| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Beta Testing
Forum: Beta Test Support Forum
Thread: Beta test for Say No to Schistosoma (May 24, 2012) Issues Thread |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 88
|
|
| Author |
|
|
JollyJimmy
Advanced Cruncher USA Joined: Aug 23, 2005 Post Count: 115 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
If you look at the edits of my previous post, the security software is the closer suspect v.v. the -1073741790. One confirmed that back in 2009. What AV/Sec.Ware are you running? Any Event viewer entries of AV message log records [whence you can get to that information]? Is there a BOINC data dir scan exclusion set? I am running one of Symantec's suites (cannot tell you the exact version until tonight). However....--//-- Both machines are currently running other projects without problems (nor, if memory serves correctly, have there ever been any significant problems due to AV/Security/Firewall issues). Both machines have run plenty of other (non-SN2S) beta and (non-beta) SN2S tasks before. I am 99% sure they have also run beta-SN2S suites from the original (=pre-launch) beta for SN2S. Also, at least as of last weekend there have been no recent changes to my AV/Security/Firewall SW. Of course, I cannot exclude the possibility, that Symantec has released a patch this week that affects BOINC, however, if that were to be the reason behind these errors, my expectation would be that this would also affect tasks other than these betas. There were no such errors, though: This problem seems to be specific to this set of SN2S betas. By comparison, my Laptop (which now has caught a total of 3 betas), also runs Symantec - even though in a different version (=corporate install) - and has no problems with these betas at all: 1 returned valid, 1 PV, 1 in progress. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Almost 11 of 34 tasks finished, everything still fine. Only oddity was that my machine turned back on its monitor from its Fn+F5 key sleep mode, waking me up. It had a very high disk usage then. I don't think this was Boinc caused though, this Boinc client is set to use zero % paging max, and disk usage is now low again.
----------------------------------------edit: restarted every machine used. Did also a quick test using 50% of CPU time only. Also fine. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at May 25, 2012 12:51:56 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
If you look at the edits of my previous post, the security software is the closer suspect v.v. the -1073741790. One confirmed that back in 2009. What AV/Sec.Ware are you running? Any Event viewer entries of AV message log records [whence you can get to that information]? Is there a BOINC data dir scan exclusion set? I am running one of Symantec's suites (cannot tell you the exact version until tonight). However....--//-- Both machines are currently running other projects without problems (nor, if memory serves correctly, have there ever been any significant problems due to AV/Security/Firewall issues). Both machines have run plenty of other (non-SN2S) beta and (non-beta) SN2S tasks before. I am 99% sure they have also run beta-SN2S suites from the original (=pre-launch) beta for SN2S. Also, at least as of last weekend there have been no recent changes to my AV/Security/Firewall SW. Of course, I cannot exclude the possibility, that Symantec has released a patch this week that affects BOINC, however, if that were to be the reason behind these errors, my expectation would be that this would also affect tasks other than these betas. There were no such errors, though: This problem seems to be specific to this set of SN2S betas. By comparison, my Laptop (which now has caught a total of 3 betas), also runs Symantec - even though in a different version (=corporate install) - and has no problems with these betas at all: 1 returned valid, 1 PV, 1 in progress. It only needs a string close to one of the sigs the AV knows and some contorted heuristic scanning logic and think one process launching a second is suspect [which VINA does] and voila, you got one series of tasks that cant even get into the set-up routine. Of the estimated last 10 new science app versions, I've only seen one for Avista to get alarmed... so happened I was there before it could put it into sandbox execution mode. That would have failed it. At any rate, if you could check it out, it would be one more possible cause to be ticked off. --//-- |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I've received an _2 WU where the _1 wingman errored out with an message unreadable by me. It has progressed OK for over an hour here.
Result Name: BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000030_ 0842_ 1-- <core_client_version>6.10.58</core_client_version> CreateProcess() failed - �w�肳�ꂽ�t�@�C����������܂���B (0x2) |
||
|
|
littlepeaks
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Apr 28, 2007 Post Count: 748 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Got two, both errored out with error code 22. Did not shut down my PC during the test.
----------------------------------------[Edit 1 times, last edit by littlepeaks at May 25, 2012 2:48:20 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
The beta ran just fine on my Celeron, even with a complete shutdown.
----------------------------------------it's running now on the AMD dual core. I did a full shut down on it and restart and do not see any problems except boinc going back to one of the other tasks and leaving the half done beta sitting at waiting to run. Ill address that in a few hours if it does not go back to it on it's own so you can get your results back in a timely manner. Aaron Edit: everything appears to have ran fine. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at May 26, 2012 10:18:18 AM] |
||
|
|
uplinger
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: May 23, 2005 Post Count: 3952 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
So, I received 19 beta units (woohoo!!  ) and when I check this morning, 2 of them are still running, and the remaining 17 have all errored out with zero credit with exit code (0xc0000022). No fair!  I have seen the FAQ comments about this being due to an abrupt shutdown, however, that is not a plausible explanation here: I am running BOINC on three machines, two i9 desktops and one i5 Laptop. The units that have errored out are all from the desktops (laptop units still in progress). I do not have direct access to the desktops, but the likelihood of these errors being caused by unexpected shutdowns is close to zip - the machines are typically running undisturbed, almost idle, and one of them is even plugged into a UPS. Also the beta units that errored out were returned to WCGrid over the course of several hours: No way these machines had "many" unexpected reboots in that timeframe. Both machines are running 64bit BOINC (as a service, and yes, on Vista!), version 6.10.58. Here are the units that failed: BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000031_ 0251_ 2-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000034_ 0794_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000032_ 0935_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000032_ 0929_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000032_ 0624_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000032_ 0477_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000028_ 0339_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000030_ 0442_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000028_ 0236_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000034_ 0956_ 0-- BETA_ SN2S_ ABE97928_ 0000034_ 0104_ 0-- BETA_ SN2S_ smp005470_ 0000002_ 0165_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ smp005470_ 0000001_ 0378_ 0-- BETA_ SN2S_ smp005470_ 0000001_ 0277_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ smp005470_ 0000001_ 0260_ 1-- BETA_ SN2S_ smp005470_ 0000001_ 0463_ 0-- BETA_ SN2S_ smp005470_ 0000000_ 0097_ 0-- If you look at the edits of my previous post, the security software is the closer suspect v.v. the -1073741790. One confirmed that back in 2009. What AV/Sec.Ware are you running? Any Event viewer entries of AV message log records [whence you can get to that information]? Is there a BOINC data dir scan exclusion set? --//-- We are looking into this issue, it does not appear to be a Vista issue, because most of the machines with the issue are running Windows 7. We are in the early stages of reviewing the problem. Thanks, -Uplinger |
||
|
|
Warped@RSA
Senior Cruncher South Africa Joined: Jan 15, 2006 Post Count: 419 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
We are looking into this issue, it does not appear to be a Vista issue, because most of the machines with the issue are running Windows 7. We are in the early stages of reviewing the problem. Thanks, -Uplinger Yup. Good old XP (32-bit) and Ubuntu Lucid (64-bit). That's what I run and stable as anyone can need for crunching. 
Dave
 |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Received 12, one still in progress (make up). Ran them them through the drill and all have completed fine (3 valid, 8 pending). These were all run in Fedora on 1x, 2x and 4x cores simultaneously..
----------------------------------------Edit: All AMD cores, no HT. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at May 25, 2012 5:51:03 PM] |
||
|
|
Bugg
Senior Cruncher USA Joined: Nov 19, 2006 Post Count: 271 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
edit: hmmm, Google was asked for the xxxx1790 error and pops up xxxx1510. Cracks in the ceiling? Searching the forums, tracked it back to a first of very few reports: https://secure.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/...ead,25646_offset,0#229703 suggesting AV/Security software obstruction. Not a biggest surprise as it really is a new science app build that the guards need to learn about... Beta testing "hands on" once again called for. Well, Rob, considering the test was announce long after I was already gone from home, and everything was sent and most were returned by almost everybody before I got BACK home, there really wasn't a chance for me to be more "hands on" in this case. Sorry for that.  i5-12600K (3.7GHz), 32GB DDR5, Win11 64bit Home |
|||
|
||||
|
|