- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x005124B3 write attempt to address 0x3FF00000

Yea! Two of us with the same address!

Maybe it is not random after all .... :)

The same here - lr6_D_score12_rlbn_1bm8_IGNORE_THE_REST_NATIVE_7059_5_1.

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x005124B3 write attempt to address 0x3FF00000

The same as well had Manuel Lupotto above.
Both of us had MiniRosetta ver. 1.56.

The 1.57 version doesn't show the protein in the searching box.

In addition the Accepted Energy and RMSD graphs take a long time to develop each time you turn on the graphics.

I already have some 1.57 workunits in the queue, so when they start, I'll try to check if they give similar results.

In this workunit, 1.57 under Vista SP1:

https://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1292982

The graphics works, but whenever it switches to the stick figure display, the Low Energy and Native sections of the graphics window get rather dim. Also, the Searching section is solid black. Already up to model 5, though.

75% complete in the graphics, and in the BOINC manager.

I've switched from 100% CPU time to 98% CPU time to see if that helps test the lock file problem.

HMM... It's still running at 100%. Looks like I'd better check if any of the following are true:

1. I have to leave it set below 100% longer for 1.57 to notice.

2. There's another setting that overrides this.

3. I have to set it even lower, such as 90%, before it will stop rounding the value to 100%.

In case it makes a difference, I tried switching the Rosetta@home setting to 98% first, but it made no difference in the starting value for the Ralph@home setting, so I set that one to 98% also.

I'm seeing the same quirk in progress times that robertmiles and others have already reported. I've got a bunch of tasks with names of the form csttest_1_8_nativecst_harm*, all of which, under Mac OS X 10.4.11, are supposed to take 1 hour approximately to complete. What I'm seeing is that, after say 45 minutes, progress is apparently only 15% complete and there is 1:20:00 left. It's stepping very slowly at this point in a stage called MoverBase+Minimization. Nevertheless the tasks complete in about one hour as they're supposed to.

I found the World Community Grid Device Profile setting and changed it from 100% CPU time to 98% also; still running at 100%, though. I suspended BOINC for the weekly backup and disk cleanup session:

Back Up Files
Disk Cleanup
Disk Defragmenter
Vista update
reboot

Restarted running BOINC; still running at 100% CPU time.

Waited a few minutes; then got these messages:

2/1/2009 5:05:01 PM|World Community Grid|Task mf189_00038_13 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file
2/1/2009 5:05:01 PM|World Community Grid|If this happens repeatedly you may need to reset the project.
2/1/2009 5:05:01 PM|ralph@home|Task csttest_1_8_nativecst_harm_cenfa_0.1_hb_t373__IGNORE_THE_REST_1S3JA_4_7372_1_0 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file
2/1/2009 5:05:01 PM|ralph@home|If this happens repeatedly you may need to reset the project.
2/1/2009 5:05:01 PM|World Community Grid|Restarting task mf189_00038_13 using hpf2 version 603
2/1/2009 5:05:01 PM|ralph@home|Restarting task csttest_1_8_nativecst_harm_cenfa_0.1_hb_t373__IGNORE_THE_REST_1S3JA_4_7372_1_0 using minirosetta version 157

Waited a few minutes; then told BOINC Manager to read the config file and the local prefs file; no change.

2/1/2009 5:19:11 PM||General prefs: from World Community Grid (last modified 01-Feb-2009 16:35:52)
2/1/2009 5:19:11 PM||Computer location: home
2/1/2009 5:19:11 PM||General prefs: using separate prefs for home
2/1/2009 5:19:11 PM||Reading preferences override file
2/1/2009 5:19:11 PM||Preferences limit memory usage when active to 1438.32MB
2/1/2009 5:19:11 PM||Preferences limit memory usage when idle to 1725.99MB
2/1/2009 5:19:11 PM||Preferences limit disk usage to 27.94GB
2/1/2009 5:19:21 PM||General prefs: from World Community Grid (last modified 01-Feb-2009 16:35:52)
2/1/2009 5:19:21 PM||Computer location: home
2/1/2009 5:19:21 PM||General prefs: using separate prefs for home
2/1/2009 5:19:21 PM||Reading preferences override file
2/1/2009 5:19:21 PM||Preferences limit memory usage when active to 1438.32MB
2/1/2009 5:19:21 PM||Preferences limit memory usage when idle to 1725.99MB
2/1/2009 5:19:21 PM||Preferences limit disk usage to 27.94GB

I haven't checked if the POEM@home project or the boincsimap project have any similar options for lowering the percentage of CPU time, but will do that next.
No other projects expected to provide any workunits for the next day or so. Any other ideas about how to get such a lowering?

boincsimap recognized one of the previous CPU percentage changes from 100% to 98%, so I made no changes there.

POEM@home didn't, so I made the change there also.

Still running at 100% CPU time, though. Could the changes affect only workunits downloaded after the changes?

Looks like time to try even lower values.

Can 1.58 read the current CPU percentage value, and return it along with the results? Can it do the same with the Leave In Memory option, and perhaps a few other values affecting whether the lock file needs to be used?

Robert,

I had the lock file problem with a setting ot 99% ... but it is INTERMITTENT ... I only had it on about 40% of the tasks .... which of course failed.

As far as the setting propagating. You set it here at Ralph, update Ralph on your computer ... get the setting downloaded (you can check in the preferences pane) then do updates to the other projects on the target system and it should propagate up ...

Note that if you hit Ok on the preferenece pane you are now running locally and I am not sure if the changed Ralph settings will then propagate up ...

I only had the problem with Rosetta, primarily on my i7 computer ...

@Mtyka,

The graphics in 1.58 seems to work on XP Pro again ... time for 1.59 to break them again ... :)

I did that step to download the new setting before expecting it to have any effect. However, I've only had the end of one workunit from RALPH@home and the first part of another run since the change - not enough to test very well for an intermittent problem.

Got this 1.56 result , with "Process exited with error code 193".

Other than that one the others seem to work ok on this run.

---

I did that step to download the new setting before expecting it to have any effect. However, I've only had the end of one workunit from RALPH@home and the first part of another run since the change - not enough to test very well for an intermittent problem.

I think out of 20 tasks I ran I had 8 or 9 with that problem others with other failures.

I think it is a combination problem... with something else being involved. Not sure what it is exactly as I usually use a switch interval of 720 min so that most tasks are run end to end with no switching. Leave in memory is checked and I only turn off the systems when power goes out ...

All I can positively report is that since I went back to 100% usage and the later application I now have tasks running on that same system with no failures ...

Ramostol, this is relevant for you too, i think that's the same bug.
You two, could you set your settings back to restrict to specific days and see if it works now ? It did here :)

At last I managed to grab some 1.57 wus. I had time to observe that at least the first two succeeded, my first miniRosetta successes for a month. In a few hours we shall see if the rest survived the night and the network settings. Then, no news = good news.
Cheers!

Well, almost 80 tasks run on all my systems and no failures since the access failure reported below...

We seem to have broken the server ... work generation is stopped ...

Hard to test with no test cases ... :)

nothing today either and i got room on my system now after playing catch up again.

nothing today either and i got room on my system now after playing catch up again.

Cheep, Breek, Nereek ...

I can hear the crickets ...

The calm before the storm?

The storm before the hurricane?

Or was it something I said?


:)

Got a couple more tasks, ran fine ...

A post over at Rosetta NC from another user on the lock file problem and the indication there is that they also cured it with using CPU at 100% and not less ...

The more cores you have running the worse the problem was my experience ... for example I did not see it that much on my 4 cores but it was a real killer on my 8 CPU i7 ... YMMV

Then maybe that's why I'm not seeing it even though I've tried to set my CPU to 90% to catch the problem. For some reason, something seems to be making my CPU stay at 100% even though I've told it to change to 90%. I have a dual CPU core machine.

Then maybe that's why I'm not seeing it even though I've tried to set my CPU to 90% to catch the problem. For some reason, something seems to be making my CPU stay at 100% even though I've told it to change to 90%. I have a dual CPU core machine.

Did you try to set it locally?

If you have local preferences already set, then changing the web ones will not do anything. Sadly, there is no clear indication on the preference pane that you are using local vs. remote preferences. Try setting them locally for a shot and then use clear to go back to the web settings...

I've attempted to set them both locally and remotely, both at less than 100%. I'm not sure if I've found the correct way to set them locally, though, and I'll want to know the difference when I get the new computer I'm planning to order.

I've attempted to set them both locally and remotely, both at less than 100%. I'm not sure if I've found the correct way to set them locally, though, and I'll want to know the difference when I get the new computer I'm planning to order.

Advanced menu/preferences ... make the setting ... click "Ok" button ...

To go back to the web settings:

Advanced menu/preferences ... click "Clear" button ...

You should be able to tell if the setting has taken, assuming you set it to less than 100% by watching the CPU trend-line and there will be periodic dips in the level ... the way BOINC does "throttling" is to halt operation on a periodic basis. If you set it lower the dips should be more dramatic.