Posts by DJStarfox

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 107932) Posted 7 Jan 2023 by DJStarfox Post: Let'sEncrypt has been making free and (relatively) easy to acquire SSL certificates available for years now. There's no excuse anymore for not having a valid, publicly trusted SSL certificate.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 107927) Posted 6 Jan 2023 by DJStarfox Post: To whom it may concern, The download server is broken per status page: Download server boinc-files.bakerlab.org Not Running Please fix. Thanks.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Problen downloading work tasks. (Message 107924) Posted 6 Jan 2023 by DJStarfox Post: I aborted all my tasks since it cannot download the files for a long time now. Someone please post here when the downloader is operational again. Thanks.
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Disk Space Requirements (Message 102334) Posted 3 Aug 2021 by DJStarfox Post: Rosetta needs 164.93MB more disk space. You currently have 8418.14 MB available and it needs 8583.07 MB. What's the deal with needing 9GB of disk space for 1 work unit? Is this for real? Other projects typically need less than 100MB. Even climate models only need 1 or 2 GB at most....
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Help - Rosetta seems to be misreading my disk space. (Message 101294) Posted 13 Apr 2021 by DJStarfox Post: I had to let all WU finish & report, then, I reset the Rosetta project. After that, it could download new WU. Seems Rosetta wants 10GB space, but I cannot spare more than 12GB (small SSD). I wonder if it would just cleanup after itself, that more space would be available?
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Target CPU run time (Message 78555) Posted 7 Aug 2015 by DJStarfox Post: The Rosetta preference "Target CPU run time" has a wide range of options from 1 hour to 24 hours. I know each task should complete at least 1 decoy. So, how do I choose the best run time for my CPU?
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Next Generation SAN in use? (Message 69573) Posted 1 Feb 2011 by DJStarfox Post: Still waiting to re-join this project until that new SAN has been up for 1 week without trouble. Rosetta is on thin ice.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : problems with boinccmd authorisation (Message 69572) Posted 1 Feb 2011 by DJStarfox Post: Or you can set a password in the gui_rpc_auth.cfg and call boinccmd (from anywhere) like this: boinccmd --host localhost --passwd yourpass --your_command
9) Message boards : Number crunching : hard lock on linux (Message 65620) Posted 22 Mar 2010 by DJStarfox Post: Just for a test, try reducing your memory overclock by 1x. For example, if your memory is 800 MHz, go down to 667MHz. Then, 1) abort all work units, 2) reset the Rosetta project, 3) get new tasks for testing. also, I highly recommend Mod.Sense's suggestion of adding the start delay parameter.
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Validate error on submitted results (Message 65584) Posted 18 Mar 2010 by DJStarfox Post: I am also getting occasional validation errors. For example: http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=323932749 This one tried to produce 10,000 decoys.
11) Message boards : Number crunching : WUs Advancing Together (Message 65533) Posted 12 Mar 2010 by DJStarfox Post: Might be a debt problem. Also, what are the resource share for each of your projects (SETI & Rosetta)? Try this from the command line (in the BOINC bin directory): boinccmd --set_debts http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta 0 0 And let BOINC work itself out.
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Will there be a 64-bit client in the near future? (Message 65234) Posted 8 Feb 2010 by DJStarfox Post: Well-written code shouldn't need much work if any to re-compile with a x86_64 compiler. Just compile for multiple architectures (x86 and x86_64) from the same source. True, there's no 64-bit specific enhancements, but you'll still use the 64-bit CPU feature set available from the compiler. (It will probably help Windows clients more than Linux clients.)
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Rosetta 2.05 & Windows 7 Issue? (Message 64998) Posted 15 Jan 2010 by DJStarfox Post: That's a bug in your USB mouse or keyboard driver. I'm not sure how Rosetta application could cause that to crash.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Discussion on increasing the default run time (Message 64939) Posted 12 Jan 2010 by DJStarfox Post: Even if you ignore Steve's experience with this project, I hope you recognize that one point has been made clear repeatedly. Checkpoints are a critical feature of BOINC applications. If you need to make checkpoints work within a single decoy's generation, then make it happen. Given that, there's nothing wrong with doubling the default/minimum run times.
15) Message boards : Number crunching : problems with extracting out-files to pdb (Message 64912) Posted 11 Jan 2010 by DJStarfox Post: BOINC should work NOT running as root. I think you need to configure more shared memory on your Linux system.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : When will cuda support be ready ? (Message 64836) Posted 6 Jan 2010 by DJStarfox Post: I think a programmer familiar with the Rosetta code should first look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_processing ...and also other articles/books published before deciding that a GPGPU application (ATI or CUDA or both) would be of any performance benefit. If you're not doing a lot of SIMD or MIMD, then there won't be much benefit. With the introduction of double-precision floating point in newer video cards, precision should no longer be an issue with GPU processing.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Strange Folder (Message 64418) Posted 9 Dec 2009 by DJStarfox Post: Those are debugging symbols that that programs use for diagnosis of crashes and problems. I'm not sure why Rosetta is sending that data to the clients. On Ralph, I might see the advantage, but unless a moderator says otherwise, you can delete that entire folder. Just make sure BOINC is NOT running if you delete it.
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Hyperthreading with 1 core (Message 64359) Posted 3 Dec 2009 by DJStarfox Post: I have a P4 system and use option 3. While task manager shows this only using 50% of the CPU it's actually using all of the physical CPU's resources and it's only the virtual CPU (i.e. the spare hyperthreaded units) that aren't being utilised, so task manager can be ignored. That is interesting. Task Manager was confusing me on this because it does say 50%, but you have cleared it up for me. I do use this computer for other things, so it looks like I'll be sticking with option 3. Thanks for the info. Yeah, you had it to crunch 50% of 50%.... I think what you want it to be instead is: On multiprocessors, use at most: 50 % of the processors Use at most: 100 percent of CPU time Also, in the taskmanager, set it to show separate graph for each CPU. :)
19) Message boards : Number crunching : System Restarts Win 7 Intel i7 (Message 64358) Posted 3 Dec 2009 by DJStarfox Post: I only crunch R@H. When I look at the failed WUs, they all have some failure to find file message in them. I have leave application in memory when suspended. I have 9GB of RAM and Win 7 64-bit so I don't think I am using much swap space. I am thinking about setting my swap space to 0K. HyperThreading is on so I get 8 WUs. thx for the help. 9 GB is a lot of ram... must be 3gb per stick. What is your memory's speed? If you're overclocking your ram, or the ram has errors, it can cause a computer to spontaneously reboot (ECC exceptions). I recommend: Download a copy of memtest86++ and burn the ISO to a CD. Let us know if it finds any errors (probably 2 hours to run). http://www.memtest86.com/download.html
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Extreme RAM usage (Message 64357) Posted 3 Dec 2009 by DJStarfox Post: Dear Rosetta Is it really necessarily for the application to use more than 300MB of RAM for each unit? I'm running this on a weak computer (my netbook when it's hooked up to some juice) and sometimes I can only run one unit at a time, due to it requesting more RAM. Since most netbooks only sport 1GB of RAM it's really a lot that it use up more than 1/3. What I'm asking, isn't it possible to optimize the code/change something, so it doesn't require those amounts of RAM? Rosetta uses a lot of ram, compared with other projects. Set your preferences to use only 50% of available CPUs, so it will only load one task at a time. This works much better than trying to enforce memory constraints in preferences.

Next 20