Bug reports for Ralph 5.04

Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.04

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
Rhiju
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 06
Posts: 161
Credit: 3,725
RAC: 0
Message 1338 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 1:48:41 UTC

Thanks for continuing posts of ralph errors.
This will probably be our last development release
on ralph before putting the app on Rosetta@home. We really need to know if anything is fundamentally wrong with this one!
ID: 1338 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
tralala

Send message
Joined: 12 Apr 06
Posts: 52
Credit: 15,257
RAC: 0
Message 1344 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 11:06:21 UTC - in response to Message 1338.  

Thanks for continuing posts of ralph errors.
This will probably be our last development release
on ralph before putting the app on Rosetta@home. We really need to know if anything is fundamentally wrong with this one!


Then put up a few more WUs! Why so few testing?
ID: 1344 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile TritoneResolver
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 2
Credit: 4,397
RAC: 0
Message 1345 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 12:14:34 UTC

Haven\'t seen this error before, but here it is: WU 84203

<core_client_version>5.3.6</core_client_version>
<message>Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 3884798
# cpu_run_time_pref: 10800
# cpu_run_time_pref: 10800
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\dock_structure.cc line:401

ID: 1345 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
[B^S] sTrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Feb 06
Posts: 58
Credit: 15,430
RAC: 0
Message 1347 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 15:58:14 UTC
Last modified: 25 Apr 2006, 15:59:26 UTC

My one 5.04 wu, and one 5.03 wu for that matter, both finished successfully. However I\'m wondering why they both finished in under 2 hours when my preference is set to 16 hours and earlier wu\'s did run for that time.

wu 95168, 5.04
wu 94408, 5.03
ID: 1347 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
rbpeake

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 19
Credit: 3,370
RAC: 0
Message 1348 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 16:13:20 UTC - in response to Message 1347.  

My one 5.04 wu, and one 5.03 wu for that matter, both finished successfully. However I\'m wondering why they both finished in under 2 hours when my preference is set to 16 hours and earlier wu\'s did run for that time.

wu 95168, 5.04
wu 94408, 5.03

Did you \"Update\" with BOINC Manager after changing your preferences on the web site? If not, the preferences will not be changed until the client contacts the server. Pardon me if this response is too obvious, but you never know.... :)
ID: 1348 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
[B^S] sTrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Feb 06
Posts: 58
Credit: 15,430
RAC: 0
Message 1349 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 16:23:02 UTC - in response to Message 1348.  
Last modified: 25 Apr 2006, 16:25:00 UTC

My one 5.04 wu, and one 5.03 wu for that matter, both finished successfully. However I\'m wondering why they both finished in under 2 hours when my preference is set to 16 hours and earlier wu\'s did run for that time.

wu 95168, 5.04
wu 94408, 5.03

Did you \"Update\" with BOINC Manager after changing your preferences on the web site? If not, the preferences will not be changed until the client contacts the server. Pardon me if this response is too obvious, but you never know.... :)


No problem, appreciate the thought (however I did update). I should have said in my original post that the result files show the preference set to 16 hours.
ID: 1349 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
simpe73

Send message
Joined: 20 Feb 06
Posts: 2
Credit: 36,752
RAC: 0
Message 1350 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 16:44:55 UTC - in response to Message 1338.  

Thanks for continuing posts of ralph errors.
This will probably be our last development release
on ralph before putting the app on Rosetta@home. We really need to know if anything is fundamentally wrong with this one!


Some work for testing, please! I\'ve only got about 2 WU\'s per host. One WU (resultid=95455) has crached...

ID: 1350 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile feet1st

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 06
Posts: 313
Credit: 113,747
RAC: 79
Message 1352 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 17:26:38 UTC

I have same, first 2 WUs completed in 1hr 10min. But my updated preference to Ralph indicates I\'d prefer 16hrs as well.
ID: 1352 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Rhiju
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 06
Posts: 161
Credit: 3,725
RAC: 0
Message 1354 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 18:32:26 UTC - in response to Message 1352.  

For those jobs, we had it set to make a maximum of 10 predictions -- \"hit it and quit it\". That was mainly so that we\'d have some results back quickly. Thanks for asking for more work! I\'m sending out more jobs now, asking for 50 predictions.

Things looks OK for ralph 5.04 so far. We\'re still getting the occasional file transfer error when the watchdog aborts, but that\'s not the end of the world. Looking into it.

I have same, first 2 WUs completed in 1hr 10min. But my updated preference to Ralph indicates I\'d prefer 16hrs as well.


ID: 1354 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile feet1st

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 06
Posts: 313
Credit: 113,747
RAC: 79
Message 1355 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 18:36:40 UTC
Last modified: 25 Apr 2006, 18:36:58 UTC

Quess I should have put this here:
I\'ve not had hung WUs before, but watchdog stepped in and killed one after about 1hr 10min runtime, with a 16hr preference. My other WU (same PC) seemed to end normally, but again, after about 1hr 10min rather than the 16hr preference. 2 more crunching now, during the day, so I can watch them run.


Does the watchdog just compare two points in time? Is it possible the score was jumping all around for an hour, and just happened to be exactly the same at that instant in time an hour later? Or is it looking at the step I\'m on too?

ID: 1355 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
rbpeake

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 19
Credit: 3,370
RAC: 0
Message 1356 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 18:42:18 UTC - in response to Message 1354.  

For those jobs, we had it set to make a maximum of 10 predictions -- \"hit it and quit it\". That was mainly so that we\'d have some results back quickly. I\'m sending out more jobs now, asking for 50 predictions.

I have my Preferences set to 8 hours, which I guess is OK if the workunit is set to report at a set time anyway. Or maybe you mean you have overwritten the time preferences, and if it takes longer than 8 hours to get 50 predictions, then that is what it will take? Might be prudent to make this clarification, so people don\'t get too stressed if their time preferences are ignored for now. :)

Thanks!
ID: 1356 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
KB7RZF

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 7
Credit: 1,426
RAC: 0
Message 1357 - Posted: 25 Apr 2006, 20:54:56 UTC
Last modified: 25 Apr 2006, 20:57:07 UTC

Got this error on This WU running the BOINC CC 5.4.2. The \"Target CPU Run Time\" was set on 2 hours. Changed it to 4 hours, will see how the next WU goes when I get it.

Result ID 95456
Name CHECK_600_DOG_7486h002_dec08_1.pdb_410_2_1
Workunit 83413
Created 25 Apr 2006 14:06:59 UTC
Sent 25 Apr 2006 14:07:19 UTC
Received 25 Apr 2006 21:07:58 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Client error
Client state Computing
Exit status 0 (0x0)
Computer ID 65
Report deadline 9 May 2006 14:07:19 UTC
CPU time 4949.296875
stderr out <core_client_version>5.4.2</core_client_version>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 3885562
# cpu_run_time_pref: 7200
**********************************************************************
Rosetta score is stuck or going too long. Watchdog is killing the run!
Stuck at score -128.786 for 600 seconds
**********************************************************************

</stderr_txt>
<message><file_xfer_error>
<file_name>CHECK_600_DOG_7486h002_dec08_1.pdb_410_2_1_0</file_name>
<error_code>-161</error_code>
</file_xfer_error>

</message>


Validate state Invalid
Claimed credit 11.0121627676007
Granted credit 0
application version 5.04

ID: 1357 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Carlos_Pfitzner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 182
Credit: 22,792
RAC: 0
Message 1359 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 0:51:01 UTC

For 1 days, this result is 100% done, but does not upload at all

I run several projects on ths pc, and keep work in ram.

When boinc switches for ralph@home ... boincview shows cpu eficciency 0.0000

After about an hour, boinc switches for next project ...
then cpu efficiency is restored to 0.9809

And this cycle, is repeating for 1 days .. (I believe for ever, if I do nothing)
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=94996

I am aborting this result now, manually
Click signature for global team stats
ID: 1359 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Carlos_Pfitzner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 182
Credit: 22,792
RAC: 0
Message 1361 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 1:05:57 UTC
Last modified: 26 Apr 2006, 1:17:50 UTC

Exit status 0 (0x0) - Watchdog is killing the run!, no credits granted
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=95121
ps: I have the debugger installed on this pc

Click signature for global team stats
ID: 1361 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Carlos_Pfitzner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 182
Credit: 22,792
RAC: 0
Message 1362 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 4:55:57 UTC

I believe that the credits should be granted in this case !
*No error in my part.
ID: 1362 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Snake Doctor

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 37
Credit: 996,938
RAC: 0
Message 1363 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 5:03:45 UTC - in response to Message 1362.  
Last modified: 26 Apr 2006, 5:04:16 UTC

I believe that the credits should be granted in this case !
*No error in my part.

From a link off the RALPH Home page -

RALPH@home is the official alpha test project for Rosetta@home. New application versions, work units, and updates in general will be tested here before being used for production. The goal for RALPH@home is to improve Rosetta@home.

Please consider the following before deciding to join:

Since this project is a testing environment, applications and work units may be unstable at times.
Credits and other competitive statistics do not mean anything in this test project. Credits may be lost due to instabilities and may be reset at any time for testing.
There will not be a continual flow of work units. Work units will be issued only when necessary for testing.
We urge participants to not abort work units to help with testing.
Please set the resource share low for this project compared to other production projects in your RALPH@home preferences.


Emphisis added for clarity

Regards
Phil
ID: 1363 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile anders n

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 166
Credit: 131,419
RAC: 0
Message 1364 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 5:11:38 UTC - in response to Message 1362.  

I believe that the credits should be granted in this case !
*No error in my part.



You are right Carlos.

You should have gotten credit for the WU.

Somthing for the developers to look at before it reaches Rosetta.

Anders n
ID: 1364 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
[B^S] sTrey
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Feb 06
Posts: 58
Credit: 15,430
RAC: 0
Message 1365 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 5:47:26 UTC
Last modified: 26 Apr 2006, 5:48:32 UTC

wu 85055 was killed by the watchdog; credits were granted.

cpu_run_time_pref: 57600
Watchdog is killing the run! Stuck at score 2.48287 for 3600 seconds
ID: 1365 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile leylinewalker

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 06
Posts: 2
Credit: 1,284
RAC: 0
Message 1366 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 5:55:54 UTC

Not sure if this is the right place to report this, but I am seeing errors on the graphics. Strands are broken - I see as many as six ends. Graphic is moving partially outside the box on the search and accepted graphics. No problems yet running the code, though.
ID: 1366 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile anders n

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 166
Credit: 131,419
RAC: 0
Message 1380 - Posted: 26 Apr 2006, 14:12:08 UTC

A new watchdog kill.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=95535

switching tasks involved?

Anders n
ID: 1380 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.04



©2018 University of Washington
http://www.bakerlab.org