Posts by nouqraz

1) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta v1.26 bug thread (Message 4104)
Posted 7 Jun 2008 by Profile nouqraz
Post:
Four more that used no CPU time, despite saying that they were 'running' and then after the report date approached/passed said 'running, high priority'. BOINC eventually ended them.

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1018875
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1017917
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1017605
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1023410


The same quad core client machine currently has another batch of 4 mini 1.26 tasks that are 'running' but not using any CPU time. All 4 have also passed their report deadline. Waiting on BOINC to give up on them and cancel... so I can get 4 more tasks that won't use any CPU time...
2) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for 5.96 (Message 4103)
Posted 7 Jun 2008 by Profile nouqraz
Post:
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1023179
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1023178
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1023142
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1023124

The above tasks all failed after around 30 - 45 seconds with the following:

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 3600
# random seed: 1192707
ERROR:: Exit from: .refold.cc line: 338

</stderr_txt>
]]>


http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1023221
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1023214

The above two both failed after about 10 seconds.

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 3600
ERROR:: Unable to determine sequence length from pdb file
======================================================
DONE :: 1 starting structures 10 cpu seconds
This process generated 0 decoys from 0 attempts
1 starting pdbs were skipped
======================================================


BOINC :: Watchdog shutting down...
BOINC :: BOINC support services shutting down...

</stderr_txt>
<message>
<file_xfer_error>
<file_name>BAK1lcj_loop_model_biased_clusterCC02_4096_9_1_0</file_name>
<error_code>-161</error_code>
</file_xfer_error>

</message>
]]>

3) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta v1.26 bug thread (Message 4083)
Posted 27 May 2008 by Profile nouqraz
Post:
Looks like the first mini 1.26 task I got failed:

[http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1017106

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005)
</message>
<stderr_txt>


Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x00486019 read attempt to address 0x0000000C

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...
4) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta v1.25 bug thread (Message 4072)
Posted 26 May 2008 by Profile nouqraz
Post:
4 failed 1.25 units so far:

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1016257
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1016226
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1016219
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1016321

The error log on each looks about the same, here is the beginning snip of it:

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005)
</message>
<stderr_txt>


Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x004861A9 read attempt to address 0x0000000C

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...
5) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for 5.96 (Message 4070)
Posted 26 May 2008 by Profile nouqraz
Post:
Had 1 5.96 task fail:

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=982220

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 3600
# random seed: 1326558


Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x0093E2D2 write attempt to address 0x0DC57000

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...

... theres alot more of the error message



All of the other 5.96 tasks assigned to that host seem to have completed or are running just fine so far.
6) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta v1.24 bug thread (Message 4069)
Posted 26 May 2008 by Profile nouqraz
Post:
Ok, my 4 mini 1.24 tasks ended themselves ---

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005)
</message>
<stderr_txt>


Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x7C82A714 read attempt to address 0x00FF9F55

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...



Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x7C82A714 read attempt to address 0x00FF9F55

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...



Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x7C82A714 read attempt to address 0x00FF9F55

Engaging BOINC Windows Runtime Debugger...

SetEntriesInAcl Error 32
failed to create shared mem segment

</stderr_txt>
]]>

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=972944
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=973059
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=972928
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=972892
7) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta v1.24 bug thread (Message 4060)
Posted 24 May 2008 by Profile nouqraz
Post:
Currently having the same issue that I was experiencing on rosetta with mini 1.19 and 1.24 on this host --- the tasks switch to 'running' but use no CPU time as shown in both the BOINC client and in windows task manager.

I'm leaving the tasks running - will the client abort them once the report deadline is reached?

Is there anything else I need to do to make sure you guys can get some useful debugging information from this?






©2025 University of Washington
http://www.bakerlab.org