Re: New Checker Request - GC6W2X9 Oldest Cache in 5 States Challenge

I need a checker that requires the cacher to have found the oldest active geocache in at least 5 states. Washington, D.C., will count as a state for this challenge.

Thanks,

-Erich (VeteranTributes)

Just wondering if this challenge is even feasible? I was told that it may not be due to the fact that the "oldest" cache sometimes gets archived and replaced with the next oldest cache.

If this is the case, I could change the challenge.

Thanks

It's possible: http://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC6W2X9/23190

The checker (I believe) will count the oldest active cache or any archived cache which was hidden earlier than it. This way someone doesn't suddenly no longer qualify just because the old oldest cache got archived.

I noticed that the output uses the word "countries" (a copy-paste issue, I'm sure) and have let the script writer know.

Cut and paste error should be fixed. More detail on where the typo is would have been appreciated. Thanks.

Otherwise. Good luck with the script. Let me know if there are problems.

I'm getting an error message when I run it.

I'm still getting an error message when I run it.

It doesn't give much in the way of details....just says:

Error
Execution time (s)
Peak memory usage (kB)
Error message
Execution status
Script exit code

And then the error log is blank and the script output is blank.

Is this with your account?

Yes, this error is when I run it with my account (VeteranTributes).

Thanks

It ran cleanly for me. I am not sure what the problem is.

I did see that the region vs country exists in the Sample log output.

On the list and fair to nag if not addressed soon.

I just ran the checker again, and it finally ran for me this time. Not sure what the problem was before.

I do notice it only lists the oldest cache in 38 of the 51 regions (counting D.C.), so not sure what that is about (I have 8 of them).

And it does still say countries instead of regions or states.

It is working though!

Thanks,

-Erich (VeteranTributes)

The 38 comes from the caches you have found. Only regions you have found caches in get checked for the oldest.

The other stuff is on a punch list there is also likely a bug with caches with hidden dates before 200p. This morning there were multiple bug reports in my inbox. AFTER chores and the salt mine they will get fixed.

I am not sure what caused your issue.

I have added a year 2000 or newer check.

I also think I have removed all the country/region references. Let me know if otherwise.

As for the error message, I got the same thing on my account and yes, it is not very helpful.

I can't seem to get the checker to work at all for me now...just keep getting the same error message.

I tried the checker about 15 more times and finally got it to work once. Not sure if there's a bug in there or what's wrong.

I think what is happening is the checker is taking too long to run. The safeguards are kicking in and killing the task.

When it does run, it takes a long time, 3.4e2 seconds or over 5 minutes. The timeout is documented at 30 seconds but it does seem to be longer. It seems to be within the 1GB memory footprint.

Some initial attempts to speed it up have been mixed. I have more to try.

Patience would be appreciated.

Don't worry...I'm not rushing you! Would rather it be right then fast...
--Did you see what I did there? lol

When I can get this one to run (only about 1 in 8 chance of that happening), the output is a bit confusing.

How come it strikes out a bunch I found?

I believe the struck out ones are caches which do not count as the oldest in that region (one per region)

sumbloke Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe the struck out ones are caches which do
> not count as the oldest in that region (one per
> region)


Region = State? I'm saying that I found some that are crossed off.

Howdy

Region is state. It is a pgcism. Region is the political division below country.

As for the confusion in the output. After the script finds the required number of hits it stops checking for more hits. This is to attempt to address the 1 of 8 problem cited above. In some circumstances it let's the macro run faster by almost 20%. If the cache or state is not one of the first found in the code it is currently incorrectly marked as not found.

My efforts right now are devoted to resolving the one in 8 runtime issue. The summary at the end is going to remain weird as the different approaches of solving the runtime problem may make different information available and therefore the summary may change to only list the found caches. To me this is not desirable as it makes finding bugs harder and doesn't let people plan trips as easily.

My plan is to make sure the macro correctly reports the completed the challenge is always correct. Next is to get the runtime down so more can benefit. Finally I will fix the report.

Apologies for the growing pains.

Howdy,

There is an update to this script. It runs faster so the one successful run of 8 or 15 or whatever you got should be reduced. The runtime for me is around 130 seconds instead of 340. This is still slow but it should help.

People will still be a bit confused about the list of caches. It will include all regions that the user has visited. However it may not include all regions/states in the country. The final list is a combination of the user and the oldest in the country.

I am looking for a way to improve that. However finding regions that are not in the oldest in the country was what was taking all the time. This is the tradeoff.

Comments welcome.

Ran a bit quicker for me... Script executed in 1.3e+2 seconds. Peak memory usage: 59,648 kB

The output makes a lot more sense and is looking much better, showing me what I would expect to see from it.

OReviewer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ran a bit quicker for me... Script executed in
> 1.3e+2 seconds. Peak memory usage: 59,648 kB
>
> The output makes a lot more sense and is looking
> much better, showing me what I would expect to see
> from it.


I'll take that as a thumbs up.

Is the new version at the same link first posted? I am still seeing repeated timeouts when I run the checker against my player account, The Leprechauns. I have found caches in 45 US states plus DC, and I qualify for the challenge with seven finds on "oldest caches" at the time when I found them. I have approximately 6500 overall finds. I had 10+ unsuccessful attempts (and one successful attempt) using this checker earlier in the week, and four more unsuccessful attempts today with the new version.

As a reviewer, I like this challenge -- provided that the checker allows a find on a cache that was the oldest at the time when the geocacher found it. On the other hand, if the checker cannot execute successfully, I'd tell the challenge cache owner to come back once they have a checker which runs on the first attempt.

@The leprechauns,

I cannot repeat your timeout. It takes about 2 minutes for your account to run and it qualifies.

Regarding your concerns about the oldest at the time, those were addressed to keep (I think) another reviewer happy. Finds on a cache older than the current oldest will be counted as a hit. As an example the user makaio found the original stash which is now archived but the macro still shows it as counting towards completion of the challenge.

Please run it for yourself to see.

Seems to be working well now! Thanks!

@veteranstribute.

Good luck with the reviewer and thanks for the feedback.