Torben Schl?ntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I think this unexpected, unannounced upgrade is a mess.
Let me quote from my Wednesday, 29 Oct 2008 posting to this mailing list:
"It was never intended that a changeover be done this way.
There was a hard disk failure on the v4 server, it was going to take a long
time to get a replacement for the relatively-antique disk, and it was decided
by those in charge that v5 and v25 were well-enough tested to be thrown in as
emergency replacements."
> And I don't understand why it should be so hard to get
> a backup up rolling for the old version.
The disk that failed was part of a relatively antique (this is an unpaid
volunteer project, after all) RAID 0 array. It's a hardware delay, not a
matter of getting a backup running. When the project is run by unpaid
volunteers, backup hardware is scarce. It can hardly be expected that this
project's server can necessarily be as gracefully and rapidly brought back as
one used by a for-profit corporation. Bringing v4 back up without a working
RAID array would risk the very data loss that you (incorrectly) fear has
already occurred.
> unless offcourse someone have very red ears and should admit the backup
> doesn't exist. Is that the case?
Perhaps we should be grateful that the unpaid-volunteer project was at least
using RAID, so that no data was lost even though it's temporarily offline.
> In any case this "upgrade" is chaotic, unplanned
> and smells like amateurs.
Well, the hard disk failure was certainly unscheduled.
Perhaps we should be grateful that a group of unpaid volunteers had been
working so hard and long on the v5 server _that it was even possible to use the
v5 development server as an emergency replacement_. I don't know how many of
them are amateurs rather than IT professionals such as yourself.
Unplanned? Development of the v4->v5 brige was in progress and would have been
released in a few months had not the disk failed.
It's true that the v4-v5 changeover was not planned to be this chaotic.
Perhaps someone (you?) could give the failed disk a good talking-to about its
untimely demise.
> My results from V24.x machines just disappears. My account
> is gone, my stats are gone.
No, they're not gone. They are safely recorded on the surviving RAID disk --
but temporarily not accessible online. People are working to remedy that
temporary lack.
> And even after I created my account on mersenne.org I still
> have 0 computers, 0 results, and 0 assignments.
>
> The site says this:
> "3. Start the software program and enter your user
> account login.
> The program will automatically 'bind' itself to
> your user account when you enter your user account login
> into the program, and starts working immediately! You can
> see each computer added to your account using your Computer
> CPU Details page, as well as what it is working upon.
> That's it!"
>
> No it is not just it! It doesn't work.
I recommend going to mersenneforum.org to read the extensive postings that have
been made since the disk failure. Many users' questions and difficulties have
been answered there. I've tried here to explain what I know, but I can't
respond authoritatively to those problems -- please post them, and any further
inquiries, to mersenneforum.org
> Maybe because I had a password less than 6 chars on the old
> server? I don't know. And I shouldn't care either.
... ideally, no. But we don't have an ideal situation.
> I really consider after a decade on the project to leave.
After a decade, you can't wait a couple of weeks? Find a source of funding so
that GIMPS can be more professional!
Patience,
Richard B. Woods
_______________________________________________
Prime mailing list
[email protected]
http://hogranch.com/mailman/listinfo/prime
