| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: FightAIDS@Home
Thread: Have very slow WU # FAHV_x3VQ7_IN_LEDGFa_rig_0220728_0005 |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 234
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Chris Holvenstot
Cruncher USA Joined: Aug 26, 2011 Post Count: 19 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
@Dieter Matyschek: I hear you. The tasks I listed were only a sample of the type 131 errors I have had. they intended to serve as an illustration was nt a “one off” as previously speculated.
I too have decided to suspend new work units from FAAH until something is done to resolve these issues. I keep my work queues fairly short so work units that had already been received will be allowed to run, or not run, as decided by the whims of fate. The credits / points are unimportant, but I can't justify the loss of 100+ hours per day of successful crunching if the science is lost due to a file transfer error. |
||
|
|
cjslman
Master Cruncher Mexico Joined: Nov 23, 2004 Post Count: 2082 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I had 2 of those ridiculously-long-time-crunching FAAH WUs... one took 24 hours and the other 56 hours to finish
---------------------------------------- (I may have more on another machine... have to check). I too have decided to suspend FAAH WUs until the project becomes stable again. I don't care a rat's arse about the points, but I agree with many comments above: losing long hour WUs to a file size error is just too much  .CJSL Crunching for a better life... |
||
|
|
katoda
Senior Cruncher Poland Joined: Apr 28, 2007 Post Count: 172 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Yup, just lost 26 hours of computation due to error 131 :-/
----------------------------------------</stderr_txt> <message> upload failure: <file_xfer_error> <file_name>FAHV_x3ZCM_A_IN_Y3a_rig_0225813_0009_0_0</file_name> <error_code>-131 (file size too big)</error_code> </file_xfer_error> Two issues (points not calculated correctly and file too big) at the same time, I fully understand people opting out of FAAH. I do know that there is no obligation to participate and the costs we pay for helping scientist it's our choice, but c'mon, even volunteer wants to see that his efforts are correctly recognized...  |
||
|
|
Eric_Kaiser
Veteran Cruncher Germany (Hessen) Joined: May 7, 2013 Post Count: 1047 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
@Seippel:
----------------------------------------I don't care about long runtime for workunits on the androids. I think I will have a new rekord: 2 wu are supposed to run more than 240 hrs each. But: They will end beyond deadline and marked as too late. I suppose that the maximum amount of resends will exceed too. Thus my completion of these wu might be the only one. For runtime at my statistics it's fine but is it helpfull for science?  |
||
|
|
Eric_Kaiser
Veteran Cruncher Germany (Hessen) Joined: May 7, 2013 Post Count: 1047 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
@Seippel:
----------------------------------------I don't care about long runtime for workunits on the androids. I think I will have a new rekord: 2 wu are supposed to run more than 240 hrs each. But: They will end beyond deadline and marked as too late. I suppose that the maximum amount of resends will exceed too. Thus my completion of these wu might be the only one. For runtime at my statistics it's fine but is it helpfull for science? |
||
|
|
AgrFan
Senior Cruncher USA Joined: Apr 17, 2008 Post Count: 383 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Lost 103 hours on these three units. This is unacceptable. I am going to abort any problem units until this gets resolved.
----------------------------------------FAHV_x3ZCM_A_IN_Y3a_rig_0225881_0013 FAHV_x3ZCM_A_IN_Y3b_rig_0226139_0006 FAHV_x3ZCM_A_IN_Y3b_rig_0226269_0052 If the Techs know there are problems with a set of work units, why do they remain in the feeder? They should not be sent out until they have been recreated properly. It doesn't make sense to me to frustrate members with faulty units.
[Edit 1 times, last edit by AgrFan at Sep 21, 2014 3:57:36 PM] |
||
|
|
XSmeagolX
Senior Cruncher Joined: Nov 12, 2009 Post Count: 444 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I think the problem is still alive and that could be the reason, why my credits going down this weekend (did not have access to most of my crunching CPUs on weekend).
----------------------------------------I'm on FAAH-only to get 20 years.... My home machine (i7 2nd gen) is crunching 6 vina units (set to nnw some hours before): 1WU after 13h at 56% 1WU after 14h at 23% 1WU after 16h at 76% 1WU after 19h at 94% 2WU after 3h at 5% and 10%. So I think, most my 44cores are running long-time-vina-units... Will see it tomorrow....
WCG-Team Captain of Team SETI.Germany
---------------------------------------- (official Partner of World Community Grid)  [Edit 1 times, last edit by XSmeagolX at Sep 21, 2014 7:27:38 PM] |
||
|
|
KWSN - A Shrubbery
Master Cruncher Joined: Jan 8, 2006 Post Count: 1585 Status: Offline |
Still chugging through my 4 day cache which on some systems rocketed to over 35 days. Should finish up all the VINA tomorrow which will put the time estimates back at reality. Pushed them all to the front to get it over with.
----------------------------------------Looking over past results, I have seen no error results due to too big of a file. Running hundreds of threads, I would have expected at least a few. Guess I'll happily complete the science even if it takes more than two days per result. As long as other people don't get them on slower systems.  Distributed computing volunteer since September 27, 2000 |
||
|
|
seippel
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: Apr 16, 2009 Post Count: 392 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The "-131 (file size too big)" error should be corrected on any work units sent out by the server from this point forward (including resends). Any work units that have already been downloaded may still encounter this problem though. Thank you for your (continued) patience as we work through these issues.
Seippel |
||
|
|
OldChap
Veteran Cruncher UK Joined: Jun 5, 2009 Post Count: 978 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Still chugging through my 4 day cache which on some systems rocketed to over 35 days. Should finish up all the VINA tomorrow which will put the time estimates back at reality. Pushed them all to the front to get it over with. Looking over past results, I have seen no error results due to too big of a file. Running hundreds of threads, I would have expected at least a few. Guess I'll happily complete the science even if it takes more than two days per result. As long as other people don't get them on slower systems. This pretty much summarises where I was a couple of days ago and when I worked through them my thought was.... FINALLY. Spoke too soon. I now have a whole bunch of these as repairs more than enough to put a couple of rigs into high priority mode and have other work waiting to run .....and our reward for this? 2 pts per hour. Can one calculate the cut off time in hours that triggers the anti cheat mode? When there is a known problem such as this cannot the anti cheat mode be switched off? If the points were fixed I would care less about the runtime. I keep these running to get the science done but fair is fair  |
||
|
|
|