| Author | Message |
|---|
|
|
|
We\'ve fixed the file input error on Macs for the MAPRELAX jobs. Also, we\'re trying a new feature (COMPTOSERVERS) where at the end of a simulation, Rosetta compares its fold to the predictions made by a dozen other algorithms. (Those predictions are sent to the clients in a compressed format.)
Let us know if you see any bugs. Also, please let us know if the memory requirements for the MAPRELAX jobs are unusually high.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some of the MAPRELAX units on my machine are erroring out after 15-20 minutes (normal runtime for me is a little over an hour). stderr out reads:
<core_client_version>5.4.9</core_client_version>
<message>
Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 3057981
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information.
fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
</stderr_txt>
Looks ok up till that point. Graphics are good, at least. Upon hitting the error point, the graphics window just disappears.
A successful MAPRELAX
Error result
I\'m on Windows XP SP2, dual Pentium 4 processors.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Got one finished in ~ 45 min, memory usage unknown (finished sooner than I was able to check)
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125948
Another one finished after 55 min, 230MB usage
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125947
3 more to go...
Dumb question: apart from lower traffic of higher \"Target CPU run time\" - does having it set to let\'s say 12 hours brings \"better\" (i.e. more precise) results?
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I also had one of those 5.16\'s with a missing fasta file or whatever:
result
running win xp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I had big problems with the last rosetta-versions, so I had to stop crunching for RALPH.
Now I tested 5.16 on that machine, where I got the problems; the WU took 3 1/2 hours, the problem didn\'t appear until now.
But, memory-usage has grown up; the actual WU was at 318 MB Main-memory, 339 MB virtuel-memory :-(
BOINC is running as a service, so no rosetta-screensaver ...
The only thing could be, the box uses a normal windows-screensaver: WindowsServer2003 (That is the name of the screensaver !)
____________
Supporting BOINC, a great concept ! |
|
|
|
|
Got one finished in ~ 45 min, memory usage unknown (finished sooner than I was able to check)
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125948
Another one finished after 55 min, 230MB usage
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125947
3 more to go...
Dumb question: apart from lower traffic of higher \"Target CPU run time\" - does having it set to let\'s say 12 hours brings \"better\" (i.e. more precise) results?
In a word, No. At least not yet. It simply makes more models. Rosetta is not like a lot of other projects where a particular refined result is sought by a particular machine within a specific work unit. However, the project is starting to experiment with approaches that do sort of \"Learn\" as they go, and refine the work based on each model produced.
The goal here is to provide each work unit with a different starting point, and have each system adjust the work looking for the lowest energy level it can find among the models it can create in the time allotted. So the more models made the better. However, ultimately all of the systems are actually searching for the same result. If we ever get to the point where the project can send out 10,000 work units and they all come back with the same result, and it correctly reflects the actual shape of the protein, then we will have reached part of the goal. If we ever get to the point where a single system can reliable predict a protein shape given the amino acid sequence, we are done.
Since what is being sought is a reliable way to predict the protein shape, at this point the more models returned the better. The hope is that among those returned will be the correct one. If that happens then it is presumed that the technique that was used could repeat the performance.
____________
Moderator9
RALPH@home FAQs
RALPH@home Guidelines
Moderator Contact |
|
|
|
|
|
Sofar, BOTH ralph 5.16 WUs errored out MAPRELAX_TEST_hom015_1fna__516_1_1, MAPRELAX_TEST_hom025_1fna__516_19_0
with \"Incorrect function (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)\"
This is on a very stable PC, which runs Rosetta flawlessly for the past 4 months (apart from 2-3 WUs which were bad).
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I had big problems with the last rosetta-versions, so I had to stop crunching for RALPH.
Now I tested 5.16 on that machine, where I got the problems; the WU took 3 1/2 hours, the problem didn\'t appear until now.
But, memory-usage has grown up; the actual WU was at 318 MB Main-memory, 339 MB virtuel-memory :-(
BOINC is running as a service, so no rosetta-screensaver ...
The only thing could be, the box uses a normal windows-screensaver: WindowsServer2003 (That is the name of the screensaver !)
Adjust u preferences to \"remove from memory\" when swapping projects,
to free swap space !
Now,
that enough checkpoints are done, this should be OK, for both ralph & rosetta
I had sucessfull run 5.16 on a Linux pc with 256 MB ram.
limited to use 35% of swap at maximum, to not crash the OS
(user of this pc is a heavy user of edonkey)
and its swap space is small ... less than 1MB
that pchttp://ralph.bakerlab.org/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1825
____________
Click signature for global team stats
  |
|
|
|
|
|
Carlos,
my machine don\'t swap, I\'m running a cache of 0 days ...
Greetings
____________
Supporting BOINC, a great concept ! |
|
|
|
|
|
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information.
fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125164
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125315
____________
Click signature for global team stats
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for answer, Moderator9.
I\'ve done 5 WUs with no issue, D 820 with 1GB RAM.
...still a bit memory demanding for average machine.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for answer, Moderator9.
I\'ve done 5 WUs with no issue, D 820 with 1GB RAM.
...still a bit memory demanding for average machine.
While is see many reports of the memory issue, I have not seen this on my machines. Both the Windows and Mac machines look normal and even approximate the memory foot print for einstein. In any case the application always moves out of the way if I use the machines for any other tasks.
____________
Moderator9
RALPH@home FAQs
RALPH@home Guidelines
Moderator Contact |
|
|
|
|
|
Running a 5.16 wu now for all of 30 minutes (XP Pro SP2, P4, 1 GB mem), and memory usage is already high: 174K memory, 191K VM. These numbers aren\'t intolerable but they\'re higher than I\'m used to seeing from rosetta, and make me think it will climb into the range I reported on earlier. I\'ll be away most of the day,;will report back when the wu has more mileage.
See also this post on the number-crunching thread; it reports 690MB which is higher than I\'ve seen.
p.s. I leave boinc apps in memory when switched. Are these high numbers only happening to machines which leave rosetta in memory when preempted?
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Update before I hit the road: 1 hr 31 minutes into the wu, memory now is 325MB peak 329, Vm size is 341MB. PF ranging from 0-1K/second. Avail memory down to 74K, will see if the box is still functioning when I get home! |
|
|
|
|
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information.
fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125164
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125315
I had a few of these as well. I feel certain they are bad Work Units.
____________
Moderator9
RALPH@home FAQs
RALPH@home Guidelines
Moderator Contact |
|
|
|
|
|
Ralph 5.16 WU\'s running fine so far, but, they consume a HUGE amount of RAM. The two WU\'s that I have running right now on my dual-core Athlon 64 X2 3800+ are using 664MB and 317MB of RAM respectively. VM usage is slighly higher than that for both.
--- bt
____________
|
|
|
|
|
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information.
fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125164
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125315
I had a few of these as well. I feel certain they are bad Work Units.
I noticed a string of 5 of these missing Fasta file errors on my list, as well. Are some of the WUs taking advantage of features in Boinc 5.4.x that aren\'t in the Boinc 5.2.13 client?
____________
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed a string of 5 of these missing Fasta file errors on my list, as well. Are some of the WUs taking advantage of features in Boinc 5.4.x that aren\'t in the Boinc 5.2.13 client?
Well I had one to http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125195 and I am using Boinc 5.4.9.
Anders n
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I Have a few -
BOINC 5.4.9, Ralph 5.16
GenuineIntel Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.86GHz
Microsoft Windows XP Professional Edition, Service Pack 2, (05.01.2600.00)
Memory 2039.37 MB
cash 76.56 KB
swap space 932.3 MB
65.54 GB
resultid=125665 -
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information. fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
resultid=125589 -
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information. fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
resultid=125413 -
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information. fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
The machine is also running Rosetta
Regards
Phil
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=125273
and the next 3 in numerical order all errored out:
<core_client_version>5.4.9</core_client_version>
<message>
Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 3057874
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information.
fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
</stderr_txt>
Ran all 4 in a row.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
|
The MAPRELAX wu I reported earlier is now just shy of halfway through its 4-hour task. 149MB in memory, peak of 405MB, VM size 416MB. Not as bad as some, but more than I\'m comfortable with. I\'m going to suspend some other projects and restart boinc to lessen the competition until this wu finishes.
If this large memory usage is in fact due to the type of wu and not leakage or some other bug, it would be nice if we could set willingness to crunch memory-gobbling tasks in host preferences.
Of course there are no host preferences, but even a project-wide preference setting would be helpful for many of us.
|
|
|
|
|
The MAPRELAX wu I reported earlier is now just shy of halfway through its 4-hour task. 149MB in memory, peak of 405MB, VM size 416MB. Not as bad as some, but more than I\'m comfortable with. I\'m going to suspend some other projects and restart boinc to lessen the competition until this wu finishes.
Just missed the edit-post deadline... I waited for a checkpoint then restarted boinc. At the time of the restart it was just beginning model 8. ralph was consuming 217MB memory peak 405, VM size 468MB.
On the restart, it went up to about 93 MB peak 95, VM 117 MB. It\'s growing though; as I type this it\'s at 130MB memory peak 13, VM 145MB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
d287__CASP7_ABRELAX_521_7
has been running for 6 hours and shows only 1.044% progress. This is running on a Mac. |
|
|
|
|
d287__CASP7_ABRELAX_521_7
has been running for 6 hours and shows only 1.044% progress. This is running on a Mac.
Let it run. It is a test Work Unit for CASP7. It is probably just a large Work Unit. Do not be surprised if it suddenly jumps to 100% at the end of the first model. Do not stop Boinc Or Rosetta or it will start over at 0%.
If it gets to the place where is has run longer that about 5 times the setting for \"Time\" in your preferences, it will either be stopped by the \"Watchdog\" or you might want to consider aborting it manually at that time.
Keep us posted.
____________
Moderator9
RALPH@home FAQs
RALPH@home Guidelines
Moderator Contact |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi sTrey: This is a really good idea -- allowing users to set a preference for \"big jobs\". Its an idea that has come up a few times on the message boards, and we\'ve contacted the BOINC team about it. For now, we\'re sending these jobs to machines with larger memories -- and we\'re tracking down ways to reduce the memory requirement.
The MAPRELAX wu I reported earlier is now just shy of halfway through its 4-hour task. 149MB in memory, peak of 405MB, VM size 416MB. Not as bad as some, but more than I\'m comfortable with. I\'m going to suspend some other projects and restart boinc to lessen the competition until this wu finishes.
If this large memory usage is in fact due to the type of wu and not leakage or some other bug, it would be nice if we could set willingness to crunch memory-gobbling tasks in host preferences.
Of course there are no host preferences, but even a project-wide preference setting would be helpful for many of us.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes these were bad WUs. They\'ve been cancelled and resent with corrected FASTA files. Thanks for posting!
I Have a few -
BOINC 5.4.9, Ralph 5.16
GenuineIntel Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.86GHz
Microsoft Windows XP Professional Edition, Service Pack 2, (05.01.2600.00)
Memory 2039.37 MB
cash 76.56 KB
swap space 932.3 MB
65.54 GB
resultid=125665 -
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information. fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
resultid=125589 -
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information. fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
resultid=125413 -
ERROR:: Unable to obtain sequence information. fasta file must be provided.
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\initialize.cc line:236
The machine is also running Rosetta
Regards
Phil
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
An update for those of you who noticed the unusual growing memory of ralph with MAPRELAX jobs. I\'ve partly pinpointed the problem to something that was introduced in the last month in the BOINC windows API. It only causes a growing memory footprint on windows (not linux, that\'s why I didn\'t see it originally) and only on those particular jobs. I\'m contacting the BOINC team about it -- hopefully this will be fixed by the next ralph. It may also be a useful lead into reducing memory requirements for Windows machines. Thanks to sTrey and others for bringing this to our attention!
The MAPRELAX wu I reported earlier is now just shy of halfway through its 4-hour task. 149MB in memory, peak of 405MB, VM size 416MB. Not as bad as some, but more than I\'m comfortable with. I\'m going to suspend some other projects and restart boinc to lessen the competition until this wu finishes.
Just missed the edit-post deadline... I waited for a checkpoint then restarted boinc. At the time of the restart it was just beginning model 8. ralph was consuming 217MB memory peak 405, VM size 468MB.
On the restart, it went up to about 93 MB peak 95, VM 117 MB. It\'s growing though; as I type this it\'s at 130MB memory peak 13, VM 145MB.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I\'ve had TWO byte the dust today, and one success.
wuid=112719
Result ID 128199
Name t283_HOMOLOG_ABRELAX_hom001__532_59_0
Workunit 112719
Created 17 May 2006 7:54:43 UTC
Sent 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC
Received 17 May 2006 10:39:17 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Client error
Client state Computing
Exit status -1073741811 (0xffffffffc000000d)
Computer ID 2172
Report deadline 21 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC
CPU time 5152
stderr out <core_client_version>5.4.9</core_client_version>
<message>
- exit code -1073741811 (0xc000000d)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 14400
# random seed: 3055630
</stderr_txt>
Validate state Invalid
Claimed credit 19.2013819424423
Granted credit 0
application version 5.16
AND
wuid=112469
Result ID 127949
Name t283_HOMOLOG_ABRELAX_hom003__532_23_0
Workunit 112469
Created 17 May 2006 7:54:15 UTC
Sent 17 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC
Received 17 May 2006 20:27:12 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Client error
Client state Computing
Exit status -1 (0xffffffffffffffff)
Computer ID 2173
Report deadline 21 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC
CPU time 3093.84375
stderr out <core_client_version>5.4.9</core_client_version>
<message>
- exit code -1 (0xffffffff)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 14400
# random seed: 3055266
</stderr_txt>
Validate state Invalid
Claimed credit 11.4215356293639
Granted credit 0
application version 5.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
Watchdog has fallen asleep on this work unit 83799 . Progress stuck at 1.03%, CPU time 23 hours and 24 hours to completion and both are rising. Nothing showing in graphics but a black screen.
It seems to be missing some files. I found these messages in the stdout text file in the Slots file.
WARNING:: paths.txt file not found!!
Setting all paths to .\\
Searching for dat file: .\\1enh.dat
Searching for dat file: .\\1enh.dat
WARNING!! .dat file not found!
WARNING: CONSTRAINT FILE NOT FOUND
Searched for: .\\1enh_.cst
Running without distance constraints
WARNING: DIPOLAR CONSTRAINT FILE NOT FOUND
Searched for: .\\1enh_.dpl
Dipolar constraints will not be used
Looking for dssp file: .\\1enh.dssp
dssp file not found
Looking for secondary structure assignment file: .\\1enh_.ssa
ssa file not found
I\'m going to have to retire this watchdog in the next day.
WOOF |
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I\'ve gotten one more. I think I might see a pattern to some extent. of both the 5.12\'s and 5.16\'s that I\'ve had the windows fault on, each time it involved my screensaver running at the time. Is anyone else seeing this?? wus I\'ve run while awake and using this puter have been done successfully.
anyway, here\'s last nites faulty wu
wuid=112721
Result ID 128201
Name t283_HOMOLOG_ABRELAX_hom003__532_59_0
Workunit 112721
Created 17 May 2006 7:54:43 UTC
Sent 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC
Received 18 May 2006 11:08:21 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Client error
Client state Computing
Exit status -1073741811 (0xffffffffc000000d)
Computer ID 2172
Report deadline 21 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC
CPU time 13684.0625
stderr out <core_client_version>5.4.9</core_client_version>
<message>
- exit code -1073741811 (0xc000000d)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 3055230
# cpu_run_time_pref: 14400
# DONE :: 1 starting structures built 19 (nstruct) times
# This process generated 19 decoys from 19 attempts
</stderr_txt>
Validate state Invalid
Claimed credit 51.0001767443229
Granted credit 0
application version 5.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=132116
ERROR:: Exit at: .\\barcode_classes.cc line:500
Anders n
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
This version doesn\'t cause an error on my computer.
Graphic : OK
Work Tasks : OK
Here are two of completed tasks on my computer.
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=117061
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=115799
I appreciate developers for great work. :)
Anyway, has a cause of errors been identified already?
____________
|
|
|
|
|
...
Anyway, has a cause of errors been identified already?
In part yes, and with the help of the people running RALPH they will eliminate it.
____________
Moderator9
RALPH@home FAQs
RALPH@home Guidelines
Moderator Contact |
|
|
|
|
...
Anyway, has a cause of errors been identified already?
In part yes, and with the help of the people running RALPH they will eliminate it.
I see. Please keep working to eliminate errors and add new functions.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=133961
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is indeed a strange bug, which seems to be related to graphics, but not all graphics. My P4 1.8 with S3 onboard video doesn\'t have any errors with 5.16. My AMD 64 3700, 1 M ram, with a PCI-Express Asus EN6200TC256 video card does have problems. I\'ve listed part of my results page below. the errors where while the screensaver was running. The one success early on was when the machine was in constant use. The other success came after I turned off the screensaver in windows.
132586 111400 20 May 2006 4:33:05 UTC 21 May 2006 16:25:53 UTC Over Success Done 14,851.61 58.65 58.65
132585 111399 20 May 2006 4:33:05 UTC 21 May 2006 16:25:53 UTC Over Success Done 13,593.53 53.68 53.68
132584 111344 20 May 2006 4:33:05 UTC 21 May 2006 4:02:36 UTC Over Success Done 14,273.86 56.37 56.37
132122 116565 19 May 2006 17:03:21 UTC 20 May 2006 4:18:50 UTC Over Client error Computing 0.00 0.00 ---
132108 116551 19 May 2006 17:03:21 UTC 20 May 2006 4:18:50 UTC Over Client error Computing 0.00 0.00 ---
132106 116549 19 May 2006 17:03:21 UTC 20 May 2006 4:18:50 UTC Over Client error Computing 0.00 0.00 ---
128201 112721 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC 18 May 2006 11:08:21 UTC Over Client error Computing 13,684.06 51.00 ---
128200 112720 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC 17 May 2006 16:21:57 UTC Over Success Done 14,411.83 53.71 53.71
128199 112719 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC 17 May 2006 10:39:17 UTC Over Client error Computing 5,152.00 19.20 ---
My AMD64 3700 laptop doesn\'t have these errors (I don\'t think the one shown was the same fatal windows error).
131159 115609 19 May 2006 7:27:43 UTC 20 May 2006 10:18:42 UTC Over Success Done 14,053.16 51.88 51.88
131089 115539 19 May 2006 7:27:43 UTC 20 May 2006 19:30:06 UTC Over Success Done 15,001.38 55.38 55.38
131088 115538 19 May 2006 7:27:43 UTC 19 May 2006 21:05:09 UTC Over Success Done 14,072.97 51.95 51.95
127951 112471 17 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC 18 May 2006 21:13:39 UTC Over Success Done 14,273.81 52.69 52.69
127950 112470 17 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC 18 May 2006 11:08:46 UTC Over Success Done 14,932.47 55.13 55.13
127949 112469 17 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC 17 May 2006 20:27:12 UTC Over Client error Computing 3,093.84 11.42 ---
|
|
|
|
|
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=133961
Jose,
Your result posted a fountain of very valuable error data. I have sent a message to Rhiju with a link and asked him to review it. Thanks for attaching here, this should be VERY helpful. We should hear somethng back soon.
____________
Moderator9
RALPH@home FAQs
RALPH@home Guidelines
Moderator Contact |
|
|
|
|
|
mmciastro and others: great observations! This definitely looks
like a problem in the way Rosetta\'s \"I\'m finished\" call interacts with
Boinc -- maybe the graphics thread is not getting shut down properly. I\'m sending a note to Rom.
This is indeed a strange bug, which seems to be related to graphics, but not all graphics. My P4 1.8 with S3 onboard video doesn\'t have any errors with 5.16. My AMD 64 3700, 1 M ram, with a PCI-Express Asus EN6200TC256 video card does have problems. I\'ve listed part of my results page below. the errors where while the screensaver was running. The one success early on was when the machine was in constant use. The other success came after I turned off the screensaver in windows.
132586 111400 20 May 2006 4:33:05 UTC 21 May 2006 16:25:53 UTC Over Success Done 14,851.61 58.65 58.65
132585 111399 20 May 2006 4:33:05 UTC 21 May 2006 16:25:53 UTC Over Success Done 13,593.53 53.68 53.68
132584 111344 20 May 2006 4:33:05 UTC 21 May 2006 4:02:36 UTC Over Success Done 14,273.86 56.37 56.37
132122 116565 19 May 2006 17:03:21 UTC 20 May 2006 4:18:50 UTC Over Client error Computing 0.00 0.00 ---
132108 116551 19 May 2006 17:03:21 UTC 20 May 2006 4:18:50 UTC Over Client error Computing 0.00 0.00 ---
132106 116549 19 May 2006 17:03:21 UTC 20 May 2006 4:18:50 UTC Over Client error Computing 0.00 0.00 ---
128201 112721 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC 18 May 2006 11:08:21 UTC Over Client error Computing 13,684.06 51.00 ---
128200 112720 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC 17 May 2006 16:21:57 UTC Over Success Done 14,411.83 53.71 53.71
128199 112719 17 May 2006 8:34:07 UTC 17 May 2006 10:39:17 UTC Over Client error Computing 5,152.00 19.20 ---
My AMD64 3700 laptop doesn\'t have these errors (I don\'t think the one shown was the same fatal windows error).
131159 115609 19 May 2006 7:27:43 UTC 20 May 2006 10:18:42 UTC Over Success Done 14,053.16 51.88 51.88
131089 115539 19 May 2006 7:27:43 UTC 20 May 2006 19:30:06 UTC Over Success Done 15,001.38 55.38 55.38
131088 115538 19 May 2006 7:27:43 UTC 19 May 2006 21:05:09 UTC Over Success Done 14,072.97 51.95 51.95
127951 112471 17 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC 18 May 2006 21:13:39 UTC Over Success Done 14,273.81 52.69 52.69
127950 112470 17 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC 18 May 2006 11:08:46 UTC Over Success Done 14,932.47 55.13 55.13
127949 112469 17 May 2006 8:35:02 UTC 17 May 2006 20:27:12 UTC Over Client error Computing 3,093.84 11.42 ---
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jose: great, thanks for posting this! This is actually
a very rare error code that you are seeing. You can
see a list of top errors at [url] http://www.romwnet.org/dasblogce/[/url].
Have you seen this if you run other BOINC apps, e.g. Seti@home?
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=133961
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Jose: great, thanks for posting this! This is actually
a very rare error code that you are seeing. You can
see a list of top errors at [url] http://www.romwnet.org/dasblogce/[/url].
Have you seen this if you run other BOINC apps, e.g. Seti@home?
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=133961
That bug has been reported in some of the Rosetta Work Units that have failed.
Other BOINC Applications I have run had not reported that error
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have \"NO searching...\" and \"Accepted\" graphic at all!!!
The \"Lowest\" is broken into many pieces....
And the step counter is awfully slow!!!
Running for 8 minutes now, step is only at about 2600!
The rosetta WU I am crunching (CASP7, too) reached far
beyond step 100.000 within 8 minutes of crunching...
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have the same low step rate, but the workunits finish in the normal time after perhaps 4000 steps or so.
Graphics are ok in my workunits. |
|
|
|
|
I have \"NO searching...\" and \"Accepted\" graphic at all!!!
The \"Lowest\" is broken into many pieces....
And the step counter is awfully slow!!!
Running for 8 minutes now, step is only at about 2600!
The rosetta WU I am crunching (CASP7, too) reached far
beyond step 100.000 within 8 minutes of crunching...
...
The relax phase is always slower, but the graphic should not look like that. Rhiju is aware there are problems with the graphic. I am not sure, but I think they are fixing it.
____________
Moderator9
RALPH@home FAQs
RALPH@home Guidelines
Moderator Contact |
|
|
|
|
|
Had this work unit manage to crash my computer twice
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=136079
It was running fine for about an hour, but i had noticed it hadnt checkpointed at all in that time. Suddenly my computer crashed...i initially presumed it was nothing to do with the workunit. After a quick reboot i started BOINC back up again and started the work unit again from scratch due to its lack of making a checkpoint. It again seemed to be running fine but after about 55 minutes my computer crashed again. After another reboot and starting BOINC up again the work unit froze after 8 seconds...i had to end the process in task manager so the work unit gave me the computing error...
If you require any more info please let me know...
Rob
____________
|
|
|
|
|
I have \"NO searching...\" and \"Accepted\" graphic at all!!!
The \"Lowest\" is broken into many pieces....
And the step counter is awfully slow!!!
Running for 8 minutes now, step is only at about 2600!
The rosetta WU I am crunching (CASP7, too) reached far
beyond step 100.000 within 8 minutes of crunching...
...
The relax phase is always slower, but the graphic should not look like that. Rhiju is aware there are problems with the graphic. I am not sure, but I think they are fixing it.
Ok, didn\'t see that is was already in relax phase...
But relax phase should be a little later, not at step 2600!??
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
wizzszz: there are different types of WUs, some (rare, or at least i didnt have many of them in the past) start with the relax stage without ever doing the faster ab initio stuff.
back to topic :)
just got this WU
got no stuff in the searching and accepted boxes just like wizzszz in his screenshot, i was able to get the structure in the low energy screen though through moving it randomly around, it was somewhere offscreen, looking ok at first, but started to get randomly broken after a while. now at 1.561% (or a little earlier maybe) everything looks like its normal, all pics where they should be, and the structure in the low energy window is in the center now too when i move it around. |
|
|
|
|
|
exact same behavior of the graphics on this WU too.
nothing in accepted and searching, randomly broken stuff in low energy. at 1.561% all pictures look normal and the accepted energy graph looks like its starting from the beginning like if it was a new model while its actually still on model 1. |
|
|
|
|
|
Just thought I would put in my experience with 5.16 so far; I haven\'t had one bad WU :)
|
|
|
|
|
back to topic :)
just got this WU
got no stuff in the searching and accepted boxes just like wizzszz in his screenshot, i was able to get the structure in the low energy screen though through moving it randomly around, it was somewhere offscreen, looking ok at first, but started to get randomly broken after a while. now at 1.561% (or a little earlier maybe) everything looks like its normal, all pics where they should be, and the structure in the low energy window is in the center now too when i move it around.
I managed to nab a few WUs, though I\'m currently running with a lower 1 hour setting on account of having a fair amount of Rosseta WUs to turn in, though if need be, I can play with the time setting there.
Anyhow, I\'m seeing this exact same problem on my computer. It\'s a t283_lowHB_LOOPRELAX_hand_aligned_hom... WU type
Edit: Model number 2 didn\'t show anything in those 2 windows as mentioned above. Model 3 is showing a little something in the upper right hand corner of the windows for those 2, which has now turned to look like the low energy window... Model 6 is also messed up like model 2. Whatever this is, it might be specific to some models within the same WU, though not others...
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
each model of those WUs show about the same behavior here, same happens on rosetta with similar named WUs on my pc, not watching every WU that closeley over there though. |
|
|
|
|
|
Yea, I saw this on my Mac too. Its a particular type of workunit, and
we\'ll have to do a little work to make sure it displays correctly in future apps.
We have checked that the data coming back is definitely use-able, and will
in fact be used to make our first CASP predictions!
each model of those WUs show about the same behavior here, same happens on rosetta with similar named WUs on my pc, not watching every WU that closeley over there though.
____________
|
|
|
