Index  | Recent Threads  | Unanswered Threads  | Who's Active  | Guidelines  | Search
 

Quick Go »
No member browsing this thread
Thread Status: Active
Total posts in this thread: 159
Posts: 159   Pages: 16   [ Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread
Author
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 16772 times and has 158 replies Next Thread
Dataman
Ace Cruncher
Joined: Nov 16, 2004
Post Count: 4865
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

Update:

So far I have completed 39 wu’s; 38 pending validation, 1 error, 0 valid

Of the 38 pending, 33 of them (87%) have one or more errors in the initial replication.

The average claim for a P4 duo is about 60 credits; Q6600 is about 122 credits.

flag
----------------------------------------


[May 13, 2008 2:16:33 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
knreed
Former World Community Grid Tech
Joined: Nov 8, 2004
Post Count: 4504
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

Just to give everyone a status. The following issues have been identified and the fix applied:
  • Some workunits contain invalid data and prevent the application from launching. We have suspended these workunits.
  • The file size for results was specified too small for some computers. It has been increased by a factor of 4.

The following issues are being investigated now:
  • Some workunits have revealed a memory leak that can cause the application to use up to 256MB of RAM. We are temporarily increasing the min RAM required for the project until this is fixed
  • Certain workunits experiencing errors because they are having troubles opening the checkpoint file
  • There are a couple of additional items that we are also investigating.

We will continue to send out work for the project as we received over 2000 results successfully so far.
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by knreed at May 13, 2008 2:49:28 PM]
[May 13, 2008 2:48:44 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

Thanks for the update Kevin cool

The following issues are being investigated now:
  • Some workunits have revealed a memory leak that can cause the application to use up to 256MB of RAM. We are temporarily increasing the min RAM required for the project until this is fixed

Noticed that earlier Kevin whilst looking at Task Manager....some heavy RAM usage on 2 wu's, and one in particular, compared to the others:


[May 13, 2008 2:59:40 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
BobCat13
Senior Cruncher
Joined: Oct 29, 2005
Post Count: 295
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

  • The file size for results was specified too small for some computers. It has been increased by a factor of 4.

I have 36 RICE tasks queued that all have the 1.5MB filesize limit. Instead of aborting all of them, is it possible to edit the client_state file and change the limit myself? Here is some data for an output file:

<name>R00000_0f42cd9f696c7cb7d97196270bebc6f7_06_17_0</name>
<nbytes>0.000000</nbytes>
<max_nbytes>1500000.000000</max_nbytes>
<generated_locally/>
<status>0</status>
<upload_when_present/>
<gzip_when_done/>
<url>https://secure.worldcommunitygrid.org/boinc/w...pload_handler</url>
<signed_xml>
<name>R00000_0f42cd9f696c7cb7d97196270bebc6f7_06_17_0</name>
<generated_locally/>
<upload_when_present/>
<max_nbytes>1500000</max_nbytes>
<url>https://secure.worldcommunitygrid.org/boinc/w...pload_handler</url>
<gzip_when_done/>
</signed_xml>

If I change the two <max_nbytes> entries to 6000000, will that allow the output files to exceed 1.5MB? Since I have a Q6600 running at 3.2GHz, I am anticipating some of the files going over the 1.5MB limit.
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by BobCat13 at May 13, 2008 4:28:35 PM]
[May 13, 2008 4:16:54 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher
Joined: Jul 24, 2005
Post Count: 20043
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

BobCat13,

Could not recommend that, but if willing to live dangerously.... you know the drill and stop the daemon/service and make backup including the client_state_prev.xml.

Fixed run time 8 hours, 36 queued is 3 days solid crunching.

cheers
----------------------------------------
WCG Global & Research > Make Proposal Help: Start Here!
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All!
[May 13, 2008 4:35:17 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
knreed
Former World Community Grid Tech
Joined: Nov 8, 2004
Post Count: 4504
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

We believe that we have fixed the memory lead and one of the major additional errors. We will be starting a beta test within 45 minutes. This is going to be a fast beta test with 6 hour deadlines (workunits will take 1 hour).

Once this version is released, along with the corrected file size limits, we expect to see 65% fewer errors. Additionally, fixing these problems will reduce the amount of cpu time lost due to errors by 95%.
[May 13, 2008 5:11:49 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
David_L6
Senior Cruncher
USA
Joined: Aug 24, 2006
Post Count: 296
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

Well I'm still getting size errors saying they have exceeded the old 1.5MB limit despite the adjustment, so like Lawrence said above they perhaps have the limit set within the WU's themselves and I need new ones?

Hopefully Kevin will be able to confirm.



If you want to abort them, go ahead. Post here when you are done.

NOTE TO OTHERS: Only the above average computers are going to be impacted by this issue. If you haven't seen this issue yet, it is not likely that you are going to. Only abort if you know that you have seen this. Also - results that allow greater file sizes (now set at 6MB) are already going out.



I aborted all of the "Rice" WUs that I received yesterday. No doubt that my overclocked quad cores would have received nothing but errors.
----------------------------------------

[May 13, 2008 5:12:15 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
David_L6
Senior Cruncher
USA
Joined: Aug 24, 2006
Post Count: 296
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

We believe that we have fixed the memory lead and one of the major additional errors. We will be starting a beta test within 45 minutes. This is going to be a fast beta test with 6 hour deadlines (workunits will take 1 hour).

Once this version is released, along with the corrected file size limits, we expect to see 65% fewer errors. Additionally, fixing these problems will reduce the amount of cpu time lost due to errors by 95%.



Send them on. I have the Beta project checked in my profiles. I'm running Core 2 Quads with minimum of 2GB RAM in every machine and I have a variety of operating systems: 32 bit XP Pro, 32 bit Vista Ultimate, 32 bit Vista Business, 64 bith Vista Ultimate, 64 bit Server 2008...... If there's still a problem with faster machines I should see it. I'll also throw a 3.4GHz P4 Northwood with XP Home on here just to see what happens with it.
----------------------------------------

[May 13, 2008 5:18:45 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
David_L6
Senior Cruncher
USA
Joined: Aug 24, 2006
Post Count: 296
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

We will be starting a beta test within 45 minutes.



Have any Betas been sent out yet? I haven't received any.
----------------------------------------

[May 13, 2008 7:05:52 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: The Initial Technical Questions Thread

Just to report something I noticed:

I'm not seeing any error messages other than
Task R00001_<whatever> exited with zero status but no 'finished' file
If this happens repeatedly you may need to reset the project.

However I'm running this app on 4 hosts and only one of them gets this error -- and it gets it every time. The result output looks OK, except for the can't open pdb for appending message; they're all currently are in pending status.

The host with these messages is a Mac(book Pro), the other 3 are Windows. Also it's a dual core, the others are H/T P4 or less. My prefs limit BONC to 1 cpu.

I can do what it suggests and reset the project on this host, but I'm a bit skeptical that will make a difference.
[May 13, 2008 7:11:42 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Posts: 159   Pages: 16   [ Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread