If your machine needs a bit more work, why don't you just open up "pending credits" again :-)

scsimodo

---

Since the pending credits list only shows what you have claimed, it's not such an accurate list. It's just overhyped, in my opinion. They could just as well delete the whole entry to the pending credits list. You can see in your Results list what kind of credit you may be expecting.

---

> If your machine needs a bit more work, why don't you just open up "pending
> credits" again :-)
>
> scsimodo
>

It would be much easier to put a "Total Pending Credit" number right next to the "Total Credit" and "Recent Average Credit" numbers. Doing that both on the account page and in the BOINC client itself would remove the need for the database to pull up the details of every single pending WU, but it would still tell us exactly how much credit is still in the works.

---

You will be assimilated...bunghole!

> If your machine needs a bit more work, why don't you just open up "pending
> credits" again :-)

Probably best to let the validator catch up first.

---

> If your machine needs a bit more work, why don't you just open up "pending
> credits" again :-)
>
> scsimodo
>
They also have to plan for the end of Seti Classic and the new Boinc Seti user's that will follow.

---

<img src='http://www.boincsynergy.com/images/stats/comb-912.jpg'>

> It would be much easier to put a "Total Pending Credit" number right next to
> the "Total Credit" and "Recent Average Credit" numbers.

I agree, good idea ;)

---

<img src="http://www.boincstats.com/stats/banner.php?cpid=d2319b8f0ad14565556d0ba45b64e779">

> > It would be much easier to put a "Total Pending Credit" number right next
> to
> > the "Total Credit" and "Recent Average Credit" numbers.
>
> I agree, good idea ;)

It's a good idea, but the "Total Credit" number needs the same query as the pending work units.....

---

> It's a good idea, but the "Total Credit" number needs the same query as the
> pending work units.....

Actually it isn't the same query, the total credit is maintained for both the user and host, pending credit is not put into a column for either the user or host, so you would have to query the result table.

---

----- Rom
BOINC Development Team, U.C. Berkeley
My Blog

> > It's a good idea, but the "Total Credit" number needs the same query as
> the
> > pending work units.....
>
> Actually it isn't the same query, the total credit is maintained for both the
> user and host, pending credit is not put into a column for either the user or
> host, so you would have to query the result table.

That's what I get for not properly proofreading.... I meant that pending credit is not maintained.

Which, in the words of Emily Litella, is very different.

---

> Actually it isn't the same query, the total credit is maintained for both the
> user and host, pending credit is not put into a column for either the user or
> host, so you would have to query the result table.

Which is why i suggested that we do the same for pending ... there is an apparently large (or just very vocal) group that likes to have an idea of the amount of pending credit they have.

Personally, I don't quite get it, because it is not, and almost cannot be, a very reliable value I don't see the need myself.

And since RAC has never been reliable, I don't much see the point of that value either. Heck, LHC@Home has me down for a bunch andthey have not had work for quite some time ...

---

> > It's a good idea, but the "Total Credit" number needs the same query as
> the
> > pending work units.....
>
> Actually it isn't the same query, the total credit is maintained for both the
> user and host, pending credit is not put into a column for either the user or
> host, so you would have to query the result table.
>
>

So please then put a column in the user and host table.
I think there should be enough space for 64 Bits more for each user and host.

Then it would be the same query...

For about 500.000 Datasets its only 4 MB.

---

> And since RAC has never been reliable, I don't much see the point of that
> value either. Heck, LHC@Home has me down for a bunch andthey have not had
> work for quite some time ...

It all depends on your definition of "recent" I guess. As far as the project is concerned, those credits are recent.

---

> So please then put a column in the user and host table.
> I think there should be enough space for 64 Bits more for each user and host.
>
> Then it would be the same query...

Therein lies the problem, for machines claiming too much credit, there accounts would continue to have a larger and larger negative value.

Since we don't know how much credit a result is worth until validation, the pending credits values are worthless anyway.

---

----- Rom
BOINC Development Team, U.C. Berkeley
My Blog

As said, pending credits does not actually represent the actual number of cobblies that will be granted. For those of us with large/ish farms, the number of wus waiting to be validated (for the account) would be useful instead of having to trawl through and try to work it out.

From there it would be possible to guess what the total pending credit would be based on previuos experience.

Dunc

---

I agree, the number of WU's waiting for validation would be a nice stat to see in my account details. But that would be a bonus feature for me, because i already largely appreciate all the things that can be tracked on this website. :)

---