Posts by j2satx

1) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug Reports for Rosetta Mini Versions 1.+ (Message 3886)
Posted 12 Apr 2008 by j2satx
Post:
Computer Project Date ID Message
.G33M01 ralph@home 4/11/2008 6:38:15 PM 9770 Output file 1who__BOINC_ABINITIO_IGNORE_THE_REST-S25-10-S3-4--1who_-_3452_2_0_0 for task 1who__BOINC_ABINITIO_IGNORE_THE_REST-S25-10-S3-4--1who_-_3452_2_0 absent

WinXP
2) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug Reports for Rosetta Mini Versions 1.+ (Message 3879)
Posted 11 Apr 2008 by j2satx
Post:

WinXP

Computer Project Date ID Message
.G33M01 ralph@home 4/11/2008 12:15:33 PM 9006 Output file 1utg__BOINC_ABINITIO_IGNORE_THE_REST-S25-10-S3-12--1utg_-_3452_1_0_0 for task 1utg__BOINC_ABINITIO_IGNORE_THE_REST-S25-10-S3-12--1utg_-_3452_1_0 absent
3) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug Reports for Rosetta Mini Versions 1.+ (Message 3859)
Posted 8 Apr 2008 by j2satx
Post:
Computer Project Date ID Message
.G33M02 ralph@home 4/8/2008 4:30:17 PM 580 Output file 1dhn__BOINC_ABINITIO_IGNORE_THE_REST-S25-7-S3-3--1dhn_-_3452_2_0_0 for task 1dhn__BOINC_ABINITIO_IGNORE_THE_REST-S25-7-S3-3--1dhn_-_3452_2_0 absent

Linux
4) Message boards : Current tests : Server Status (Message 3808)
Posted 28 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:
There needs to be seperate server status for each different set of WUs being released and in play at the same time.
5) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug Reports for Rosetta Mini Versions 1.+ (Message 3786)
Posted 23 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:
I've noticed that and will try to fix it today. That is why there has been more failures. A compiler setting must have been changed. sorry about that.


Still errors immediately on W2K.

Computer Project Date ID Message
775I65G01 ralph@home 2/23/2008 10:22:19 AM 3492 Task score13_hb_envtest62_A_1a19A_3299_5276_0 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file
6) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug Reports for Rosetta Mini Versions 1.+ (Message 3782)
Posted 21 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:
I've noticed that and will try to fix it today. That is why there has been more failures. A compiler setting must have been changed. sorry about that.


It happens.

I'm watching three run on WXP now.......they look normal so far.
7) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug Reports for Rosetta Mini Versions 1.+ (Message 3779)
Posted 21 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:

1.08 won't run on my Windows W2K.....AMD or Intel, doesn't matter.

Is anyone getting good results with W2K?
8) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug Reports for Rosetta Mini Versions 1.+ (Message 3774)
Posted 20 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:

2/20/2008 12:04:01 AM|ralph@home|Task score13_hb_envtest62_A_5croA_3299_3750_0 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file
9) Message boards : Current tests : Help us debug minirosetta. (Message 3756)
Posted 18 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:
Yes, Linux is paying more. Here are some small samples (five WUs) from my test machines. I think they are all "minis", I didn't double-check.

Intel E4500, 32-bit Windows, gets 21.97% less than claimed
Intel E4500, 32-bit Linux, gets 22.16% more than claimed
Intel E4500, 64-bit Windows, gets 29.70% less than claimed
Intel E4500, 64-bit Linux, gets 6.60% less than claimed

AMD 4400+, 32-bit Windows, gets 24.33% less than claimed
AMD 4400+, 32-bit Linux, gets 27.37% more than claimed
AMD 4400+, 64-bit Windows, gets 40.46% less than claimed
AMD 4400+, 64-bit Linux, gets 18.55% more than claimed

I've asked for more numbers from the database, but haven't received numbers or a response to my request yet.

edit: just noticed I did receive a PM about my response.
10) Message boards : Current tests : Help us debug minirosetta. (Message 3737)
Posted 14 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:
I put "Failures last 24h" on ralph. It can be client errors, invalid results, unsent results etc, i.e. everything else with a complete status. I am hesitant to add this to R@h. I'd rather point out the positive than negative for the good of the project. I wonder what other users think.


That works for me........it's the 95% you said you were getting....now I believe it.
11) Message boards : Current tests : Help us debug minirosetta. (Message 3733)
Posted 13 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:

@dekim

This got no response on Rosetta.

Please show how many WUs were released in the last 24h so we can make the "Successes last 24h" meaningful.

Any thoughts?


Meaningful as in getting the success rate? I'll put that on my list of things to do.


Yes...you already show "Successes last 24h" on server status....just add "Non-Successes last 24h".

Pretty nice having all these WUs to crunch.
12) Message boards : Current tests : Help us debug minirosetta. (Message 3727)
Posted 13 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:

@dekim

This got no response on Rosetta.

Please show how many WUs were released in the last 24h so we can make the "Successes last 24h" meaningful.

Any thoughts?
13) Message boards : Current tests : Help us debug minirosetta. (Message 3710)
Posted 12 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:
Out of work again?? Says there are 6000+ WU queued on the front page, and 10000+ on the server status page. Getting "no work available" messages.

<grump> Can't help if there's no work. </grump>


Are you still not getting WUs?

All the computers I have attached to Ralph are getting work and have warm and happy CPUs.....Intel, AMD, Windows and Linux, 32-bit and 64-bit.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : WUs (Message 3707)
Posted 11 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:

Finally, some WUs.......I've got 38 onboard.
15) Message boards : Current tests : Help us debug minirosetta. (Message 3696)
Posted 9 Feb 2008 by j2satx
Post:
Minirosetta is currently running well on R@h with a 92% success rate but we would like to make it even better.

If you have experienced errors while running minirosetta and would like to help, we ask that you download our application symbols file on windows platforms so that we can get debugging information. Ideally, the windows symstore utilities that Rom Walton added to boinc would take care of this and automatically retrieve the symbols from our site but it doesn't seem to be working as it did before so we are asking for your help.

The file can be retrieved at:

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/download/minirosetta_1.07_windows_intelx86.pdb

Please place it in the ralph@home project directory of your BOINC installation usually located in 'c:/Program Files/BOINC/projects/ralph.bakerlab.org/'

Thanks in advance!

David K


edit: You can also place the symbols (pdb) file in the Rosetta@home project usually located in
'c:/Program Files/BOINC/projects/boinc,balerkab.org_rosetta/'


We can't help much when you don't give us WUs.

I've only had 19 WUs since 5 Feb on 16 cores.

16) Message boards : Current tests : test WUs (Message 3596)
Posted 4 Jan 2008 by j2satx
Post:
Y'all know how to twist a gal's arm. :-)

I just attached my Fedora 7 host.

It now has one in progress, but it's only been running for a few minutes.

It would be nice if work was marked for a specific OS. It would help the testing out immensely. I'm not sure if there is a way to do it outside HR though. And I don't know how HR would work with a quorum of 1.


If they had to go to quorum of 2, it would still benefit the project to be able to direct to Linux.

I put another Linux box on this morning and get nada.



Big problem with quorum of two is that people can set their own run time. So a 2 hour unit won't validate against a 4 hour one.


I did not know that........interesting in trying to think of all the permutations.

Maybe they can make two projects (like Malaria and others), where users opt in or out. Linux could be one project, Windows another, etc.
17) Message boards : Current tests : test WUs (Message 3591)
Posted 3 Jan 2008 by j2satx
Post:
Y'all know how to twist a gal's arm. :-)

I just attached my Fedora 7 host.

It now has one in progress, but it's only been running for a few minutes.

It would be nice if work was marked for a specific OS. It would help the testing out immensely. I'm not sure if there is a way to do it outside HR though. And I don't know how HR would work with a quorum of 1.


If they had to go to quorum of 2, it would still benefit the project to be able to direct to Linux.

I put another Linux box on this morning and get nada.
18) Message boards : Current tests : test WUs (Message 3588)
Posted 2 Jan 2008 by j2satx
Post:
The randomness of the work generation is partly the problem as well as the lower number of Linux machines.
I have had 3 Linux computers attached 24/7 but only get a random WU now and then.
The last time one of them got a WU was on the 20/12/07, yet it tries every day.
It would appear that the Windows machines are requesting the work faster than Linux hence we don't get the work.

As for Windows I have one of those and it has 1 WU since the 18/12/07.

I am trying to grab the work before those marauding Windows machines do but I am just outnumbered.

I did pick up the problem that was eventually fixed (and reported it), but the project did not react to just the one report as they needed more proof it was a wider issue.

If I had more money then I could add more computers.


I had more Linux computers trying to get work and decided it was pointless.

The project needs to use homogenous redundancy or some other method of assigning WUs specifically to Linux or whatever OS they are working with at the moment.
19) Message boards : Current tests : test WUs (Message 3586)
Posted 2 Jan 2008 by j2satx
Post:
How do we get the Windows computers to shut down for a day or two to test Linux WUs?

20) Message boards : Current tests : test WUs (Message 3578)
Posted 24 Dec 2007 by j2satx
Post:
I believe that WUs are created without any specific designation as to platform. In fact I'm pretty sure I've seen WUs where 1st person was Windows and second was Linux or Mac. So it is just a matter of who the task gets assigned to.


Ahhh, no HR.......guess that makes it hard for Linux puters to get Linux WUs.


...umm, actually... that's the only type that a Linux puter could get. Just means they would have to burn through a lot of Windows task requests to land lots of Linux requests. Everyone has that random chance of requesting work when it is available... Linux is just outnumbered.


I obviously don't understand the process of generating WUs. If they say they "need" more Linux WUs processed, then doesn't it stand to reason they need to generate more Linux WUs. Why is that linked to Windows WUs?


Next 20



©2021 University of Washington
http://www.bakerlab.org