Posts by Divide Overflow

1) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Minirosetta 2.14 (Message 5155)
Posted 5 Jun 2010 by Divide Overflow
Post:
Completed successfully and validated, but with an odd error message:

ERROR: ERROR: Residue not supported by Placement coordinate constraint machinery
ERROR:: Exit from: ..\..\src\protocols\ProteinInterfaceDesign\movers\PlaceUtils.cc line: 281
called boinc_finish

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=1851904
2) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : minirosetta_1.72 (Message 4833)
Posted 8 Jun 2009 by Divide Overflow
Post:
Access Violation reported on my attempt.

Task 1472816
3) Message boards : Current tests : New crediting system (Message 1945)
Posted 9 Aug 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
I think it\'s dangerous having a fixed global credit award for models produced. The variability of models per time is significant from one WU to the next. This would encourage cherry picking high model WU\'s and favor machines that are handed more of that typ of work. (Or at least run the risk of seeing an increase of aborted work on WU\'s that are found to produce a few number of models.) Examples from the same machine:

WU: 1qysA_BOINC_ABRELAX_SAVE_ALL_OUT__1108_42_0
Ran for 7021 seconds
Produced 5 models
Awarded 10 credits

WU: 1l2yA_BOINC_ABRELAX_SAVE_ALL_OUT__1108_42_0
Ran for 7195 seconds
Produced 62 models
Awarded 124 credits

It would be far better to take some scaling into account for each WU. Perhaps Ralph could assist in providing this figure to carry over into Rosetta?

EDIT: Just saw the post that this is indeed the plan, which should provide a very equitable credit system for the project. I\'m eager to see some of this testing take place.
4) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.08 (Message 1489)
Posted 5 May 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
v5.08 has generated mixed results on my Linux box. Although several WU’s completed successfully, I’ve also had several result in computational errors:

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102100
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102101
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102102
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102103
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102372
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102373
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102374
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=102375
5) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Bug reports for Ralph 5.03 (Message 1324)
Posted 23 Apr 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
The watchdog seems to be more of a junkyard dog. ;) It killed off two of my v5.02 WU\'s that seemed to be running just fine:

93821
93726
6) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Report \"stuck at 1%\" bugs here (Message 1227)
Posted 18 Apr 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
I had a v4.99 FACONTACTS_NOFILTERS WU that was behaving in a similar manner. Not stuck, but constant computing for the first model with incredibly slow completion % increases. After much debate, I decided something was wrong and finally aborted it after running for over 33 hours and only reaching 8% done. It was resent with the v5.00 app to another host and was finished successfully in a normal length of time. http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=86791

Since I was running this on a WinxP machine, I think this problem is specific to the application and not your operating system.


7) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Report \"stuck at 1%\" bugs here (Message 1221)
Posted 18 Apr 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
Tony, I agree with you as well. The directive from the dev\'s is *not* to abort work units unless specifically asked to. http://ralph.bakerlab.org/forum_thread.php?id=18

If it\'s not giving you any problems and progressing properly, let it crunch! If you have a question or problem about what is currently being crunched, post and ask about it. The dev\'s are smart enough not to get confused about fixed vs. onging issues.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Max time (Message 1208)
Posted 18 Apr 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
Is 32 hours actual CPU processing time to reach 8.31% a bit much? This is a v4.99 WU (FACONTACTS_NOFILTERS_1scjB_381_7) that isn\'t stuck but seems to be taking forever! I have suspended other projects to allow it to focus exclusively on this WU, so there\'s no switching back and forth to disrupt it. If these are just large WU\'s I\'ll let it run, but I\'d like to know when to cut my lossess if there\'s something wrong!
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Max time (Message 1198)
Posted 17 Apr 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:


The best information I have is that Raalph does not have any limits except those in the preferences. So the Max time could be set as high as 4 days for a single Work Unit.

That\'s probably a good thing. A FACONTACTS_NOFILTERS WU I have is only 4.85% complete at 16.5 hours! It\'s still ripping through stepping on the first model so all should be well (I hope!).
10) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : Windows app version not updating automaticaly (Message 743)
Posted 28 Feb 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
Server status page shows that there is no work ready to send. The message in your log file is accurate, there is no work from the project available. (I\'m getting this too.)

The developers are probably tweaking the application and will generate test work for it as soon as they\'re ready. As previously indicated, work will not always be available for RALPH@Home.
11) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : 4.87 - result exceeds size limit (Message 643)
Posted 25 Feb 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
Almost all of my 4.87 WU\'s are producing this error now. Should we abort 4.87 work now that 4.89 (Windows) application is out?
12) Message boards : RALPH@home bug list : 4.87 - result exceeds size limit (Message 587)
Posted 24 Feb 2006 by Divide Overflow
Post:
I\'m getting the same error on a few of my results as well:

http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=7947
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=7921
http://ralph.bakerlab.org/result.php?resultid=7903


2/24/2006 12:50:07 PM|ralph@home|Computation for result BARCODE_30_1elwA_219_15_0 finished
2/24/2006 12:50:07 PM|ralph@home|Output file BARCODE_30_1elwA_219_15_0_0 for result BARCODE_30_1elwA_219_15_0 exceeds size limit.
2/24/2006 12:50:07 PM|ralph@home|File size: 64445797.000000 bytes. Limit: 25000000.000000 bytes
2/24/2006 12:50:08 PM|ralph@home|Starting result BARCODE_30_1enh__219_15_0 using rosetta_beta version 487
2/24/2006 12:50:09 PM|ralph@home|Unrecoverable error for result BARCODE_30_1elwA_219_15_0 (<file_xfer_error> <file_name>BARCODE_30_1elwA_219_15_0_0</file_name> <error_code>-131</error_code> <error_message></error_message></file_xfer_error>)









©2019 University of Washington
http://www.bakerlab.org