Message boards : Number crunching : Compute error(Rosetta Beta v6.06)
Author | Message |
---|---|
Hirun Send message Joined: 1 Nov 24 Posts: 3 Credit: 69,464 RAC: 1,018 |
Hey, so i started getting some Rosetta Beta v6.06 tasks but they kept failing... Here is the log <core_client_version>8.1.0</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <message> process exited with code 1 (0x1, -255)</message> <stderr_txt> command: ../../projects/boinc.bakerlab.org_rosetta/rosetta_beta_6.06_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu @10aa_1_d_hal_10aa_ce7430_d160_0001.flags -nstruct 10000 -cpu_run_time 28800 -boinc:max_nstruct 20000 -checkpoint_interval 120 -mute all -database minirosetta_database -in::file::zip minirosetta_database.zip -boinc::watchdog -boinc::cpu_run_timeout 36000 -run::rng mt19937 Using database: database_f5ae1de8e1/database ERROR: Error in simple_cycpep_predict app! The imported native pose has a different number of residues than the sequence provided. ERROR:: Exit from: src/protocols/cyclic_peptide_predict/SimpleCycpepPredictApplication.cc line: 2798 BOINC:: Error reading and gzipping output datafile: default.out 14:54:17 (3451): called boinc_finish(1) </stderr_txt> ]]> CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Eight-Core Processor OS: Ubuntu 24.04 Any help would be appreciated, Thank you. |
Sid Celery Send message Joined: 11 Feb 08 Posts: 2289 Credit: 43,129,667 RAC: 25,236 ![]() |
I've seen a few compute errors creeping into recent batches of tasks - not as many as that bad batch we had a month ago. If I were to guess, it looks like a problem with how the tasks are set up, not with the user. Fortunately, in the same way we saw previously, these errors crop up very early and only a couple of minutes of processing time are lost. Unfortunate, but a relatively small problem ![]() ![]() |
Hirun Send message Joined: 1 Nov 24 Posts: 3 Credit: 69,464 RAC: 1,018 |
I see. Hopefully it would be fixed :) |
Sid Celery Send message Joined: 11 Feb 08 Posts: 2289 Credit: 43,129,667 RAC: 25,236 ![]() |
I see. Hopefully it would be fixed :) Based on past form, if the researchers do even notice, they'll let the bad tasks error themselves out rather than take out the whole batch (which suits us too). If there's a coding error they do spot, they'll correct it for the next batch and we'll see a higher success rate there. That's certainly what happened with the bad batch from a month ago. I'm pretty sure the next two batches of work were entirely error-free. But it looks like something else has snuck into the most recent two batches again. Perhaps too small a proportion to actively do anything about just yet. Pragmatism rather than perfection seems to be the order of the day. ![]() ![]() |
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Compute error(Rosetta Beta v6.06)
©2025 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org