My real concern was that, in the almost-two-years since you've been a member, you've only seen fit to post six times before now. I'm very proud of the fact that I've written something that brought you out of your shell for number seven.

Added: A Multi or All Project cruncher is not getting an even spread of work as observed. WCG controls the overall work distribution where those that selected only 1 project get priority leaving the remainder of a project share for the pool of multi/all project clients. If thus e.g. 90% of RICE is taken by the single project crunchers and 30% by the DDDT specializers it leaves 10% of RICE+70% of DDDT. The ratio for the multi/all project crunchers would thus end up something like 7 DDDT : 1 RICE, which would explain why you got that one first.

Obviously 3 machines doing 3 weeks 24/7 would generate 9 weeks work, but given the above and what you saw it might be that you got much more done for 1 or 2 projects.

Now for the boring part, if any of your machines runs windows get the 3rd party BOINCview application. It tallies all jobs completed locally for all your hosts connected to your LAN. Using project filters allows for easy review of work done for each project. OR, you could open up the job_log_www.worldcommunitygrid.org.txt file to see all the jobs done and use the abacus to bead each projects contribution up.

Good news is, it is planned for each member to be able to see his contribution by project on the My Grid page starting with a future Website update. When? Don't know.

It's all strictly Mac.

And thank you for the explanation of how the allocations occur. I originally got involved after reading a USA Today article about the Rice project. Rather than have any downtime if there was nothing at the moment to crunch, I opted to sign up for everything. Now I understand how that decision impacted the work overall.

Here's how things look if you crunch with zero buffer before a planned trip. Having been away for 14 days and no result returned since the evening of June 20, the points kept trickling in and about 7.5 days worth of CPU time got credited:

07/03/2008  	 	0:000:15:39:39 	 	1,543  	 	3
07/02/2008 		0:000:04:36:40 		486 		1
07/01/2008 		0:001:02:15:59 		1,979 		4
06/30/2008 		0:000:09:10:59 		1,012 		2
06/29/2008 		0:000:04:35:18 		485 		1
06/26/2008 		0:000:06:29:49 		459 		1
06/25/2008 		0:000:11:58:15 		1,025 		2
06/24/2008 		0:001:01:49:42 		2,266 		4
06/23/2008 		0:000:23:11:38 		2,332 		4
06/22/2008 		0:001:06:39:57 		3,048 		5
06/21/2008 		0:003:07:42:06 		8,312 		12

3 results took 14 days to get through the validation cycle, so in virtual terms you may have more badges already.

Partee