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: 54
|
![]() |
Author |
|
nanoprobe
Master Cruncher Classified Joined: Aug 29, 2008 Post Count: 2998 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
We will be re running the alpha for both Linux and Windows with a new build. If all goes well the beta will start soon. Does that mean there will also be a new beta for Linux?
In 1969 I took an oath to defend and protect the U S Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and Domestic. There was no expiration date.
![]() ![]() |
||
|
armstrdj
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: Oct 21, 2004 Post Count: 695 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Does that mean there will also be a new beta for Linux? Yes, the next beta should include new versions of both Windows and Linux. Thanks, armstrdj |
||
|
nanoprobe
Master Cruncher Classified Joined: Aug 29, 2008 Post Count: 2998 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Does that mean there will also be a new beta for Linux? Yes, the next beta should include new versions of both Windows and Linux. Thanks, armstrdj Thank you for the heads up and a special thanks to you and all the grid techs for all the hard work you do keeping things running. ![]()
In 1969 I took an oath to defend and protect the U S Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and Domestic. There was no expiration date.
![]() ![]() |
||
|
kateiacy
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 23, 2010 Post Count: 1027 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Great news! Thank you techs for all you do!
----------------------------------------By the way, was it ever figured out what the "Application exited with RC = 0x100" message means? ![]() |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
There's the problem that the Q-Chem analysis software is proprietary and WCG not the license holder... they've seen the code, audited it for security issues as all software is that is distributed by WCG, but cant say anything much beyond that, so frankly don't expect an answer beyond: "Benign or out of bounds". The scientists said they'll take any result and on that, I've not seen this exit state in any of the last 300-400 hundred results off my quad, that is, if results validate and Elapsed/CPU time gap is "normal", I don't look.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
kateiacy
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 23, 2010 Post Count: 1027 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Oh, I see.
----------------------------------------I got three of those "RC=0x100" in a row last week. The message occurred late in the run, during job 13 if I recall, so the times looked fine. I just happened to be looking at CEP2 results carefully at the time when there was the problem with downloading files. ![]() |
||
|
yose-ue
Cruncher Joined: Dec 27, 2008 Post Count: 21 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I don't know how to find the log file but here is some info from the properties screen
Workunit name E200430_108_A.24.C18H10N20S3.227.4.set1d06 CPU time at last checkpoint 00:07:34 CPU time 03:57:39 Elapsed time 04:10:35 Fraction done 33.008 % everything was running as it should up until that time. CPU time at last checkpoint 00:16:00 CPU time 00:24:07 Elapsed time 04:34:06 Fraction done 3.352 % It just started over (not from the very beginning but close to it). Information about my system processor 3ghz p4 system memory 2gig operating system ubuntu linux 10.04 linux kernel 2.6.32-25-generic leave in memory and while computer in use are both checked The computer was not reset. I am running a HFCC job at the same time and it didn't reset and CPU time and Elapsed time are very close. How long do I keep it running? |
||
|
RaymondFO
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Nov 30, 2004 Post Count: 561 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
yose-ue,
When the CEP2 WU is finished, would the results look something like this in terms of runtime and claimed points: E200427_ 572_ A.23.C19H13NOS2.123.1.set1d06_ 1-- Pending Validation 10/8/10 00:29:13 10/8/10 15:00:17 1.66 34.4 / 0.0 The wall clock time for this WU running on this computer was probably closer to the 4.5-6 hour range, but that is a "best guess estimate" based on historical completion times for this specific computer. CEP2 WU's were generating these types of curious results before I changed WU assignments to anything but CEP2. Now all is right, except for CEP2 WU running on this and another computer. |
||
|
yose-ue
Cruncher Joined: Dec 27, 2008 Post Count: 21 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The CEP2 job finished
Workunit name E200430_108_A.24.C16H10N20S3.227.4.set1d06 CPU time 04:42:22 Elapsed time 16:38:48 thats 28.3 % efficiency I have a HFCC that has been running at the same time it is nearing completion and at 99.7 % efficiency. I haven't uploaded the CEP2 job yet it is sitting at ready to report in case there may be some log files that may be useful. before 9/29 CEP2 jobs would run for 12hours and finish 15 out of 16. On my pentium 4 processor I would need a little more time to complete all 16. I had similar results when running beta CEP2 for windows. The only time I completes all 16 was during the second beta for windows and I wasn't running another job at the same time as the CEP2 beta. In that case it completed in a little under the 12 hours. This pentium 4 is my only computer. I haven't had any trouble successfully completing any task I received until I started having problems with CEP2. |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
It's very most likely not the efficiency... it's CPU time not being recorded!
----------------------------------------Look in System Monitor or with TOP and you'll see the real percent is appearing normally. The CEP2 process time should be near the wallclock time it takes for a single job within a task. See post by armstrdj signalling the issue is being investigated (well has been under investigation since early beginnings of this phase launch... it's now seemingly happening more as the converts to Linux are increasing). If anyone observes this on a specific machine recommend to take CEP2 off the device profile (you can have 4). Still not seen here on my Q6600 quad, most of the time 2 concurrent, sometimes 3.
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
![]() |