Advanced search

Forums : Technical Support : 2.12 Errors
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile ohiomike
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Jul 07
Posts: 302
Credit: 5,006,319
RAC: 0
Message 5322 - Posted: 18 Mar 2008, 16:12:33 UTC
Last modified: 18 Mar 2008, 16:13:34 UTC

Are all the cases of:

<core_client_version>5.10.21</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
too many exit(0)s
</message>
<stderr_txt>
No heartbeat from core client for 31 sec - exiting

</stderr_txt>
]]>

caused by the WUs or V2.12?
I\'m wasting a LOT of CPU cycles on these things.

Boinc Button Abuser In Training >My Shrubbers<
ID: 5322 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 11 Dec 07
Posts: 420
Credit: 270,580
RAC: 0
Message 5323 - Posted: 18 Mar 2008, 19:19:52 UTC - in response to Message 5322.  

Are all the cases of:

<core_client_version>5.10.21</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
too many exit(0)s
</message>
<stderr_txt>
No heartbeat from core client for 31 sec - exiting

</stderr_txt>
]]>

caused by the WUs or V2.12?
I\'m wasting a LOT of CPU cycles on these things.


I am following the thread Ananas made about the INI files, but it is unclear to me if that is a 100% correct indicator of a task that is going to have a problem. If it is a version problem, then I suspect it is version 2.08+
ID: 5323 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Fred

Send message
Joined: 17 Jan 08
Posts: 40
Credit: 228,230
RAC: 0
Message 5324 - Posted: 18 Mar 2008, 19:36:26 UTC - in response to Message 5323.  
Last modified: 18 Mar 2008, 19:37:01 UTC


I am following the thread Ananas made about the INI files, but it is unclear to me if that is a 100% correct indicator of a task that is going to have a problem. If it is a version problem, then I suspect it is version 2.08+

@Brian
I tweaked the batch file that I wrote for SETI corrupted WU\'s to identify the INI files in my cache that matched the spec provided by Ananas. Several of them have now crunched successfully on my Q6600 / XP Home under 2.12 so that would certainly not seem to be a reliable indicator of problems.

F.
ID: 5324 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brian Silvers

Send message
Joined: 11 Dec 07
Posts: 420
Credit: 270,580
RAC: 0
Message 5325 - Posted: 18 Mar 2008, 21:43:29 UTC - in response to Message 5324.  


I am following the thread Ananas made about the INI files, but it is unclear to me if that is a 100% correct indicator of a task that is going to have a problem. If it is a version problem, then I suspect it is version 2.08+

@Brian
I tweaked the batch file that I wrote for SETI corrupted WU\'s to identify the INI files in my cache that matched the spec provided by Ananas. Several of them have now crunched successfully on my Q6600 / XP Home under 2.12 so that would certainly not seem to be a reliable indicator of problems.

F.


Well, if I were an industrious sort, I might make a suggestion to see if someone could create an app_info.xml file that had app version 2.05 as the \"latest and greatest\", and combined with a 2.05 executable, they\'d keep some tasks that failed and run them \"offline\" for a few days with 2.05, in lieu of the project issuing a statement and/or corrected executable.
ID: 5325 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ashj

Send message
Joined: 31 Jan 08
Posts: 18
Credit: 706,600
RAC: 0
Message 5370 - Posted: 21 Mar 2008, 12:20:12 UTC

I am getting a shed load of errors when trying to send completed wus.

21/03/2008 11:59:31||Resuming network activity
21/03/2008 11:59:32|Einstein@Home|Started upload of h1_0805.00_S5R3__136_S5R3b_0_0
21/03/2008 11:59:32|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_0
21/03/2008 11:59:32|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_1
21/03/2008 11:59:36|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_0
21/03/2008 11:59:36|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_1
21/03/2008 11:59:36|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_2
21/03/2008 11:59:36|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_3
21/03/2008 11:59:41|Einstein@Home|Finished upload of h1_0805.00_S5R3__136_S5R3b_0_0
21/03/2008 11:59:44|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_2
21/03/2008 11:59:44|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_3
21/03/2008 11:59:44|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_4
21/03/2008 11:59:44|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_5
21/03/2008 11:59:47|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_4
21/03/2008 11:59:47|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_090941_1_1_5
21/03/2008 11:59:47|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_0
21/03/2008 11:59:47|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_1
21/03/2008 11:59:51|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_0
21/03/2008 11:59:51|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_1
21/03/2008 11:59:51|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_2
21/03/2008 11:59:51|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_3
21/03/2008 11:59:54|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_2
21/03/2008 11:59:54|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_4
21/03/2008 11:59:56|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_3
21/03/2008 11:59:56|Cosmology@Home|Started upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_5
21/03/2008 12:00:02|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_4
21/03/2008 12:00:04|Cosmology@Home|Finished upload of wu_030608_101116_1_0_5
21/03/2008 12:01:12|Einstein@Home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 180264 seconds of work, reporting 1 completed tasks
21/03/2008 12:01:22|Einstein@Home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 3 new tasks
21/03/2008 12:02:43|Cosmology@Home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 88505 seconds of work, reporting 2 completed tasks
21/03/2008 12:02:48|Cosmology@Home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 3 new tasks
21/03/2008 12:02:48|Cosmology@Home|Message from server: Completed result wu_030608_090941_1_1 refused: this result wasn\'t sent (not needed)
21/03/2008 12:02:48|Cosmology@Home|Message from server: Completed result wu_030608_101116_1_0 refused: this result wasn\'t sent (not needed)
21/03/2008 12:02:50|Cosmology@Home|Started download of params_032108_000649_4.ini
21/03/2008 12:02:50|Cosmology@Home|Started download of params_032108_030126_1.ini
21/03/2008 12:02:58|Cosmology@Home|[error] Can\'t rename output file wu_030908_180616_3_0_0
21/03/2008 12:03:04|Cosmology@Home|[error] Can\'t rename output file wu_030908_180616_3_0_1
21/03/2008 12:03:10|Cosmology@Home|[error] Can\'t rename output file wu_030908_180616_3_0_2
21/03/2008 12:03:15|Cosmology@Home|[error] Can\'t rename output file wu_030908_180616_3_0_3
21/03/2008 12:03:20|Cosmology@Home|[error] Can\'t rename output file wu_030908_180616_3_0_4
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Cosmology@Home|[error] Can\'t rename output file wu_030908_180616_3_0_5
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Cosmology@Home|Finished download of params_032108_000649_4.ini
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Cosmology@Home|Finished download of params_032108_030126_1.ini
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Cosmology@Home|Started download of params_032108_050059_0.ini
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Cosmology@Home|Computation for task wu_030908_180616_3_0 finished
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Einstein@Home|Resuming task h1_0805.00_S5R3__129_S5R3b_0 using einstein_S5R3 version 426
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Einstein@Home|Task h1_0805.00_S5R3__129_S5R3b_0 exited with a DLL initialization error.
21/03/2008 12:03:25|Einstein@Home|If this happens repeatedly you may need to reboot your computer.
21/03/2008 12:03:27|Einstein@Home|Restarting task h1_0805.00_S5R3__129_S5R3b_0 using einstein_S5R3 version 426
21/03/2008 12:03:27|Cosmology@Home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 30048 seconds of work, reporting 2 completed tasks
21/03/2008 12:03:28|Cosmology@Home|Finished download of params_032108_050059_0.ini
21/03/2008 12:03:31|Cosmology@Home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 1 new tasks
21/03/2008 12:03:31|Cosmology@Home|Message from server: Completed result wu_030908_180616_3_0 refused: this result wasn\'t sent (not needed)
21/03/2008 12:03:31|Cosmology@Home|Message from server: Completed result wu_031008_210855_4_0 refused: this result wasn\'t sent (not needed)
21/03/2008 12:03:33|Cosmology@Home|Started download of params_032108_050218_0.ini
21/03/2008 12:03:35|Cosmology@Home|Finished download of params_032108_050218_0.ini
21/03/2008 12:06:05||Suspending network activity - user request


Any guidance gratefully received
ID: 5370 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Jayargh
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Jun 07
Posts: 508
Credit: 2,282,158
RAC: 0
Message 5371 - Posted: 21 Mar 2008, 13:08:43 UTC - in response to Message 5370.  
Last modified: 21 Mar 2008, 13:33:01 UTC

I am getting a shed load of errors when trying to send completed wus.



Any guidance gratefully received


These aren\'t errors-all previous work has been cancelled and credit granted already per front page news.
ID: 5371 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Inais
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 May 07
Posts: 2
Credit: 136,261
RAC: 0
Message 5372 - Posted: 21 Mar 2008, 13:15:04 UTC

I am not sure if this is the correct tread but I have to report this:

I am confused - this morning when I check my PC I found this message at the Boinc Manager:

21.03.2008 07:41:21|Cosmology@Home|Sending scheduler request: To report completed tasks. Requesting 0 seconds of work, reporting 1 completed tasks
21.03.2008 07:41:26|Cosmology@Home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks
21.03.2008 07:41:26|Cosmology@Home|Message from server: Completed result wu_030908_200330_0_0 refused: this result wasn\'t sent (not needed)

Also I read the announcement to update the Boinc but........ the info was to short in time to react on it. So I lost the complete credit on my WU and this is not the first time.

I am a little bit angree about this. Sorry.

Suggestion - maybe you can make announcement by date and time - for me it comes over night and I had no chance to react.

I wish I can fly like a bird in the sky...
ID: 5372 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Conan
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Aug 07
Posts: 169
Credit: 1,280,875
RAC: 152
Message 5397 - Posted: 22 Mar 2008, 0:28:13 UTC

G\'Day to all,
I have just found two WU\'s of the new 2.12 series that have not played the game.

These new WU\'s run in a very quick time, all sub 8,000 seconds but I have had two that have gone well beyond this new time.

This WU ran about 4 times longer than my wingman and the average of my other work units, this means I am claiming for more (178) than I am going to get (100 or 0), lowers cr/h.

This WU ran about 15 times longer than my wingman and the average of my other work units, so I am claiming 690 but will likely get 100 or 0.

Have these work units gone into a loop? If so then I rarely got these before and now have 2 out of about 30 with the new ones.
ID: 5397 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Stan Pleban
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Feb 08
Posts: 21
Credit: 85,049
RAC: 0
Message 5398 - Posted: 22 Mar 2008, 2:00:14 UTC

getting varied responses on completed WU\'s

for example, this WU
is now looking for a 4th replication...

have 3 other WU\'s looking like this WU


ID: 5398 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Forums : Technical Support : 2.12 Errors