| 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: 70
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Crystal Pellet
Veteran Cruncher Joined: May 21, 2008 Post Count: 1403 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Returning invalids is much more appreciated than valid results.
3 copies of BETA_ E236440_ 229_ S.458.C54H24N2S6.MTJVIDPCOXZDJF-UHFFFAOYSA-N.10_ s1_ 14a Valid -- 5/25/16 22:56:43 5/26/16 09:28:28 3.54 70.4 / 100.4 Invalid 5/24/16 20:29:44 5/25/16 12:20:43 6.61 294.6 / 294.6 Valid -- 5/24/16 20:29:28 5/25/16 22:56:38 2.30 130.5 / 100.4 |
||
|
|
ErikaT
Former World Community Grid Admin USA Joined: Apr 27, 2009 Post Count: 912 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Hello all,
I've had to do some cleaning up of posts in this thread due to violation of forum rules. Again, I remind everyone, please do not respond or comment on anything you find to be in violation of forum rules. Report the post and we will handle it. Thank you for your cooperation, ErikaT |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hmm, "Try Validation" on 2 attempts hitting 18 hours?? - should be interesting
Minimum Quorum: 1 Replication: 1 Try Validation BETA_ E236438_ 715_ S.400.C60H26N2.SZDJSPUQOGJDOE-UHFFFAOYSA-N.3_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- Microsoft Windows 10 Professional x64 Edition, (10.00.10586.00) 700 Pending Validation 25/05/16 22:38:07 26/05/16 18:02:23 18.00 213.0 / 0.0 BETA_ E236438_ 715_ S.400.C60H26N2.SZDJSPUQOGJDOE-UHFFFAOYSA-N.3_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- Microsoft Windows XP Professional x86 Edition, Service Pack 3, (05.01.2600.00) 700 Error 24/05/16 10:19:56 25/05/16 22:38:01 18.00 213.0 / 0.0 |
||
|
|
pvh513
Senior Cruncher Joined: Feb 26, 2011 Post Count: 260 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Since they already started removing entries from the database, a quick update of where my WUs are before it is all gone...
----------------------------------------I got 14 WUs. 2 are still running. 2 went invalid BETA_ E236437_ 323_ S.372.C52H28S2.WEULLIFNMVXNAH-UHFFFAOYSA-N.4_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- BETA_ E236437_ 872_ S.372.C52H28S2.AZCCIDDKWPEAKB-UHFFFAOYSA-N.8_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- 3 are PVer BETA_ E236437_ 322_ S.372.C52H28S2.WEULLIFNMVXNAH-UHFFFAOYSA-N.3_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- BETA_ E236440_ 593_ S.458.C54H24N2O4S4.RJZAKIXHKKRSKH-UHFFFAOYSA-N.1_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- BETA_ E236440_ 907_ S.460.C57H25N3O5S2.OPURKTMPXSJFSA-UHFFFAOYSA-N.14_ s1_ 14a_ 2-- I expect the third to go invalid too as it shows the same problems as the other two invalids. The other two PVer WUs have problems with wingmen hitting the 18h limit. The second entry also had one wingman getting "process exited with code 210 (0xd2, -46)" straight after startup. 1 WU is PVal, but has two wingmen in PVer... BETA_ E236440_ 658_ S.456.C54H22N2O2S5.SHHGPAPAUYNDGP-UHFFFAOYSA-N.9_ s1_ 14a_ 2-- Linux 4.1.15-8-default 700 Pending Validation 5/25/16 01:33:08 5/26/16 17:03:05 9.02 131.2 / 0.0 BETA_ E236440_ 658_ S.456.C54H22N2O2S5.SHHGPAPAUYNDGP-UHFFFAOYSA-N.9_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- Linux 4.5.4-1-ARCH 700 Pending Verification 5/24/16 20:25:14 5/25/16 01:05:28 3.01 84.3 / 0.0 BETA_ E236440_ 658_ S.456.C54H22N2O2S5.SHHGPAPAUYNDGP-UHFFFAOYSA-N.9_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- Linux 4.4.0-22-generic 700 Pending Verification 5/24/16 20:24:30 5/25/16 01:32:47 4.66 186.4 / 0.0 The remaining 6 WUs are valid. So the failure rate is very high in this batch, at least 2 or 3 out of 14. This is on computers that haven't returned any invalids on production work in months... Update - The 2 running units have finished now. They both went PVal. One has both units hitting the 18h brick wall BETA_ E236440_ 332_ S.460.C62F2H26N4S1.YZLTYBBFARFTDT-UHFFFAOYSA-N.3_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- Linux 3.13.0-68-generic 700 Pending Validation 5/24/16 20:34:06 5/25/16 18:51:10 18.00 390.4 / 0.0 BETA_ E236440_ 332_ S.460.C62F2H26N4S1.YZLTYBBFARFTDT-UHFFFAOYSA-N.3_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- Linux 4.1.15-8-default 700 Pending Validation 5/24/16 20:33:09 5/26/16 22:33:05 18.00 262.2 / 0.0 The other has two wingmen both in PVer BETA_ E236440_ 607_ S.458.C54H24N2O4S4.RJZAKIXHKKRSKH-UHFFFAOYSA-N.15_ s1_ 14a_ 2-- Linux 4.1.15-8-default 700 Pending Validation 5/25/16 17:33:05 5/26/16 20:33:08 10.29 326.6 / 0.0 BETA_ E236440_ 607_ S.458.C54H24N2O4S4.RJZAKIXHKKRSKH-UHFFFAOYSA-N.15_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- Linux 3.2.0-54-generic 700 Pending Verification 5/24/16 20:34:14 5/25/16 00:34:09 3.10 75.2 / 0.0 BETA_ E236440_ 607_ S.458.C54H24N2O4S4.RJZAKIXHKKRSKH-UHFFFAOYSA-N.15_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- Linux 3.8.0-19-generic 700 Pending Verification 5/24/16 20:33:00 5/25/16 15:37:04 8.42 181.8 / 0.0 The PVer units listed above are unchanged. Update 2 - As expected BETA_ E236440_ 907_ S.460.C57H25N3O5S2.OPURKTMPXSJFSA-UHFFFAOYSA-N.14_ s1_ 14a_ 2-- went invalid, BETA_ E236440_ 332_ S.460.C62F2H26N4S1.YZLTYBBFARFTDT-UHFFFAOYSA-N.3_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- went to error status as it hit the 18h limit, BETA_ E236437_ 322_ S.372.C52H28S2.WEULLIFNMVXNAH-UHFFFAOYSA-N.3_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- is still PVer and the rest went valid. So the tally is now 3 invalid, 1 error, 1 PVer, 9 valid. Update 3 - The final PVer WU also went valid. So the final tally is 10 valid, 1 error, 3 invalid. That means more than 21% invalid rate... [Edit 3 times, last edit by pvh513 at May 29, 2016 2:09:51 PM] |
||
|
|
nanoprobe
Master Cruncher Classified Joined: Aug 29, 2008 Post Count: 2998 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I just accidentally stumbled onto something interesting. I put a beta task that was at 15 hours and 90% complete w/o a checkpoint into "waiting to run" mode with a setting in the app_config file. When I restarted it, it picked up right where it left off at 15 hours and 90% complete. It didn't go back to zero time and 0% complete.
---------------------------------------- ![]() Any other time I paused/suspended or in any way stopped one of these tasks that hadn't checkpointed it restarted from 0. The obvious conclusion was that it was kept in memory but why this time and not before?
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.
----------------------------------------![]() ![]() [Edit 3 times, last edit by nanoprobe at May 26, 2016 9:20:24 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
<snip> BETA_ E236438_ 146_ S.396.C44H22N2S6.CGPWUKAIJXKZGD-UHFFFAOYSA-N.14_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- <snip> Oddly, this ended up being invalid. Two wingmen (one of which which having the same OS, but older client) stopped early at job 3 while my machine stopped early at job 1. None of us hit the 18 hour limit. |
||
|
|
Crystal Pellet
Veteran Cruncher Joined: May 21, 2008 Post Count: 1403 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
When I restarted it, it picked up right where it left off at 15 hours and 90% complete. It didn't go back to zero time and 0% complete. ![]() Any other time I paused/suspended or in any way stopped one of these tasks that hadn't checkpointed it restarted from 0. The obvious conclusion was that it was kept in memory but why this time and not before? It's how BOINC is configured. When a task did not reach its first checkpoint it stays in memory independent of the setting 'Leave application in memory' on or off. Of course this is only when the BOINC client keeps on running. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Crystal Pellet at May 27, 2016 5:34:40 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
It looks like some beta units are going through validation and others are being held. I'm seeing unusual combinations of results, e.g. PVal and PVer.
BETA_ E236440_ 679_ S.456.C55H22O1S6.FYXZKWTVNKCCLN-UHFFFAOYSA-N.11_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- Microsoft Windows 8.1 Professional x64 Edition, (06.03.9600.00) 700 Pending Validation 25/05/16 23:20:18 27/05/16 04:57:06 1.43 41.4 / 0.0 BETA_ E236440_ 679_ S.456.C55H22O1S6.FYXZKWTVNKCCLN-UHFFFAOYSA-N.11_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- Microsoft Windows 10 Core x64 Edition, (10.00.10586.00) 700 Pending Verification 24/05/16 20:25:17 25/05/16 23:20:11 2.26 78.0 / 0.0 |
||
|
|
pvh513
Senior Cruncher Joined: Feb 26, 2011 Post Count: 260 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
When a WU from this batch hits the 18h limit, does it still count towards the total run time for beta testing? My impression is that it does not, though it is hard to be sure about that. I think it should count.
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Oh dear:
----------------------------------------BETA_ E236438_ 878_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.MVPFUQOYKWSINW-UHFFFAOYSA-N.11_ s1_ 14a_ 4-- Microsoft Windows 7 Enterprise x64 Edition, Service Pack 1, (06.01.7601.00) 700 Error 27/05/16 15:58:04 27/05/16 17:02:17 0.00 213.0 / 0.0 BETA_ E236438_ 878_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.MVPFUQOYKWSINW-UHFFFAOYSA-N.11_ s1_ 14a_ 3-- Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Edition, Service Pack 1, (06.01.7601.00) 700 Error 26/05/16 08:03:05 27/05/16 07:08:28 18.00 213.0 / 213.0 BETA_ E236438_ 878_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.MVPFUQOYKWSINW-UHFFFAOYSA-N.11_ s1_ 14a_ 2-- Microsoft Windows 10 Professional x64 Edition, (10.00.10586.00) 700 Error 25/05/16 02:55:15 26/05/16 08:03:03 17.69 213.0 / 213.0 BETA_ E236438_ 878_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.MVPFUQOYKWSINW-UHFFFAOYSA-N.11_ s1_ 14a_ 1-- Microsoft Windows 7 Professional x64 Edition, Service Pack 1, (06.01.7601.00) 700 Error 24/05/16 10:20:35 25/05/16 02:55:12 12.35 213.0 / 213.0 BETA_ E236438_ 878_ S.400.C56F1H25N2S1.MVPFUQOYKWSINW-UHFFFAOYSA-N.11_ s1_ 14a_ 0-- Microsoft Windows 7 Professional x64 Edition, Service Pack 1, (06.01.7601.00) 700 Too Late 24/05/16 10:20:25 25/05/16 16:05:58 18.00 213.0 / 213.0 Two exit code 195 (0xc3), two hit 18h, one error code -120 (RSA key check failed for file). ... and @pvh513, I believe that 18h results do count towards your run time. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at May 28, 2016 7:47:31 AM] |
||
|
|
|