Bug reports for Ralph 5.17-5.19

Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.17-5.19

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
Rhiju
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 06
Posts: 161
Credit: 3,725
RAC: 0
Message 1705 - Posted: 29 May 2006, 0:13:35 UTC
Last modified: 30 May 2006, 5:57:39 UTC

Ralph 5.17 has potential fixes for some glitches in 5.16:

1. Apps that can\'t find the appropriate libraries to display graphics (for whatver reason) will now not display graphics! Hopefully, this will help with some of the rare cases where graphics is triggering errors.

2. We have put in a symbol store to give us more debugging information. Thanks, Rom!

3. We removed the print statements to stdout.txt that were filling up some users\'s disks for a particular kind of workunit.

Some of the graphics issues associated with the t283_lowHB_LOOPRELAX_hand_aligned_hom... workunits are still there, but we\'re working on it!
ID: 1705 · 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 1707 - Posted: 29 May 2006, 4:10:18 UTC

Ralph 5.18 is the same executable as Ralph 5.17.
Now the \"PDB\" file has been updated properly to give us more debugging
info; its downloaded by the client in case of error and
gives us more useful feedback as to where and why the error occurred!
ID: 1707 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
ruevoss

Send message
Joined: 24 May 06
Posts: 3
Credit: 919
RAC: 0
Message 1708 - Posted: 29 May 2006, 9:26:21 UTC

5.18 does not save results on disk despite settings ;((
mac os x 10.4.6
ID: 1708 · 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 1712 - Posted: 29 May 2006, 20:40:39 UTC - in response to Message 1708.  

Ruevoss, that\'s odd. I saw that you aborted a bunch of ralph WUs -- is that because they were hanging? Can you post what error message you got? Thanks!

Is anyone else having problems with 5.18 and Mac?

I\'m crunching a WU on my Mac now, so I\'ll pay careful attention.

5.18 does not save results on disk despite settings ;((
mac os x 10.4.6


ID: 1712 · 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 1714 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 4:00:44 UTC - in response to Message 1712.  

I didn\'t have any problem with my WU, but I\'m running Mac OS 10.4.2. Anyone having trouble with the new ralph and Mac OS 10.4.9?

Ruevoss, that\'s odd. I saw that you aborted a bunch of ralph WUs -- is that because they were hanging? Can you post what error message you got? Thanks!

Is anyone else having problems with 5.18 and Mac?

I\'m crunching a WU on my Mac now, so I\'ll pay careful attention.

5.18 does not save results on disk despite settings ;((
mac os x 10.4.6



ID: 1714 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
ruevoss

Send message
Joined: 24 May 06
Posts: 3
Credit: 919
RAC: 0
Message 1715 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 5:31:53 UTC

>Ruevoss, that\'s odd. I saw that you aborted a bunch of ralph WUs -- is that because they were hanging?
exactly ...
>Can you post what error message you got? Thanks!
okay, next time i\'am crunching and they\'ll blow it, I send the message. I hardly do remember saying \"result to nil ...\" or so. but .....
ID: 1715 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Honza

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 9
Credit: 1,962
RAC: 0
Message 1716 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 7:08:08 UTC

Now really a bug, Rhiju, but we are empty, dry, no more WUs to test 5.19...
ID: 1716 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
ruevoss

Send message
Joined: 24 May 06
Posts: 3
Credit: 919
RAC: 0
Message 1717 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 15:36:15 UTC

Here\'s the required Message:

\"Message:
rosetta_beta not responding to screensaver, exiting
Task t283_lowHB_FARELAX_S_00001_0000040_0_583_2_1 exited with zero status but no \'fi.
if this happens repeatedly you may need to reset the project
Rescheduling CPU: application exited\"

and i can not copy the messages from boinc manager on my mac ;((
had to type it!
ID: 1717 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mike Gelvin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 06
Posts: 50
Credit: 55,397
RAC: 0
Message 1718 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 18:52:05 UTC
Last modified: 30 May 2006, 18:55:44 UTC

Had an occasion where a work unit was showing at the end 100% complete but was not using any CPU time. I investigated and indeed the Idle Task was running at 99%+ while the 5.19 work unit was apparently idle. This lasted for at least 2 minutes, but might have been up to 2 hours before I saw it as that\'s how much time the Idle task has accumulated. Without intervention, the work unit completed and was reported normally. Not sure what this means, I\'ll keep an eye out for a similar occurrence.


As I was typing this, another work unit has gotten into this mode. Showing 100% complete and not using any CPU time.

ID: 1718 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mike Gelvin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 06
Posts: 50
Credit: 55,397
RAC: 0
Message 1719 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 19:15:34 UTC - in response to Message 1718.  

Had an occasion where a work unit was showing at the end 100% complete but was not using any CPU time. I investigated and indeed the Idle Task was running at 99%+ while the 5.19 work unit was apparently idle. This lasted for at least 2 minutes, but might have been up to 2 hours before I saw it as that\'s how much time the Idle task has accumulated. Without intervention, the work unit completed and was reported normally. Not sure what this means, I\'ll keep an eye out for a similar occurrence.


As I was typing this, another work unit has gotten into this mode. Showing 100% complete and not using any CPU time.


It completed after being dormant for 18 minutes. I\'ll watch for another.

ID: 1719 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mike Gelvin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 06
Posts: 50
Credit: 55,397
RAC: 0
Message 1720 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 20:15:36 UTC - in response to Message 1719.  

Had an occasion where a work unit was showing at the end 100% complete but was not using any CPU time. I investigated and indeed the Idle Task was running at 99%+ while the 5.19 work unit was apparently idle. This lasted for at least 2 minutes, but might have been up to 2 hours before I saw it as that\'s how much time the Idle task has accumulated. Without intervention, the work unit completed and was reported normally. Not sure what this means, I\'ll keep an eye out for a similar occurrence.


As I was typing this, another work unit has gotten into this mode. Showing 100% complete and not using any CPU time.


It completed after being dormant for 18 minutes. I\'ll watch for another.


The very next work unit also showed 100% with no CPU time after about 40 minutes of run time. It stayed dormant for 20 minutes, then completed and reported.
ID: 1720 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mike Gelvin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 06
Posts: 50
Credit: 55,397
RAC: 0
Message 1721 - Posted: 30 May 2006, 23:55:20 UTC - in response to Message 1720.  

Had an occasion where a work unit was showing at the end 100% complete but was not using any CPU time. I investigated and indeed the Idle Task was running at 99%+ while the 5.19 work unit was apparently idle. This lasted for at least 2 minutes, but might have been up to 2 hours before I saw it as that\'s how much time the Idle task has accumulated. Without intervention, the work unit completed and was reported normally. Not sure what this means, I\'ll keep an eye out for a similar occurrence.


As I was typing this, another work unit has gotten into this mode. Showing 100% complete and not using any CPU time.


It completed after being dormant for 18 minutes. I\'ll watch for another.


The very next work unit also showed 100% with no CPU time after about 40 minutes of run time. It stayed dormant for 20 minutes, then completed and reported.


For the next two work units. Run 35 minutes, dormant for 24. Run 51 minutes, dormant for 9.

The pattern seems to be that the work unit will go dormant after completion until one full hour has elapsed.

Note: this is in the account file for Ralph: <cpu_run_time>0</cpu_run_time>


ID: 1721 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mike Gelvin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 06
Posts: 50
Credit: 55,397
RAC: 0
Message 1722 - Posted: 31 May 2006, 5:16:29 UTC - in response to Message 1721.  

Had an occasion where a work unit was showing at the end 100% complete but was not using any CPU time. I investigated and indeed the Idle Task was running at 99%+ while the 5.19 work unit was apparently idle. This lasted for at least 2 minutes, but might have been up to 2 hours before I saw it as that\'s how much time the Idle task has accumulated. Without intervention, the work unit completed and was reported normally. Not sure what this means, I\'ll keep an eye out for a similar occurrence.


As I was typing this, another work unit has gotten into this mode. Showing 100% complete and not using any CPU time.


It completed after being dormant for 18 minutes. I\'ll watch for another.


The very next work unit also showed 100% with no CPU time after about 40 minutes of run time. It stayed dormant for 20 minutes, then completed and reported.


For the next two work units. Run 35 minutes, dormant for 24. Run 51 minutes, dormant for 9.

The pattern seems to be that the work unit will go dormant after completion until one full hour has elapsed.

Note: this is in the account file for Ralph: <cpu_run_time>0</cpu_run_time>



This time I had a work unit that ran for 59 min 35 seconds... then went dormant for 60 min 25 seconds. Total was 2 hrs instead of 1.

ID: 1722 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
[B^S] suguruhirahara

Send message
Joined: 5 Mar 06
Posts: 40
Credit: 6,001
RAC: 0
Message 1723 - Posted: 31 May 2006, 9:53:31 UTC - in response to Message 1722.  
Last modified: 31 May 2006, 10:01:56 UTC

This version works without problems on x64.

Work tasks : OK
Graphics : OK
This time I had a work unit that ran for 59 min 35 seconds... then went dormant for 60 min 25 seconds. Total was 2 hrs instead of 1.

Are your workunits CASP7? If so, it\'s natural to delay to finish.
Moderator9 has mentioned in the post, http://ralph.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=209#1654
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.


If your units aren\'t CASP7 ones, it might be an error, I think.
ID: 1723 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mike Gelvin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 06
Posts: 50
Credit: 55,397
RAC: 0
Message 1724 - Posted: 31 May 2006, 14:35:36 UTC - in response to Message 1723.  
Last modified: 31 May 2006, 14:38:26 UTC

This version works without problems on x64.

Work tasks : OK
Graphics : OK
This time I had a work unit that ran for 59 min 35 seconds... then went dormant for 60 min 25 seconds. Total was 2 hrs instead of 1.

Are your workunits CASP7? If so, it\'s natural to delay to finish.


Whole different issue, my CPU utilization dropped to 0. In this specific case, it remained at 0 for 60 min 25 sec. This is a waste of CPU cycles.
All work units are CASP7 as far as I know.

Moderator9 has mentioned in the post, http://ralph.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=209#1654
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.


If your units aren\'t CASP7 ones, it might be an error, I think.


ID: 1724 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
retsof

Send message
Joined: 28 May 06
Posts: 1
Credit: 640
RAC: 0
Message 1725 - Posted: 31 May 2006, 21:45:55 UTC

I must be missing something. Others are processing work and finding bugs. All I have seen for a few days is \"No work from project\"
ID: 1725 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
TCU Computer Science

Send message
Joined: 16 Feb 06
Posts: 5
Credit: 241,166
RAC: 0
Message 1726 - Posted: 1 Jun 2006, 5:08:02 UTC

rosetta_beta version 518
WU Name: JUMP_RELAX_3142__t285__SAVE_ALL_OUT_594_22_0
running on Mac OS 10.4.6

BOINC Manager Tasks tab shows CPU Time stuck at 08:53:24 and 70%
top command shows TIME = 36:04:48 and climbing

stopped and restarted BOINC
CPU Time reverted to 05:35:00 and 70% but no longer stuck
ID: 1726 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
[B^S] suguruhirahara

Send message
Joined: 5 Mar 06
Posts: 40
Credit: 6,001
RAC: 0
Message 1727 - Posted: 1 Jun 2006, 6:35:23 UTC - in response to Message 1725.  
Last modified: 1 Jun 2006, 6:36:53 UTC

I must be missing something. Others are processing work and finding bugs. All I have seen for a few days is \"No work from project\"

You request workunits untimely. Because this alpha project sends workunits out in the limited number to check them for bugs, if developers don\'t want to send units out, it means that they\'re satisfied with them and there\'s no need to send and check anymore. So you can\'t get works.

Those who are processing works now are who have requested and fetched works already.
ID: 1727 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
[B^S] suguruhirahara

Send message
Joined: 5 Mar 06
Posts: 40
Credit: 6,001
RAC: 0
Message 1728 - Posted: 1 Jun 2006, 9:14:51 UTC
Last modified: 1 Jun 2006, 9:17:39 UTC

While a progress of an unit reached 100% on my BOINC client, strangely it continues to work, and % of completed on the graphic keeps less than 100%, approximately 57%.
(here you can see a screen shot of it.) And I continue to work on the unit several minutes, but it remains at the same percentage.

Is this bug or not? thanks,


ID: 1728 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
[B^S] suguruhirahara

Send message
Joined: 5 Mar 06
Posts: 40
Credit: 6,001
RAC: 0
Message 1729 - Posted: 1 Jun 2006, 9:20:11 UTC - in response to Message 1728.  

While a progress of an unit reached 100% on my BOINC client, strangely it continues to work, and % of completed on the graphic keeps less than 100%, approximately 57%.
(here you can see a screen shot of it.) And I continue to work on the unit several minutes, but it remains at the same percentage.
This problem are solved. sorry for embarassment.
ID: 1729 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.17-5.19



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