Running simultaneously multiple applications in project is possible and easy.
I can easily restore immediate credits, but it is not accurate and people complain see: https://boinc.tbrada.eu/forum_thread.php?id=3006. If users complain about the delay in credit allocation, I will switch.
I can not run more applications, because I do not have them. If I had the sources, I could build them all in one go and be done with it.

It is up to you to send me sources and new experiments. And I can load the experiment on this server (to be run by contributors).

I already answered above.

I am ready to send you all the sources at once.
But you are not ready to create Applications!

Running simultaneously multiple applications in project is possible and easy.

So run!
What is the reason that you are not creating a new application for PADLS rule 15 now?
Why did you postpone it until next week?
I repeat: I can send you all the sources.
But you need to decide on loans.

In addition, you must understand that every experiment and every branch of an experiment requires a new Application.
It is impossible to perform all experiments in one Application!

There are three Applications in the ODLK project, and two Applications in the ODLK1 project.
These are all branches of one experiment.

So run!
What is the reason that you are not creating a new application for PADLS rul 15 now?
Why did you postpone it until next week?
I repeat: I can send you all the sources.
But you need to decide on loans.

The soonest I can build new windows applications is this 6th. If I have one source ready, I will build one app. If i have three, then three. I am postponing it because I do not have access to the computer, where I installed tools to build boinc applications.

There is only so much I can do.

By loans, you mean credits? I really do not care about them. I will set it at whatever users want.

Tomas Brada
I suggested you to run three Applications at the same time in my letter (PADLS rule 38, PADLS rule 15, PADLS rule 51)

You can run three applications at once.

You answered

Which three? There are two in project, this two new and then 15 and 51.
I already count 6.

I did not understand your answer and sent you only the source for PADLS rule 38.

And now you say

Next are rule 15 and 51. But I do not want to create two more apps for this. Each app also requires new version of assimilator. These edits are minor, but it still needs to be built on three platforms, add new app to project and add the app versions to project. Instead I will bundle both versions of the generators and select based on argument.

I don't understand that also.
You do not want to create two Applications PADLS rule 15, PADLS rule 51?
You want something else that I don't understand.

By loans, you mean credits?

This is a Google translation. I do not know English and I use a translator.

So
1. we are waiting for the completion of the Application PADLS rule 38;
2. you process the results and create a database of your project, please publish the database;
3. you speak a clear plan for further work (credits, Applications, etc.).

I would like an understanding.

PS. As I see, in the project one Application is working now.

Pseudo Associative DLS 0 0 --- 0
Pseudo Associative DLS 0 0 --- 0
PADLS Rule 38 0 718 0.61 (0.13 - 2.86) 10

https://boinc.tbrada.eu/server_status.php

Maybe there are other Applications in your project, but I don’t see them.

You can combine the PADLS rule 15 and PADLS rule 51 Applications, but you must perform DLSs generation on the server, and give the client ready-made squares to check with the family_mar program.

Do you understand this?

I see I made it too complicated. Let's forget about that bundling multiple rules into one application.
If you send me sources to generators on rule 15 and 51, I can easy build boinc applications for them on 6th. I can start earlier, but finish on 6th.
I repeat: I do not have to wait for completion of previous batches.

Tomas Brada
in this situation, we must wait for the completion of PADLS rule 38.

I'll repeat:
1. you will process the results of the current experiment PADLS rule 38 and publish the database of your project;
2. you assign all credits in accordance with your assimilator;
3. you change the credit accrual rule so that it is not associated with the end of the batch.

After that I will send you sources for PADLS rule 15 and PADLS rule 51, if you are ready to launch these Applications.

Should not rush.

PS. Wish: I would like to have access to the results on the server.
I have access to the results in ODLK and ODLK1 projects.
Results in the ODLK project are available to everyone.
Results in the ODLK1 project are available by password.

Pseudo Associative DLS 0 0 --- 0
Pseudo Associative DLS 0 0 --- 0
PADLS Rule 38 0 172 0.65 (0.13 - 2.96) 10

https://boinc.tbrada.eu/server_status.php

I think completed Applications can be deleted.

Progger did it like this

Приложение помечено deprecated.

https://boinc.progger.info/odlk/forum_thread.php?id=23&postid=705#705

1. you will process the results of the current experiment PADLS rule 38 and publish the database of your project;
2. you assign all credits in accordance with your assimilator;
3. you change the credit accrual rule so that it is not associated with the end of the batch.

I have hard time understanding the reason behind these requirements. I find them strange.

PS. Wish: I would like to have access to the results on the server.

Every time batch ends, I mail the results to you (raw and processed). If you want results more often, we can make smaller batches (say 800 rows). I will not give you direct access to the server. It wouldn't be safe.

1. you will process the results of the current experiment PADLS rule 38 and publish the database of your project;
2. you assign all credits in accordance with your assimilator;
3. you change the credit accrual rule so that it is not associated with the end of the batch.

I have hard time understanding the reason behind these requirements. I find them strange.

These requirements are normal.
You must publish the project database.
You must assign members credits for the processed batch.

Is it wrong?

PS. Wish: I would like to have access to the results on the server.

Every time batch ends, I mail the results to you (raw and processed). If you want results more often, we can make smaller batches (say 800 rows). I will not give you direct access to the server. It wouldn't be safe.

I do not ask for direct access to the server!
There is a website in the project. You can post the results on the site and give me a link.

In the ODLK project everyone has access to the results.
https://boinc.progger.info/odlk_results/odlk3
https://boinc.progger.info/odlk_results/odlkmax/
https://boinc.progger.info/odlk_results/odlkmin/

Is it dangerous???

Recently I asked you for the preliminary results of the current PADLS rule 38 experiment.
You answered

Rows missing: 263
This is not practical. Better wait for completion of the batch.

I do not want to wait for the end of each batch, I want to see the results in the process.

If you find all my requirements strange, I stop working with you.

1. you will process the results of the current experiment PADLS rule 38 and publish the database of your project;
2. you assign all credits in accordance with your assimilator;
3. you change the credit accrual rule so that it is not associated with the end of the batch.

I have hard time understanding the reason behind these requirements. I find them strange.

strange or not - this is how boinc is - use it or.....

I was informed in private message that I should take down the results that I published. I want to cooperate, therefore I left the decision of publishing to the scientist.

Crunchers were complaining that the credits granted were too inaccurate and varied a lot for the same work. So I changed it to more deterministic rule. Makarova is the only one complaining about the new credit rule. But she is not crunching the project, so she has ho say in how credits are assigned. I will not change it, unless someone from crunchers speak up.

1. you will process the results of the current experiment PADLS rule 38 and publish the database of your project;
2. you assign all credits in accordance with your assimilator;
3. you change the credit accrual rule so that it is not associated with the end of the batch.

I have hard time understanding the reason behind these requirements. I find them strange.

G'Day Tomas and Natalia,

I would like to thank you both for the project, Tomas for setting it up and Natalia for the data sets (I think this is how the setup works?).

From my perspective as a volunteer for this project, I have seen a lot of misunderstandings being sent back and forth on how the project is run.

With point 1 above, I understood this to already be working and complied with
With point 2 above, Tomas has already posted this is how he will grant credits, when the results are assimilated.
Due to point 2 there is no need for point 3.

Please Natalia don't get hung up about the credits, we will get them, this is not the only project to delay when points are granted to volunteers (climate prediction is a good example and any project with very long deadlines (months))

If the problem is about when the next experiment might start or waiting till an experiment ends, might I suggest this approach
When an experiment is at 80% complete, Natalia sends the new source or sources for Tomas to compile into the next experiment / experiments, so that as one experiment ends then the new one can start, constant work flow is then the result.

The new experiment can be started even as the previous experiment is ending.

Multiple experiments should be able to run at the same time if necessary and even selected from a users account.
Or experiments combined into one and then run, but as stated by Tomas, work unit length becomes a problem.

Please we all need to get along for anything to work.

Google translator can sometimes come across with the wrong intention by making a request appear as a demand.

I have probably simplified things way too much, but this is how I see it.

Things don't need to be complicated.

Have a good day everyone, things will work out, just take things one at a time and we all can be happy.

Thanks
Conan

I was informed in private message that I should take down the results that I published. I want to cooperate, therefore I left the decision of publishing to the scientist.

Sorry, I did not understand.
Have you published the results?
And you were asked to remove them? (in the form of a requirement?)
For what reason?

So you do not want to publish the results of your project.
I understand correctly?
Then why do you need this project?

I do calculations in a manual project.
I publish all the results of these calculations.
I have helpers in a manual project, for example: Demis, XAVER.
I also publish the results obtained by helpers.

I have been processing and publishing of results ODLK and ODLK1 projects for more than a year.

If you will not publish the results of the project, you can continue the project without me.

Tasks ready to send 0
Задания обрабатываются 0

https://boinc.tbrada.eu/server_status.php

Tomas Brada
The experiment is over.

Did you process the results of the experiment?
Please publish the results of the experiment.

If you have already published the results of the experiment when I was asleep, and then removed them (at the request of a private message), post them again.

Tomas Brada
have you already assigned credits to members for a processed batch?
I see

1 Ralfy 5,647 181,620 Germany 16 Feb 2019, 15:52:42 UTC
2 purplecfh 1,444 54,064 United States 16 Feb 2019, 1:01:33 UTC
3 Tomáš Brada 917 49,116 Slovakia 3 Feb 2019, 20:51:50 UTC
4 Cruncher Pete 523 9,539 Anguilla 20 Feb 2019, 22:08:54 UTC

https://boinc.tbrada.eu/top_users.php?sort_by=expavg_credit&offset=0

In my opinion, nothing has changed in credits.

Maybe I see the wrong page?

PS. Yes, I do not like the new credit rule.
If a new batch is processed a year, will everyone wait for a year?

By the way, in my mail there are no results of the experiment.

Tomas Brada
you do not want to give me the results of the experiment?

Great humor! :)