RESOLVED - 2.65/2.66 -- Or just don't blink

Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : RESOLVED - 2.65/2.66 -- Or just don't blink

Author	Message
KSMarksPsych Send message Joined: 25 Jan 08 Posts: 16 Credit: 12,520 RAC: 0	Message 252 - Posted: 1 Feb 2008, 10:57:45 UTC
	I ran 3 2.65 results. I can\'t really tell if they\'re working or not because they run so fast. It\'s a fairly new computer, but .2 seconds??? :) Fedora 7 and BOINC 5.10.21 running as a daemon from it\'s own account. At least they don\'t outright crash. stderr out <core_client_version>5.10.21</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <stderr_txt> ACTR: starting ACTR: boinc_init_options complete ACTR: boinc_get_init_data(actr_aid) complete ACTR: Trace 1 ACTR: Trace 2 ACTR: Trace 3 ACTR: Trace 4 ACTR: Trace 5 ACTR: Trace 6 ACTR: Trace 7 ACTR: Trace 8 ACTR: Trace 9 ACTR: Trace 10 ACTR: Trace 11 called boinc_finish </stderr_txt> ]]> ____________ Kathryn :o) The BOINC FAQ Service The Unofficial BOINC Wiki The Trac System More BOINC information than you can shake a stick of RAM at.
	ID: 252 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

mgpower0 Send message Joined: 28 Jan 08 Posts: 24 Credit: 71,702 RAC: 0	Message 256 - Posted: 1 Feb 2008, 15:21:46 UTC
	strange, I updated to 2.65 tonight and its running fine. Units are taking around the same time as the windows units, 15-25 min on this rig
	ID: 256 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Dagorath Send message Joined: 29 Jan 08 Posts: 29 Credit: 4,047 RAC: 0	Message 257 - Posted: 1 Feb 2008, 15:49:53 UTC
	I can\'t really tell if they\'re working or not because they run so fast. They seem to be working just fine, at least your log shows success for those. I\'m getting same error as I got on 2.64, \"output file size exceeds limit\", output file is 137 MB but the limit is 50 MB. Yours run .2 secs, mine run 2 to 3 minutes on a slightly faster machine. Yours is 32 bit OS, mine is 64. You have 2 GB RAM, I have < .9 GB Top shows physical mem and swap are OK. typical stderr out: <core_client_version>5.10.28</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <message> Maximum disk usage exceeded </message> <stderr_txt> ACTR: boinc_init_options complete ACTR: boinc_get_init_data(actr_aid) complete ACTR: Trace 1 ACTR: Trace 2 ACTR: Trace 3 ACTR: Trace 4 ACTR: Trace 5 ACTR: Trace 6 ACTR: Trace 7 ACTR: Trace 8 ACTR: Trace 9 ACTR: Trace 10 ACTR: Trace 11 </stderr_txt> ]]> Conclusion: takes longer to go to hell than heaven?
	ID: 257 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

mgpower0 Send message Joined: 28 Jan 08 Posts: 24 Credit: 71,702 RAC: 0	Message 268 - Posted: 1 Feb 2008, 19:24:52 UTC - in response to Message 257.
	I can\'t really tell if they\'re working or not because they run so fast. They seem to be working just fine, at least your log shows success for those. I\'m getting same error as I got on 2.64, \"output file size exceeds limit\", output file is 137 MB but the limit is 50 MB. Yours run .2 secs, mine run 2 to 3 minutes on a slightly faster machine. Yours is 32 bit OS, mine is 64. You have 2 GB RAM, I have < .9 GB Top shows physical mem and swap are OK. typical stderr out: <core_client_version>5.10.28</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <message> Maximum disk usage exceeded </message> <stderr_txt> ACTR: boinc_init_options complete ACTR: boinc_get_init_data(actr_aid) complete ACTR: Trace 1 ACTR: Trace 2 ACTR: Trace 3 ACTR: Trace 4 ACTR: Trace 5 ACTR: Trace 6 ACTR: Trace 7 ACTR: Trace 8 ACTR: Trace 9 ACTR: Trace 10 ACTR: Trace 11 </stderr_txt> ]]> Conclusion: takes longer to go to hell than heaven? Did you just do a reset or a full reattach to the project? I did the later, actually detached from the project then reattached and haven\'t had a failed W/U since.
	ID: 268 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

KSMarksPsych Send message Joined: 25 Jan 08 Posts: 16 Credit: 12,520 RAC: 0	Message 283 - Posted: 2 Feb 2008, 10:24:02 UTC Last modified: 2 Feb 2008, 10:25:05 UTC
	Well, 2.66 behaves the same for me. 2 of the 3 results under 2.65 validated and the other is pending. I expect the other to validate as well. So it looks like the science is valid. I feel strangely guilty for getting almost 7 credits for .02 seconds of work. I\'ve set NNT for the moment (ran 2 with the new app). Please let me know if there\'s any information you want me to gather. ____________ Kathryn :o) The BOINC FAQ Service The Unofficial BOINC Wiki The Trac System More BOINC information than you can shake a stick of RAM at.
	ID: 283 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

KSMarksPsych Send message Joined: 25 Jan 08 Posts: 16 Credit: 12,520 RAC: 0	Message 293 - Posted: 3 Feb 2008, 3:38:36 UTC
	Hmmmm... Interesting. After a detach/reattach cycle, units are running for a measurable amount of time. ____________ Kathryn :o) The BOINC FAQ Service The Unofficial BOINC Wiki The Trac System More BOINC information than you can shake a stick of RAM at.
	ID: 293 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Jack.Harris Send message Joined: 24 Apr 07 Posts: 507 Credit: 761,261 RAC: 0	Message 298 - Posted: 3 Feb 2008, 22:01:56 UTC - in response to Message 293.
	Hmmmm... Interesting. After a detach/reattach cycle, units are running for a measurable amount of time. Good I think there was a left over file in the projects directory that was created 2.64
	ID: 298 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Dagorath Send message Joined: 29 Jan 08 Posts: 29 Credit: 4,047 RAC: 0	Message 299 - Posted: 4 Feb 2008, 19:23:14 UTC - in response to Message 298.
	Hmmmm... Interesting. After a detach/reattach cycle, units are running for a measurable amount of time. Good I think there was a left over file in the projects directory that was created 2.64 Yes, must have been a left over or something. A simple reset didn\'t work for me but a detach/reattach fixed it. Now units are crunching error free and verifying against results from wingmen :) Keep up the good work, Jack.
	ID: 299 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : RESOLVED - 2.65/2.66 -- Or just don't blink