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: 89
Posts: 89   Pages: 9   [ Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread
Author
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 16772 times and has 88 replies Next Thread
vepaul
Senior Cruncher
Belgium
Joined: Nov 17, 2004
Post Count: 261
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled

I don't receive any CEP2 WU's anymore.
confused Why ?
VEP
[Aug 30, 2014 3:52:12 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: CEP2 validator disabled

I don't receive any CEP2 WU's anymore.
confused Why ?
VEP

Sorry little buddy, they will be back.
[Aug 30, 2014 4:11:35 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
johncmacalister2010@gmail.com
Veteran Cruncher
Canada
Joined: Nov 16, 2010
Post Count: 799
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled

Work flowing again - thanks!
----------------------------------------


crunching, crunching, crunching.

AMD Ryzen 5 2600 6-core Processor with Windows 11 64 Pro.

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-Core Processor with Windows 11 64 Pro (part time)


smile
[Aug 31, 2014 2:24:57 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Crystal Pellet
Veteran Cruncher
Joined: May 21, 2008
Post Count: 1411
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled

After resuming the normal CEP2 distribution the validation of the results is still very bad.

A task exited during Job #0 can't be successful after 8,200 seconds runtime where those jobs normally need more than 5 to 8 hours or even more. Such a task is invalid and no reason to put it in pending verification state. We've seen before that a resend which produces the same exit during Job #0 will validate that short task to valid and the longer running task doing 7 of the 8 jobs to invalid.

WCG and CEP do your homework and solve your problems.

Result Names: E225116_ 968_ S.338.C44H28N2O4.YMASRQQEYPJSMV-UHFFFAOYSA-N.20_ s1_ 14_ 0-- and ****_1-- 

[07:29:03] Number of jobs = 8 
[07:29:03] Starting job 0,CPU time has been restored to 0.000000. 
[15:52:40] Finished Job #0 
[15:52:40] Starting job 1,CPU time has been restored to 30033.359320. 
[16:48:17] Finished Job #1 
[16:48:17] Starting job 2,CPU time has been restored to 32949.439213. 
[17:37:29] Finished Job #2 
[17:37:29] Starting job 3,CPU time has been restored to 35891.602473. 
[18:30:29] Finished Job #3 
[18:30:29] Starting job 4,CPU time has been restored to 39065.692419. 
[19:17:05] Finished Job #4 
[19:17:05] Starting job 5,CPU time has been restored to 41853.945093. 
[20:12:30] Finished Job #5 
[20:12:30] Starting job 6,CPU time has been restored to 45173.287570. 
Application exited with RC = 0x1 
[01:14:29] Finished Job #6 
[01:14:29] Starting job 7,CPU time has been restored to 63237.719767. 
[01:14:29] Skipping Job #7 
01:14:40 (3664): called boinc_finish 

---------------------------------------------------------

[19:31:26] Number of jobs = 8 
[19:31:26] Starting job 0,CPU time has been restored to 0.000000. 
[07:47:07] Number of jobs = 8 
[07:47:07] Starting job 0,CPU time has been restored to 0.000000. 
Application exited with RC = 0x1 
[12:20:54] Finished Job #0 
[12:20:54] Starting job 1,CPU time has been restored to 8274.901444. 
[12:20:54] Skipping Job #1 
[12:20:54] Starting job 2,CPU time has been restored to 8274.901444. 
[12:20:54] Skipping Job #2 
[12:20:54] Starting job 3,CPU time has been restored to 8274.901444. 
[12:20:54] Skipping Job #3 
[12:20:54] Starting job 4,CPU time has been restored to 8274.901444. 
[12:20:54] Skipping Job #4 
[12:20:54] Starting job 5,CPU time has been restored to 8274.901444. 
[12:20:54] Skipping Job #5 
[12:20:54] Starting job 6,CPU time has been restored to 8274.901444. 
[12:20:54] Skipping Job #6 
[12:20:54] Starting job 7,CPU time has been restored to 8274.901444. 
[12:20:54] Skipping Job #7 
12:20:56 (2976): called boinc_finish 
[Aug 31, 2014 7:05:27 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
pcwr
Ace Cruncher
England
Joined: Sep 17, 2005
Post Count: 10903
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled

Work flowing again - thanks!


Only just, waiting on CEP2 WUs as currently reports none available.

Patrick
----------------------------------------

[Aug 31, 2014 7:41:02 AM]   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: CEP2 validator disabled

Returned my first one in a while and it was validated straight away. biggrin

Keep them coming. love struck
[Aug 31, 2014 8:40:28 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Yarensc
Advanced Cruncher
USA
Joined: Sep 24, 2011
Post Count: 136
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled


It really shouldn't matter if the CPU clock runs at 800MHz as long as the unit is completed before the 10 day dead line or if the CPU time is 2 full days as long as its error free.


The problem is if the CPU is slow enough that it doesn't finish the first job (which is quite long now) before the 18 hour time limit then nothing gets uploaded to the CEP scientists (as far as I understand it) which essentially wasted your 18 hours. Also, since it doesn't checkpoint until the first job is done, if your computer restarts the workunit would reset to 0%.

So while its true that slower CPU's still contribute to the grid, it gets to a point where CEP becomes impractical and that computer should be switched to different projects
[Aug 31, 2014 3:19:03 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
AgrFan
Senior Cruncher
USA
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Post Count: 397
Status: Recently Active
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled

I had two units fail with 0x100 in Job #6 on the same machine and one validated successfully and the other was marked as error.

This is getting silly now. Is it that hard to check return codes? I've turned off CEP2 until these problems get resolved. This project is too frustrating.

BTW, something needs to be done about the long runtimes. If this project can't run properly with reasonable runtimes (6-12 hrs) then it's time to end it. Being opt-in doesn't cut it. I have two dedicated 3.0ghz quad core crunchers with lots of memory having problems with this project. How much hardware is needed to run this project efficiently?

I will be stopping CEP2 altogether in a few months when I reach 10 years.

E225112_ 981_ S.334.C43H27N7.LAERXDMRXOZDDS-UHFFFAOYSA-N.19_ s1_ 14_ 3-- Ubuntu-PC Error 8/31/14 05:09:31 8/31/14 20:20:04 12.21 / 12.54 281.5 / 0.0
[12:51:12] Starting job 6,CPU time has been restored to 31702.480000.
[12:51:13] Starting new Job
[12:51:13] Qink name = fldman
[12:51:22] Qink name = gesman
[12:51:24] Qink name = scfman
Application exited with RC = 0x100
[16:15:50] Finished Job #6

E225115_ 565_ S.336.C45H31N5.AOJZTPHPZDFOEV-UHFFFAOYSA-N.20_ s1_ 14_ 2-- Ubuntu-PC Valid 8/31/14 05:03:11 8/31/14 21:39:16 13.53 / 13.86 310.8 / 310.8
[14:04:28] Starting job 6,CPU time has been restored to 36122.320000.
[14:04:28] Starting new Job
[14:04:28] Qink name = fldman
[14:04:38] Qink name = gesman
[14:04:40] Qink name = scfman
Application exited with RC = 0x100
[17:34:21] Finished Job #6
----------------------------------------

  • i5-10400 (Comet Lake, 6C/12T) @ 2.9 GHz
  • i5-7400 (Kaby Lake, 4C/4T) @ 3.0 GHz
  • i5-4590 (Haswell, 4C/4T) @ 3.3 GHz
  • i5-3330 (Ivy Bridge, 4C/4T) @ 3.0 GHz

----------------------------------------
[Edit 7 times, last edit by AgrFan at Sep 1, 2014 2:26:31 AM]
[Sep 1, 2014 2:19:14 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
gb009761
Master Cruncher
Scotland
Joined: Apr 6, 2005
Post Count: 3010
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled

Hi AgrFan, I can empathise with your situation, although I'm sure that everyone behind the scenes are attempting to iron out these issues.

What I have to keep reminding myself, is that, occasionally 'Science isn't simple' - and that's certainly true of this particular project. BUT, I'm sure that, in due course, these issues (and the numerous ones which will face the scientists after we've finished the "crunching"), will eventually get resolved - resulting in the end goal of more efficient/cheaper solar energy.
----------------------------------------

[Sep 1, 2014 4:28:03 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Jim1348
Veteran Cruncher
USA
Joined: Jul 13, 2009
Post Count: 1066
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: CEP2 validator disabled

It is better to get higher-quality science and have a few fail occasionally than to get perfect results that don't accomplish as much.
[Sep 1, 2014 3:14:23 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Posts: 89   Pages: 9   [ Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread