tks, but that sux.

I cannot 'cleanly retire' the old instance and would like to track the performance record of an individual piece of hardware to 'merge' through installations.

No big deal though, if it is how it is it is how it is.

again, tks

The reason it is requested is that merging of records for different instances of BOINC on the same machine makes it easier for stats junkies to keep track of performace parameters for each machine. I realize it probably requires more back office work than it is worth. Having had this same problem with HDD's dying and having to reinstall both OS and BOINC several times on machines, it gives another instance of the machine in your device statistics. You can still combine the stats for each instance, but: 1. Most people don't care anyway and
2. It is not that big of deal to manually combine them.

Cheers

It's not really all that complex (although the techs do already have enough to keep them occupied for years, so priority is hard to determine) - but despite that, when Berkeley implemented their version of the feature, they had no end of trouble.

Ultimately, I view it as feature bloat. We don't need it, so although it may be neat for those that like such things, I can't see how it can be justified. With that in mind, I'm glad you consider it no big deal.

BOINC already suffers from trying to do everything.

According to the stats I have 5 machines. That's a gross overstatement. In fact I had a motherboard failure and re-load of the operating system, The same machine has dual-boot Ubuntu (64-bit) and Win XP, so that accounts for 4 machines!

Anyway, with such a lowly machine count, it's rather daunting to try and keep up with the flow of new projects.

I have yet to start a single IADS workunit and now we have HCMD2 to contend with. Oh well, shut up and crunch - or is bring me the book so that I can get on with life?