Dogg wrote:

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:13:59 GMT, Roger Halstead
<Delete-Invallid.groups@tm.net> wrote:

I installed 4.09 on three of my machines. All were part way through
on a WU.  I suspended operation, installed 4.09 right over the
earlier version, reattached to the project and all three appeared to
start back in on the WU where the previous version had left off.
They did not start over at the beginning.

<snip>

I didn't even bother with that. I just stopped it, installed new
version, cranked it up again.

Same. Interestingly the benchmarks predict a lot longer times now. My
Tualatin Celeron (24/7, internet gateway and file server) now has an
estimated TTC or 5:58, a lot closer to the 6:35 it usually takes. 4.05 and
earlier had the TTC at 4:30 which really stuffed up the cache size.

Unfortunately it's just longer times, not more accurate. My overclocked XP
Athlon Tbred used to have a ETTC of 3:10 but an actual time of 2:35 or so.
Now, with 4.09, the ETTC is 3:55 and the cache is too small. With all
machines still using 'defaults' instead of the preferences they're assigned
to it's difficult to get the caches right.

What you win on the swings you lose on the roundabouts. (Or something, I
haven't actually *heard* that old cliche for ages. <g> People usually just
say "Swings and roundabouts").

Incidently, had a bunch of WUs that either showed no processing time, a
minute or so or an hour the other day. Strange WUs.
--
~misfit~