Posts by Robert Everly

1) Message boards : Current tests : New crediting system (Message 2053)
Posted 16 Aug 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
I'm extracting the archived data and will see what I can do. What do other users think about trying to backdate the credits using the new work based system?


If nothing else, it would be interesting to see what changes would be made. Could a mock run be done and show us side by side results?
2) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.05 and higher (Message 1415)
Posted 28 Apr 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
Just my 2 cents worth here. I've said this on other project boards as well.

There should be two cache settings in each project.

1) Max Wu/cpu/day (current cache)

2) Max outstanding WU/CPU.

I'd love to see #2 added. Personally I find it silly that some people and systems download hundreds of WUs to only return a portion of them. Just look at host 3755 on seti beta. Yes, the daily quota is down to 1 per day, but there were over 1000 outstanding WUs on the machine.

My thought for #2 would be this. Project defines how many outstanding WUs/cpu is acceptable. You can download up to this amount over any number of days with #1. Once you hit the limit in #2, the server refuses to send you more work until you return work.

Why keep sending work to hosts that are not returning work.
3) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.02 (Message 1317)
Posted 23 Apr 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
All three of my 5.02 WUs were killed by the watchdog thread.

resultid=91985
resultid=91973
resultid=91972

I still have my settings to leave the app in memory when switching. Is it possible that the watchdog thread is taking that time into consideration? I have my systems set to switch projects every hour. All of mine aborted very very close to the one hour mark.
4) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : 4.92 ignoring CPU run time setting (Message 882)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
I have my CPU run time set to 2 hrs, however I currently have a WU that has been running for ~20 hrs and is at 4.7%.

This is the WU:
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=5340



The status of that WU is showing CANCELLED. You should go ahead and abort it if you already haven't.
5) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : 4.92 WU errors with \"incorrect function (0x1)\" (Message 863)
Posted 12 Mar 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
These three had the same error as well

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=12677
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=12827
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=12829

I'm still betting that a bad batch went out. All seven (so far) of the recent failures have had a series of numbers at the start of the name. Like this: 7652_fullatom_relax_dec_7652_101.pdb_267_1

Not a single one of my seven have be done sucessfully by any other hosts so far.
6) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : 4.92 WU errors with \"incorrect function (0x1)\" (Message 851)
Posted 11 Mar 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
I had 4 results on two machines error out over night.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=12722
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=12678
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=12676
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=12727

These are relatively high WU numbers, so it could be a bad batch as opposed to 4.92 errors.

I say that because I currently have three other WUs running 4.92 with no problems so far, but they are re-issues. They were not returned by the original host.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=9677
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=9678
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/workunit.php?wuid=9680
7) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Report - Previously Unclassified Work Unit Errors (Message 796)
Posted 3 Mar 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
Haven't seen this error before.

I checked in on how things were going, saw a 4.91, gave the graphics a shot. It ran for a couple of minutes, then went all wacky. The accepted protein model disappared as did both graphs. It advanced a couple of steps and hard locked the computer. Also got a bunch of runtime error popup boxes. No screenshots though with the lockup. Had to do a cold reboot.

Anyway, here is the wu.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=13679

and the error result.

<core_client_version>5.2.12</core_client_version>
<message>The system cannot find the path specified. (0x3) - exit code 3 (0x3)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# random seed: 3988164
# cpu_run_time_pref: 7200
# cpu_run_time_pref: 7200

</stderr_txt>

8) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Maximum disk usage exceeded (Message 707)
Posted 27 Feb 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
Had one die on me with the same disk limit error.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=11796
9) Message boards : Feedback : Credit scores (Message 441)
Posted 21 Feb 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
Seti@Home - Enhanced is testing a flops based measurement ?
Can it be used here ?
Is it easy to implement ?
Can it be tested ?
Does it restrict the boinc client version numbers ?


Or Rosetta could go the CPDN route and do non-standard credits.

Since the new app shows how many models you do, a credit value could be assigned to each model.
10) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : UNHANDLED EXCEPTION (Message 307)
Posted 19 Feb 2006 by Robert Everly
Post:
This result of mine had an error but appears to have finished ok. Settings were to leave in memory, 4 hour run time. This was with ralph 4.84

<core_client_version>5.2.12</core_client_version>
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 14400
# random seed: 3997866
# cpu_run_time_pref: 14400

***UNHANDLED EXCEPTION****
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x7C910E03 write attempt to address 0xBFF42FF2

1: 02/18/06 11:35:23


# cpu_run_time_pref: 14400
# cpu_run_time_pref: 14400
# DONE :: 1 starting structures built 113 (nstruct) times
# This process generated 114 decoys from 114 attempts

</stderr_txt>



Do have a question/suggetion for the info that is displayed.

Is this in 12 or 24 hour format? If its 12, should list am or pm.
1: 02/18/06 11:35:23








©2024 University of Washington
http://www.bakerlab.org