| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
| World Community Grid Forums
|
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 311
|
|
| Author |
|
|
rainforest1155
Cruncher Joined: Mar 28, 2007 Post Count: 6 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I'm getting similar if not the same messages:
That's been an hour ago and about 2 hours after E200364_634 and E200364_635 started. The tasks range from 7h26min elapsed time to a bit more than 1h elapsed time. Strangely enough, the non-beta WU still running shows this as well, but I've never before noticed the message. Of course, without the beta running, I don't check the message log that often. I'm also on an i7 860, 2.8GHZ running usually at 3GHZ with turboboost and hyperthreading enabled. Win 7 64 bit with BOINC 6.10.58 The WUs are still running. Hope they'll make it error free after all. Sebastian |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Also look at your security software, in case it's seeing a new app and is scanning the heck out of it (given there's lots of disk IO). Exclude the BOINC data_dir also from scanning.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
crille1006
Advanced Cruncher Germany Joined: Aug 15, 2007 Post Count: 79 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
My BETA-Wus were restarted twice again (21:46 & 22:36) with the following message:
----------------------------------------exited with zero status but no 'finished' file I don't think, that it's a problem with my security software 'Avira Antivir', because there's nothing reported in Antivir. Anyway, I disabled Antivir and I hope the WUs won't restart again. Is it possible, that my hd is too busy for crunching 8 cep2 beta wus concurrently and I have to limit it? |
||
|
|
Jason1478963
Senior Cruncher United States Joined: Sep 18, 2005 Post Count: 295 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
you may want to try running 3 at a time. I have some trouble with more then that as the machine gets less responsive
----------------------------------------![]() |
||
|
|
rainforest1155
Cruncher Joined: Mar 28, 2007 Post Count: 6 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I just had paused two WU temporarily and I can't say for sure, but I'd say they were both at about 13%. After pausing and restarting them they both started at around 1%.
I'm hesitant to repeat this with another WU. but in the properties of another WU I saw this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/283274/sc2/20100915230650-00254x2350201015.jpg Isn't the last checkpoint way too old? Shouldn't the WU save checkpoints more regularly? And I thought if a WU is paused, it would save it's current status more or less? Or is this project special so it can't be saved as often and you might lose a lot of progress if the WU gets paused? |
||
|
|
JSYKES
Senior Cruncher Joined: Apr 28, 2007 Post Count: 206 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I've picked up 7 WU's across the day, 5 this morning and 2 this evening - all set 5hrs16mins - the first WU has now been processing for 1.5hrs with 12.5% completed (on an OC i7 running W7 64 with 12Gb ram and large HD allocation)...total time will be interesting overnight as the next 4 WU's will all be betas taken in sequence.
----------------------------------------![]() |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
It may indeed be with 4-8 concurrent that so much time is sucked up with IO that the 30 second Core Client-Science App timeout is exceeded and the client then deciding to restart the task. At any rate I don't allow my quad to run more than 2 concurrent... efficiency drops quite allot with more, but my Linux quad has not shown these messages even when initially I just let it rip unhindered.
----------------------------------------Don't think that a project reset would be a save option for me to advice with these rare beta jobs in the queue ;D. edit: The first of 2 Beta jobs finished. Clean log, all 16 jobs ran normally and ended borderline within the 12 hour CPU hours cut-off limit. BETA_ E200360_ 593_ A.24.C18H12N4S2.129.0.set1d06_ 1-- 625 Pending Validation 15-9-10 05:15:16 15-9-10 20:50:06 11.38 113.2 / 0.0 Per the BOINCtasks History log, the elapsed time was 13:28 hours, indicating an overall efficiency of 84.5% 6.25 beta11 BETA_E200360_593_A.24.C18H12N4S2.129.0.set1d06_1 13:27:52 (11:22:53) 15-09-2010 22:44 15-09-2010 22:50 Reported: OK (u)
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sekerob at Sep 15, 2010 9:24:19 PM] |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Amazing, 15 hours later in between new water jobs another Beta with 5 day deadline came in which seems to be the 'normal' for this test.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
genes
Advanced Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 28, 2006 Post Count: 132 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Got 8 units so far. 3 finished and pending, 1 took just under 6 hours on L5410 in Win7_x64, the other 2 took about 6.5 hours on Q6600 in Win7_x64.
|
||
|
|
anhhai
Veteran Cruncher Joined: Mar 22, 2005 Post Count: 839 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Amazing, 15 hours later in between new water jobs another Beta with 5 day deadline came in which seems to be the 'normal' for this test. I think this means that the beta pool for this project is smaller then normal. (that plus the WUs take 12 hrs each). Of course this is partially due to the fact that people have to opt-in to this project. ![]() |
||
|
|
|