Testing openMalaria app version 6.30/6.31/6.32/6.33 |
Message boards : Number crunching : Testing openMalaria app version 6.30/6.31/6.32/6.33
Author | Message |
---|---|
We're about to start testing of the new application release, version 6.30. Diggory's outlined a few of the new features that we added for this one |
|
ID: 12629 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
We're about to start testing of the new application release, version 6.30. Diggory's outlined a few of the new features that we added for this one And I think we are ready to start working on those units and trying to help you make the World a better place. Man that sounds lofty and funky, what I mean to say is, we are ready to start crunching again whenever you are. |
|
ID: 12633 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
I am sure Mikey is correct, in that we have activated all the appropriate preferences ... placed our 12 hour update scripts (tongue in cheek) and wait for the new trial work. |
|
ID: 12635 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
We've updated the openMalariaBeta application to version 6.31 after we found that the Linux and Mac versions of 6.30 would crash on some of the computers which received work from the first mini-batch. |
|
ID: 12671 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
We're working on a new release (6.33). There were some minor issues with checkpointing in the previous versions, and a major problem with library incompatibilities with the Linux versions. |
|
ID: 12717 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Looking forwards to the test work or the propper run soon |
|
ID: 12718 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
We're working on a new release (6.33). There were some minor issues with checkpointing in the previous versions, and a major problem with library incompatibilities with the Linux versions. ____________ |
|
ID: 12721 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
We've updated the openMalariaBeta Windows and Mac versions to 6.33 today, and are currently sending out a small test batch targeted at these operating systems. 6.33 differs from 6.32 in that we have added some more log messages, which should help us tackle the problems with checkpointing. |
|
ID: 12724 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Hi, |
|
ID: 12730 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
I've got Linux and got 2 WUs, that both crashed with the following error: process exited with code 255 (0xff, -1) Cannot create, lock or unlock a mutex ]]> This are the lines from the BOINC manager:
Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:50 CEST malariacontrol.net Starting wu8_16300_1274199106_1
Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:50 CEST malariacontrol.net [cpu_sched] Starting wu8_16300_1274199106_1 (initial) Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:50 CEST malariacontrol.net Starting task wu8_16300_1274199106_1 using openMalariaBeta version 632 Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:51 CEST malariacontrol.net Computation for task wu8_16300_1274199106_1 finished Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:51 CEST malariacontrol.net Output file wu8_16300_1274199106_1_0 for task wu8_16300_1274199106_1 absent Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:51 CEST malariacontrol.net Output file wu8_16300_1274199106_1_1 for task wu8_16300_1274199106_1 absent Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:51 CEST malariacontrol.net Starting wu8_16086_1274199106_1 Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:51 CEST malariacontrol.net [cpu_sched] Starting wu8_16086_1274199106_1 (initial) Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:51 CEST malariacontrol.net Starting task wu8_16086_1274199106_1 using openMalariaBeta version 632 Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:52 CEST malariacontrol.net Computation for task wu8_16086_1274199106_1 finished Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:52 CEST malariacontrol.net Output file wu8_16086_1274199106_1_0 for task wu8_16086_1274199106_1 absent Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:35:52 CEST malariacontrol.net Output file wu8_16086_1274199106_1_1 for task wu8_16086_1274199106_1 absent Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:36:57 CEST malariacontrol.net Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:36:57 CEST malariacontrol.net Reporting 2 completed tasks, requesting new tasks Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:37:02 CEST malariacontrol.net Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks Mi 19 Mai 2010 08:37:02 CEST malariacontrol.net Message from server: (Project has no jobs available) ____________ Grüße vom Sänger |
|
ID: 12736 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
I'm not sure if this trouble report should go here or not. But I got this response to the latest download. Which was tagged "Text Version V6.34 |
|
ID: 12775 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Here is another example of a failed w/u; Test Version V6.33. Shows "error while computing." It's a WU that says MIE! ____________ Grüße vom Sänger |
|
ID: 12777 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Yes. Thankfully we've reduced the number of times it says that now! MIE isn't the reason it crashed anyway, just a diagnostic. |
|
ID: 12787 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
My earlier glibc 64bit Linux systems (RHEL5 Update 3 and RHEL4 Update 8) that insta-crashed v6.35 of the test app seem to be happily running the newest v6.36 test app. so far. process exited with code 1 (0x1, -255) ../../projects/malariacontrol.net/openMalariaBeta_6.36_i686-pc-linux-gnu: /lib/tls/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not found (required by ../../projects/malariacontrol.net/openMalariaBeta_6.36_i686-pc-linux-gnu) ]]> (That system has glibc 2.3.4) |
|
ID: 12807 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
1. could someone please delete all those MIE lines on an earlier post it does not make this thread very user friendly. |
|
ID: 12822 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
1. could someone please delete all those MIE lines on an earlier post it does not make this thread very user friendly. No, but as a moderator, I can hide it (That is it is hidden for all normal users, not moderators or admins, so we have to suffer a slow loading thread) Is it better now ? |
|
ID: 12825 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Much better - Thanks |
|
ID: 12826 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
2. Problem with v6.35 on W XP Home. I wonder if you updated to a newer version of Boinc it would help? You are still running a very old version of Boinc, according to the website: "BOINC client version 5.2.13" If you go to download the current version of Boinc it is 6.10.56. Your pc is also quite old, again according to the website, could your hard drive be having 'issues'? Does the hard drive make noises during normal hard drive intensive operations? ie copying a large file on or off of it. I am NOT demeaning your pc, we all have old pc's we use for some reason or other, what I am asking is if the hard drive could be having troubles since it looks like it has been around a while. The website only gives so much info about our pc's and I am trying to diagnose over a distance. |
|
ID: 12828 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Hi Bill -- yes, checkpoints _are_ big: we typically need to represent maybe a million infections at once in a scenario. They're also well compressed, since they're written as binary. |
|
ID: 12831 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Hi, |
|
ID: 12847 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
I have been running units of the test version 6.35 on my Mac for the last week or so and everything went well until now. Since starting wu2_6377_1275209386_1 and wu2_6432_1275209386_1, Boinc has crashed my computer at least 5 times overnight. I finally had to abort the tasks. |
|
ID: 12897 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Hi, You can try to increase your checkpoint time, I personally use 900secs (15mins) and have done so for years. I don't shut down all that much and its better on the hard drives with less activity. So if I do shut down (for applications that do not checkpoint on exit) or the komputa krashes only up to 15M work is lost. Its a small trade off, but probbaly in the long run, I've saved more komputa time by not checkpointing more frequently than I have lost by redoing that work from the previous checkpoint. Remember too, every time you checkpoint, it takes some cpu cycles to process the commands and transfer data, and those are being taken away for time that could be used for the pure number krunchin'. It may be a small amount, but over the long run it adds up. It's up to you how to set your preferences, but yours makes 120 checkpoints an hour whereas I make 4 per hour. Someone else can do the math on how much extra time is spent on all those checkpoints. I see too you have a single core, but it dosen't show the speed. This probally accounts for the performance and you should consider a larger time betwwen checkpoints. I run P4-HT's with GPU's so they are running a GPU task and two CPU tasks at 100% CPU use always, along with my regualr work. I never notice any computer lag on what I do even if running two MC at the same time, including whenever these apps checkpoint and this includes a dozen other projects. Only project that bogs me down is seti when it uses the GPU, all other projects have no effect on my performance. I suggest you give it a try and see if a longer checkpoint time improves your performance, if so then decided to keep that larger time. Try several also like 300, 600, 900 secs and give it an hour or two to run each time. |
|
ID: 12898 | Rating: 0 | rate: /
|
|
Message boards : Number crunching : Testing openMalaria app version 6.30/6.31/6.32/6.33