The meeting with the scientists is on Thursday, UK time.

The edits to the Client_state file have been made. The problem is that one of the models was at 37% and had already sent the first (presumably) truncated decadal zip file. Any word from the Scientists on whether it is still usable and is worth the time (about 15 days) needed to finish it?

Hard to say, but the only error that was in stderr for AstroWX's models was about the last zip file. That's no guarantee, but perhaps a good sign.

That task is now suspended until the verdict Thursday. Weather@home is presently crunching in its place

---

If I recall correctly, we can manually edit client_state.xml and change the max_nbytes for those file uploads to something larger, and the rest of the files should upload correctly. Of course this has to be done when boinc has been shut down. Perhaps Richard or Ian can chime in on that as they are more boinc knowledgeable and have better memories than I do.

Your right, I remember doing that several years ago. I think that they were beta model, so the instructions are probably lost with the boards from the now defunct beta site. It worked well. so if someone could come with those instructions I am game to try it again.

Not to be a nudge or anything, but, did that meeting ever take place about whether the hadcm3n task with the truncated zip files will yield valid results and should be finished.

---

The word is: Please abort any HadCM3n tasks from 352/351/350 batches you are running, have suspended, or lurk in your queue. Sorry about that.

They were corrected and will be reissued in the near future -- with correct 'stash' files and supposedly with smaller .zip upload files.

---

"We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo
Greetings from coastal Washington state, the scenic US Pacific Northwest.

Thanks. The 2 hadcm3n's I had have been aborted.

---

astroWX wrote:

...Please abort any HadCM3n tasks from 352/351/350 batches you are running, have suspended, or lurk in your queue...

Arrgh... I had 4 of those bad boys. :-(

You might want to make a separate post about this -- I just happened to stumble on this thread when looking for something else.

---

Good point.
I just posted in News and Announcements 2.

Are the names of the "350 Batchs" etc. to abort of the form "hadcm3n........._350_xxxxxxxxx_0"?

---

Are the names of the "350 Batchs" etc. to abort of the form "hadcm3n........._350_xxxxxxxxx_0"?

I believe so, along with 351, 352 and 353.