I'd like to comment.

I see a problem, a problem that I should not be seeing. I try to make headway to resolve it, so ask. The result of asking each time is the same, basically, the BOINC folk tell me the problem is Folding, the Folding folk tell me it is not.

I have set no new tasks at both. I would seem to face a choice, I can support one or the other. Both are important to me.

28 tasks with validate error...great....but i suppose thats just the way it goes with a beta.

I hope I got what you wanted this time. I rebooted, started BOINC with a watch in hand, counted five minutes and then got the log file.

Thanks.

Your confusion appeared to be in thinking that a WU had a time allocated to it

No, I didn't mean that either.

I continue not to see rosetta@home in the list of the projects....

I'm sorry, but neither answer directly responds to my question.

Maybe my question wasn't clear enough, but I'm asking the meaning of TQJ given the variable sizes, not what a work unit is or how long the server will take to process work units.

I tried again after doing a reset and got computation errors for each task after under a minute. Is there anything else I can do to debug?

How do I interpret the server status page?
Today it says "Total queued jobs: 431,868"

For most projects one job is one work unit, but here we have variable work unit sizes creating multiple models apiece.
My 36 hour work units have hundreds of models, and the beta ones have thousands.

The lowest common denominator is a two-hour work unit.
So are the total queued jobs 863,736 hours of work?
Are they 431,868 models of various complexity, completed in minutes to hours apiece?
Are they part of a pool with the in-progress models, totaling 717,885 iterative calculations bouncing between users until they reach a undisclosed limit and retire out of the pool?

As I said, Folding has been running on this machine for years, the "problem" I started the thread about is VERY recent. All the tasks from that last download have completed and returned now, they show quite a variety of run times 73K to 90k. There are also other tasks downloaded the same day, but at an earlier time, that do not show the extended run time.

The runtime for the last few work units has jumped up considerably. CPU time and credit haven't changed noticeably, but run time has increased from 60 thousand to 90 thousand on the same machine, (very approximate - illustrates the point though).

Seems like 5 million tasks have become available to run !!

As of 24 Feb 2024, 8:02:19 UTC [ Scheduler running ]
Total queued jobs: 4,921,248
In progress: 115,690
Successes last 24h: 43,490

What is the error that shows in the stderror file - click on the workunit in the tasks link of your account.

Here's the output of one Task.

<core_client_version>7.20.5</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
process exited with code 127 (0x7f, -129)</message>
<stderr_txt>
../../projects/boinc.bakerlab.org_rosetta/rosetta_beta_6.05_x86_64-pc-linux-gnu: error while loading shared libraries: libGL.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Installation/permissions issue?

Hi

my computer specs:

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4790 CPU @ 3.60GHz [Family 6 Model 60 Stepping 3]
Number of processors 8
Operating System Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm) [6.1.0-15-amd64|libc 2.36]
BOINC version 7.20.5
Memory 7833.52 MB

Rosetta v4.20 x86_64-pc-linux-gnu are completing normally as expected
Rosetta Beta v6.05 x86_64-pc-linux-gnu errors out, every single one gives "Error while computing"

Is there any option to block the "beta 6*" series until this is sorted out ?

thanks

UPDATE: currently the errors are at 116 and counting.
Just for the record, this is a headless install of Debian stable and no overclocking applied to the hardware,
which has been set up just for Rosetta & WCG.

Holy sh*t indeed. Finally got some work, all tasks errored out within 30 seconds.

Is it me? Is it the work? Anybody else have this problem?

Cheers - rumple

So far 6 errors and 99 good.

The errors are hard with my wingman also failing and appear to be a data error in the config file.

I’d say it’s all old7scaff units but I’ve had one, an old7scaff_7aa_hall_9 that’s completed and validated.

I had a lot of failures with old8scaff and old7scaff Rosetta Beta tasks too, but they were all received and returned by 30 Nov - also with a fair few successes tbf.

The new batch all seem to be named new7snme_7aa_ndif and are running fine here (7hrs+) but I haven't returned any yet to confirm they validate successfully.
They certainly don't crash after 5-20secs, which is the issue rumple seems to have.