Posts by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian

1) Message boards : Number crunching : extremely low crediting (Message 75625) Posted 19 May 2013 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Mine are on 6 hrs but ????????
2) Message boards : Number crunching : extremely low crediting (Message 75605) Posted 12 May 2013 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Thought I'd crunch some time on R@H wu's again but just found out I got 10 credits for 10 hrs of crunching time on a Phenom II X4 945. Sorry, can appreciate a joke but this is too much so I hopped to another project again. BOINC:: CPU time: 36161.4s Valid Claimed credit 388.351803321246 Granted credit 10.5259902693623
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems and Technical Issues with Rosetta@home (Message 71959) Posted 2 Jan 2012 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: My preferences change every time. I have my preferences the same at all my boinc-projects but R@H can't keep them as I set them. Leave applications in memory while suspended? (suspended applications will consume swap space if 'yes')no Confirm before connecting to Internet? (matters only if you have a modem, ISDN or VPN connection)no Disconnect when done? (matters only if you have a modem, ISDN or VPN connection)no After a short while, I guess after connecting to my comps, it goes back to yes. And I do not use the local preferences of the manager.
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Validate error (Message 71550) Posted 31 Oct 2011 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: I'm getting a lot of WU's with validate error showing : tarting work on structure: _00050 Starting work on structure: _00051 Starting work on structure: _00052 ====================================================== DONE :: 1 starting structures 42732.6 cpu seconds This process generated 52 decoys from 52 attempts ====================================================== BOINC :: WS_max 2.90845e+008 BOINC :: Watchdog shutting down... BOINC :: BOINC support services shutting down cleanly ... called boinc_finish </stderr_txt> Anybody any info on this ? Hold on, found a thread with the same problem. Stop till it's fixed. http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=5835
5) Message boards : Number crunching : No XML updates to BOINCstats for two days!? (Message 68992) Posted 3 Jan 2011 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: [ICO] Name Last modified Size Description [DIR] Parent Directory - [TXT] db_dump.xml 28-Dec-2010 11:05 701 [ ] host.gz 28-Dec-2010 11:04 141M [TXT] tables.xml 28-Dec-2010 11:05 662 [ ] team.gz 28-Dec-2010 11:05 950K [ ] user.gz 28-Dec-2010 10:50 18M Apache/2.2.3 (Scientific Linux) Server at boinc.bakerlab.org Port 80 Almost a week ago ?????
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Please ABORT these 4 stuck workunits (Message 14619) Posted 25 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: ... By the way: once there was a promise to grant credits for the 'maximum cputime exceeded' error as well. Did anyone saw that happen? Do you really think/expect that to happen ? Still waiting for credits but not for long.... As a personal note: Your insinuations and innuendoes implying that the Project team has mislead you in some way and does not intend to follow through on their promise, are not true nor are they welcome. As I stated before I'll run R@H for just another 5 days and I promise you here and now, I will never reply here ever again. Lost my confidence some time ago and that's deadly. "Sick and tired by Anastasia"
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Please ABORT these 4 stuck workunits (Message 14594) Posted 25 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: I think the projectteam have to try harder to keep us (at least me) enthousastic for this project. As far as I'm concerned they don't need to bother anymore. Lost the motivation to run this project just before the start of our Stampede. The DPC-poll however showed the majority wanted to run R@H so I had no choice. The changes are not enough to keep me here, so another 5 days and I'm gone. By the way: once there was a promise to grant credits for the 'maximum cputime exceeded' error as well. Did anyone saw that happen? Do you really think/expect that to happen ? Still waiting for credits but not for long. @ gpcola : Just running to keep XS from second place during our Stampede. The 1st of May you're welcome to take second place, I'm leaving. Tell movieman to bring the promised wooden shoes to Bubbles.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Report stuck & aborted WU here please - II (Message 13737) Posted 14 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Just a reminder to those who are posting stuck WU's -- please abort the 4 work units below. We know why they're hanging, are not sending out anymore, and are giving credits to any of these jobs that have timed out! Thanks. I read the above as saying, no credit granted when we actually abort the stuck units although credit is granted when we leave them to timeout? Will this now be the standard way of dealing with all workunit timeouts or only in this case? Random, I suppose. I have let a Wu go on (graphics were moving) so it timed out or it aborted itself and no credits. Can't be positive anymore about this project. Have run it for about 5 months and another fortnight and than it's over.
9) Message boards : Rosetta@home Science : Comments/questions on Rosetta@home journal (Message 13635) Posted 13 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Good news today: second, David Kim has awarded credits to those who lost valuable time during the problems last weekend. Suppose it will be handled just as fast as those credits for time exceeding WU's and in that case : just don't bother as I will not bother to report them anymore. Already written those off. Counting the days "17".
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Report stuck & aborted WU here please - II (Message 13569) Posted 12 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Just again had a WU that was running for more than 6 hours at 1.17% and when I checked it again another one had started which is running for 45 minutes now at 1.06% but I cannot find that other wu in my results. Better testdrive a project like this more thoroughly before letting so many people waste their money. If I go on this month it wil be the last anyway. Rather fed up with it. No fun at all anymore.
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Report stuck & aborted WU here please (Message 13154) Posted 7 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=15702999
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Target CPU run time 2 hours (Message 13131) Posted 6 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Dimitris' quote : Rosetta (and many other programs, e.g. AutoDOCK which is used by projects like FightAIDS@home) can't just "checkpoint" at a moment's notice, because then it'd have to "dump" (write) 250MBytes of data from RAM onto disk, so it can continue from the same point later. As Angus says : Why can't the Rosetta client checkpoint at fixed, frequent intervals - like 15 minutes or less? Then the maximum you would lose from a re-boot would be limited. I think people would accept the write-to-disk penalty over losing hours of crunch time. I prefer that. Quote of Moderator9 : It is more a matter of WHEN you start and stop. If you stop right after the application checkpoints, you will not loose work. So you can check whether you can stop at the right moment or not ? Or is it just a gamble ? Is it perhaps a 24/7 project without any interruptions ? If you have to restart because you just installed new defenitions of your virusscanner for instance ? In some cases you're just unlucky ? @ AMD is logical : I didn't mean another Boinc project (but F@H) and as I stated before : I cannot remember having this much problems with DF or any other project. Perhaps I was lucky.
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Target CPU run time 2 hours (Message 13123) Posted 6 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: It was "CPU TIME". And before they ran for no more than 2 hrs (even when time to completion was sometimes perhaps 12 hrs or more (on a Cellie) it did not exceed 2 hrs), so when I see it running for 3 hrs or more I expect somethings wrong. Set it to 4 hrs now, but perhaps it's better to make that 16 hrs. Still I don't understand why this machine downloaded a WU on which it had to crunch much longer than the TCRT set. Why this parameter if it is used random(ly) ? Please read the explanation for all of this in the FAQs. Any WU can run longer than the user selected time if it takes longer for it to complete a model than the users setting. All Wus will complete at least ONE model no matter how long that takes. By stopping and restarting the WU you are causing them to loose CPU time. When you stop the WU it will loose all CPU time since the last checkpoint. In your case you are causing the WUs to loose over two hours of processing time every time you reset them. The "Leave in memory" setting has nothing to do with your problem. If you let the WUs finish, the BOINC software will adjust to the WU run time parameters you have set. By aborting them you are preventing the system from adjusting, and causing the problem yourself. If I read it correctly you cannot stop/restart your computer without the chance of loosing time. If so, it is made very easy to change project. I cannot remember having this much trouble running DF, FAD etc. And I just want to run a medical project without this much trouble. It has to be fun and no annoyance. As far as I'm concerned just another 24 days. And if you read the last post of Dimitris you could've known I replied to his remark "Do you run other BOINC projects on that particular PC, switching between them every 1hr (default)? Do you have the "keep in memory when pre-empted" setting to "Yes" or "No"?".
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Target CPU run time 2 hours (Message 13119) Posted 6 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: It was "CPU TIME". And before they ran for no more than 2 hrs (even when time to completion was sometimes perhaps 12 hrs or more (on a Cellie) it did not exceed 2 hrs), so when I see it running for 3 hrs or more I expect somethings wrong. Set it to 4 hrs now, but perhaps it's better to make that 16 hrs. Still I don't understand why this machine downloaded a WU on which it had to crunch much longer than the TCRT set. Why this parameter if it is used random(ly) ?
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Target CPU run time 2 hours (Message 13115) Posted 6 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Graphics show it is running and stuck at 60% : yet model 3 step 44.444 and going. Still no explanation for the exceeding target cpu run time. And why it ran for 4 hours the first time and after a restart it the shown time jumped back to less than 2 hours. Do I have to keep on restarting to get it back to 2 hours ??????? And what is the use of setting the run time to 2 hours if it just keeps on running ? Or am I missing the purpose of this parameter ? You just can ignore it than. Just deleted al the BARCODE WU's, also the running one, and will wait to see what wil happen next. When something like this happens again this machine will be switched over to another projekt. The same will happen with my other machines if needed. I have to pay enough for this crunching so I'll not waste anymore money. EDIT : Running R@H only ! And allthough it should make no difference it is set to yes.
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Target CPU run time 2 hours (Message 13111) Posted 6 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: And again more than 2.5 hours. Delete all BARCODE WU's. Really getting a bit sick of it. If I wanted to babysit, it still wasn't gonna be computers.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Target CPU run time 2 hours (Message 13110) Posted 6 Apr 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: But machine is already running the same wu (HB_BARCODE_30_2chf__351_46196_0) for 4 hours and now at 60%. What is wrong ????? After a restart it is back to less than 2 hours. Get's a bit annoying again. Do we have to delete all BARCODE WU's perhaps ? Sometimes I think it's too bad our Stampede went over to R@H instead of F@H.
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Report stuck & aborted WU here please (Message 12468) Posted 21 Mar 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/result.php?resultid=14068243 Rather strange : I did not, repeat, did not abort it myself. Didn't touch the machine, it runs on it own. Had more of these and still don't know what happens.
19) Message boards : Number crunching : Merging ??? Still a mystery to me when machines are identical (Message 12141) Posted 17 Mar 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Had some problems with one of my machines so had to install boinc again and now it's a whole different machine. Nothing's changed but I have another node added and am unable to merge those two. Should be easier to merge two machines. Perhaps a point for the future.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Result was reported too late to validate ???????????? (Message 11870) Posted 10 Mar 2006 by Grutte Pier [Wa Oars]~MAB The Frisian Post: Thanks Megaflix . Funny way of crunching. I'm getting the WU and while mine is crunching it, another one sends it in before my computer is ready and so I'm crunching for nothing. Seems like a contest. Not my way of doing things. Just a waste of time and demotivating. My Cellie already over to F@h. The rest will follow. If our Stampede is going to be R@H I'm staying for a month and then that's it.

Next 20