YMG thanks for pointing that out. I haven't seen such errors. The link in the FAQ goes to Rosetta version 5.06, so it is pretty far back. Have you still been seeing this error occuring? Is that on a Windows PC?

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

sooo please please delete my rosetta account and info :)

(I say that because I like rosetta, but I can't help the community when I only go to the internet once a month)

Ethan's post below is the current official word on the subject of account deletion. You see user accounts go deeper then just stopping new work and deleting some user information, they are tied in to the message boards and the work units, and other databases in the BOINC system. So it requires some study.

Actually you COULD help the BOINC community by crunching climate prediction. Even if you only access the internet once a month. That's enough for that project.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

How to "delete" your own BOINC user account

Click the "Participants" link above on this message board.
Click the change links for EMail address and other account info.
Modify or remove any information you do not wish to remain.
If you have created an account profile, click the link to delete it.

So you see, the "account" will still exist, but it won't have any of your personal information anywhere. Presumably at that point you would stop crunching under that account as well. Although it will still work. It's just that if you forget the EMail address and password for the account you won't be able to signon to post to the message boards.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Is there a - epidemic on the boards?

Anders n

---

I noticed your system had a melt down around 2:40 am eastern standard time, since then if you log on to my results are recording 14 projects that never reached my computer. Is it possible for you to remove these from the server side and re-assign them to other computers so crunching time will not be lost for the next 10 days.

Thanks,
FirePage

---

FirePage, no we (the moderators) don't have a way to do that. The tasks will drop from your list once they age normally. Others are already crunching tasks for those same proteins, just under a different random starting point. So, there really isn't any crunch time lost.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

FirePage, no we (the moderators) don't have a way to do that. The tasks will drop from your list once they age normally. Others are already crunching tasks for those same proteins, just under a different random starting point. So, there really isn't any crunch time lost.

Thank You for the infromation. While the computations will couninue, which is the most important concern, as in the past, the RAC will drop like a rock.

As long as the result come through, I hope I make some difference with the program.

Thanks,
FirePage

---

As I understood it, you have some "ghost WUs", where the server shows them for your host, but you do not see them in your task list. These will not harm your RAC at all.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Since there is no way for the user community to contact the moderators reliably, I have established this sticky. Hopefully this will reduce the number of new threads started solely for the purpose of attracting the attention of the moderation team to a problem or complaint.

This is a place for the user community to contact the moderators to provide feed back, ask for explanations for any moderator actions, request moderator actions, or get assistance that may require a moderator.

Feel free to post here, but note that after the issue is address the posts will be moved to an archive thread located here.

So think of this as a work queue for the moderation team. If the question is in this sticky and a moderator has not responded it has not yet been addressed.

I have a computer working for Rosetta@home that isn't getting work from the server. I get a message saying one result is the limit per day. Why?

I haven't been able to find a message or post that talks about this.

---

Jim, normally there is a limit of downloading 100 WUs per day. But any time a computation error occurs for a given host, that number is reduced by one. It is the system's way of halting work to a system that's having some kind of problem. So if you have computation errors on 100 different tasks the maximum download reaches 1. Then when you report back a successful result, that maximum is doubled; then doubled again for the next, so you very quickly work your way back to a 100 maximum after returning about 8 good results.

Having said that, I expected to bring up your hosts list and see one with 100+ WUs out there and a limit of 1; but I don't see a host like that in your list. Did the problem clear up on it's own? Or, which host ID is having this occur?

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Jim, normally there is a limit of downloading 100 WUs per day. But any time a computation error occurs for a given host, that number is reduced by one. It is the system's way of halting work to a system that's having some kind of problem. So if you have computation errors on 100 different tasks the maximum download reaches 1. Then when you report back a successful result, that maximum is doubled; then doubled again for the next, so you very quickly work your way back to a 100 maximum after returning about 8 good results.

Having said that, I expected to bring up your hosts list and see one with 100+ WUs out there and a limit of 1; but I don't see a host like that in your list. Did the problem clear up on it's own? Or, which host ID is having this occur?

It is this host
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=231587
Anders n

Thanks Anders. Looks like that host is requesting a new task each day and always getting a download error. So, sounds like that PC is having internet problems. Simplest to power it down and restart and that will probably clear it up.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

My F-Secure anti-virus scanner just popped up these alerts while I was working and running BOINC in the background:

Malicious code found in file C:PROGRAM FILESBOINCPROJECTSBOINC.BAKERLAB.ORG_ROSETTAROSETTA_BETA_5.70_WINDOWS_INTELX86.EXE.

Malicious code found in file C:PROGRAM FILESBOINCPROJECTSBOINC.BAKERLAB.ORG_ROSETTAROSETTA_5.68_WINDOWS_INTELX86.EXE.

Malicious code found in file C:Program FilesBOINCprojectsboinc.bakerlab.org_rosettarosetta_5.68_windows_intelx86.exe.
Infection: Trojan-Dropper.Win32.Agent.blk


Is this a known issue or something I should be concerned about? I'm not running BOINC again until I know what's up.

Submitted the files to F-Secure and got a response:

"The file you submitted is indeed clean. Our anti-virus product had a false alarm on this file earlier, however the problem is already fixed in the latest anti-virus update."

good good. :)

in another thread, a bunch of us ran other virus scanners and came up with nothing wrong. must be something with that particular program.

---

this post by you is way better on explaining checkpoints. maybe you could mix and match the text of both the other post from below and the one i just linked to.

---

Thanks Greg... I think. I was kind of afraid that would be your response. Basically that the reasonably concise text addresses numerous questions... thus making it difficult to catagorize, and reference in an FAQ :)

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Thanks Greg... I think. I was kind of afraid that would be your response. Basically that the reasonably concise text addresses numerous questions... thus making it difficult to catagorize, and reference in an FAQ :)

for checkpointing read what i just wrote but did not post before you posted this response. kinda one of those timing things. Like my notes indicated, you can split that response we were talking about into the various categories that i indicated in my notes. it's all useful text.

---

Thanks Greg... I think. I was kind of afraid that would be your response. Basically that the reasonably concise text addresses numerous questions... thus making it difficult to catagorize, and reference in an FAQ :)

for checkpointing read what i just wrote but did not post before you posted this response. kinda one of those timing things. Like my notes indicated, you can split that response we were talking about into the various categories that i indicated in my notes. it's all useful text.

what are u meaning ???

Thanks Greg... I think. I was kind of afraid that would be your response. Basically that the reasonably concise text addresses numerous questions... thus making it difficult to catagorize, and reference in an FAQ :)

for checkpointing read what i just wrote but did not post before you posted this response. kinda one of those timing things. Like my notes indicated, you can split that response we were talking about into the various categories that i indicated in my notes. it's all useful text.

what are u meaning ???

you posted your reply before i had finished adding my remarks to the thread, so things got a little out of sequence. In that thread that I linked to above, everywhere I put a *(xxxxxx)* is a point i thought would be usefull
the whole paragraph/thread has alot of points that could be isolated into various FAQ's if they do not exist already. Also look at message 43438 if you haven't already. The link there to another message that you wrote about checkpointing was really nice. Very clear.

---