How would that be worse to the current situation? His proposal would lead to infinite repeated downloading if there is work needing a file and the antivirus keeps deleting it.
Current BOINC code has that too, *and* repeated downloading even if the file is not needed. El Martes 29 Sep 2009 15:20:23 David Anderson escribió: > That proposal would lead to infinite downloading (see below) > > [email protected] wrote: > > The proposal is to download missing files only at startup or when new > > tasks arrive needing the file, and ONLY do so if there is work that needs > > the file. i.e. at startup, if there is a missing file, and no work for > > that file, do nothing. > > > > jm7 > > > > > > > > David Anderson > > <[email protected] > > ey.edu> > > To > > > > > > > > I'm not sure this will solve the problem. > > Seems to me the client will go into this loop: > > > > 1) get a job from the server > > 2) download the executable > > 3) anti-virus program deletes the executable > > 4) job bombs out because executable missing > > 5) go to 1 > > > > As of right now, as far as I've heard, > > the client re-downloads the executable only on startup. > > That's better than the above. > > > > It's not clear to me what the solution is, > > or if we really need to do anything. > > Suggestions welcome. > > > > -- David > > _______________________________________________ > boinc_dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev > To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and > (near bottom of page) enter your email address. -- Nicolas _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
