I have been wondering for a while about the exact meaning of a couple of items on the Server Status Page, vis the users and computers registered in past 24 hours.

Does this refer to new users? If so the current figure of over a thousand compared with computers in only double figures seems excessive and possibly aimed at spamming or hacking? I am sure someone must have asked this before but I couldn't find it.

Maybe when you "disconnect" and "reconnect" (for the correct url) that counts as a new user. Although, it seems that should also count as a new computer.

---

I see Feeder and Transitioner are both showing red.

It appears to me that the work is decreasing slowly. It is usually about 1000 tasks per day, but now less than half that. The outage has taken its toll, perhaps until the word gets out that they are back online.

It appears to me that the work is decreasing slowly. It is usually about 1000 tasks per day, but now less than half that.

I notice that the recent batches are 25km squares which makes tasks take twice as long as 50km squares for tasks that cover the same number of months. So that could be a factor as could the relatively high failure rate meaning when a task fails for the first and second times it goes back in the hopper and with some boxes crashing all of some of these tasks for whatever reason, they will end up being marked to get no new tasks for 24 hours.

That could be it. But there should be a large backlog of work by now. I may have to put on another Windows machine after all.

Number of users with recent credit is about 3k down on before if my memory is correct but that could be partly a function of the credit system not having been sorted yet.

Don't 25km squares take 4 times longer as they are 1/4 the area of a 50km square for the same total area covered?

Don't 25km squares take 4 times longer as they are 1/4 the area of a 50km square for the same total area covered?

Yep! (Brain Failure)

And 3,000 tasks that are much longer than the more common 13 months have been released.

Some long models just added: batch #747 PNW at 25 km for 121 months (2000) and 61 months (1000) (batch list).

Don't 25km squares take 4 times longer as they are 1/4 the area of a 50km square for the same total area covered?

Yep! (Brain Failure)

One confounding factor for run-time comparisons is that the modelled areas are not necessarily the same for 50 km and 25 km models. Comparisons for Central and South America have been added to the "New region?" thread.

One confounding factor for run-time comparisons is that the modelled areas are not necessarily the same for 50 km and 25 km models. Comparisons for Central and South America have been added to the "New region?" thread.

More brain failure! I completely forgot about that. Perhaps my double was closer than I had any right to think it was!