the console as a service on an XP or 2K machine is preferable to running the graphical. Right?



Correct. Anything that unecessarily uses processor cycles is overhead. I don't need to watch the graphics. Actually, since I have it on multiple machines, I couldn't really make use of that anyway. The console version is the "thinnest" client, wasting the fewest cycles for administration and fluff.

The main benefit of running it as a service (under any Windows OS) is that it runs full-time while the computer is on, whether or not you are logged in. That also helps if you are running Folding in an office setting where multiple people could be logging in and using the machine under various IDs.

Quote

I want all of your secrets.



They aren't secrets. I'm happy to share. Passing around the knowledge helps us work for a worthy cause.... and kick some whuffo butt. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

The main benefit of running it as a service (under any Windows OS) is that it runs full-time while the computer is on, whether or not you are logged in.


How do you set it up as a service under 9x? I use FireDaemon to set it up under XP/2k but that won't run on a 9x machine as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

How do you set it up as a service under 9x? I use FireDaemon to set it up under XP/2k but that won't run on a 9x machine as far as I know.



I'm pretty sure you're right that FireDaemon won't run on 9x. As far as other ways to do it, umm.... I'm a techie, not a historian, damnit! :o;)

Upgrade, man, time to upgrade! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The console version is definitely more efficient than the graphical client.

The real advantage of the graphical client is when other people see it and ask what it is. You might be suprised how many people will join the cause after seeing it.

The console version cannot be installed as a service under Win95/98/Me. To run the console version, you have to open a DOS window and run it from there.

If you are annoyed by the little window or don't want it to appear on the task bar, I can write a small executable to hide it when it runs. It won't allow you to see the program running (you can still look at the unitinfo text file to see progress), nor to shut it down gracefully, but it's just another thing to click on when shutting down/rebooting.

The laws of physics are strictly enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the first one was small, the second was even smaller but the third assignment was huge.. it'll take forevah until it's done.



I'm working on a 1250 but it seems to be going pretty quickly.

Team 31515
Kickin whuffo ass and movin on up ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0