Posts by copycat

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Can't upload for 12 days (Message 41562) Posted 30 Jan 2011 by copycat Post: I've got 4 zips waiting in transfers in my Linux-setup and another 4 in my Win 7-setup, all backing off and reporting the project servers are down when trying to upload. Trickles report without a problem. The Win 7-setup has its deadline in 15 days.
2) Questions and Answers : Windows : ghost task in profile (Message 40837) Posted 11 Oct 2010 by copycat Post: When I look at the pending tasks in my profile I notice one attributed to my Windows-BOINC supposedly 'belonging' to the FAMOUS-application and 'deadlining' later this month. However, that one is nowhere to be found in my BOINC-manager, so naturally, it shows no trickles either and will exceed the deadline with no response. Can't abort, restart, or do anything with a WU I don't have. Anyone who can shed any light on how this task managed to sneak into my profile and if anything can be done about it?
3) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : I\'ve had my fair share of problems, so now it\'s goodbye (Message 26798) Posted 14 Feb 2007 by copycat Post: The amount of memory shown for your machine suggests an on-board video chip. That is of frequent cause of trouble. No WAY dude, that this machine has an on-board video chip. I don\'t go for that kind of stuff. Had an on-board audio chip in use for a long time, but not video. There a Radeon 9800XT Edition by Sapphire handling my video. However, the Nvidea video drivers have been causing my x-windows to crash when starting the GUI so I don\'t try to update them anymore. By the way, haven\'t you looked at my profile and noticed I\'m using Linux?
4) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : I\'ve had my fair share of problems, so now it\'s goodbye (Message 26734) Posted 11 Feb 2007 by copycat Post: I\'d hoped my latest CPDN-WU would have held out a bit longer, so I could\'ve at least made it through Phase 1 but, alas, a signal 11 decided otherwise. Luckily, year 1937 had just been finished, so at least I managed to do 17 years. However, since it\'s taken me almost 1 year to to those mere 17 years, I\'ve come to the conclusion the CPDN-project is not meant for a person who uses his pc like me. It\'s a shame though, I really would\'ve liked to contribute more to this project, but having not finished one WU completely, I decided it\'s time to quit.
5) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Is it normal for a CPDN WU to take this much time? (Message 25743) Posted 26 Dec 2006 by copycat Post: Do you have enabled a GNOME/KDE/what_ever_desktop_you_use screensaver too? You should disable it or set it to blank_screen or black_screen only. It\'s KDE. Can\'t see an option to disable screen saver, so I\'ll just set it to black screen. Anyway, in the past, the screensaver kicked in only seven minutes after the pc was left inactive, and the CPDN WU only started slacking many hours later.
6) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Is it normal for a CPDN WU to take this much time? (Message 25731) Posted 26 Dec 2006 by copycat Post: @astroWX 1. Use \"Show graphics\", full screen. Check with top. You\'ll also notice a difference between displays, such as 3-D clouds and temperature. The \"Show graphics\" display in normal (not full) screen takes away half of the available cpu-usage, on full screen that\'s reduced to taking up one fourth/third. 2. The reason we shut CPDN down first is that there are so many files open that boinc doesn\'t always get the job done in time. (This is usually more reliable in Linux than in Windoze, in my experience, but not foolproof.) ? Shut CPDN down first? BOINC doesn\'t always get the job done in time? I don\'t get it. BTW, I pause BOINC I shut down the pc. Is that an unnecessary precaution? @Les Beyliss I just checked, and my P4 is getting 2.75 s/TS on one half, and 2.78 s/TS on the other. The 1st is checkpointing at 26 minutes, and the 2nd at 29 minutes. These are more realistic \'benchmarks\' to use than the processor type or speed. 2.44 s/TS. The models will take as many hours to run when the computer is only on for a couple of hours a day, as they will when the computer is on all of the time. So you won\'t save any more on electricity; you might as well run 24/7 and get it over with. In the past I\'ve let the pc keep on running during my night sleep, for other reasons than BOINC, and when my log still made a line showing the time each hour, I noticed that during the last few hours the calculating speed started dropping dramatically, even to half of normal operation. And whilst running it 24/7 will not save me electricity, it will save me money because during the day electricity is much more expensive than during the night. Thanks for the help on the time when progress is saved (432-timer).
7) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Is it normal for a CPDN WU to take this much time? (Message 25725) Posted 24 Dec 2006 by copycat Post: Slower computers, and/or running less than 24/7, and/or running cpdn for less than 100% of the BOINC time will take a LOT longer. Even though it\'s not top of the line, my cpu is not THAT slow, considering it\'s a 64-bit AMD Athlon 3200+, running ona 64bit Linux OS. However, whether my BOINC-setup running CPDN can take advantage of that is another matter. The CPDN WU is the only WU I have at the moment, so when BOINC is running, it\'s running that. Some things to speed up the processing: 1) DON\'T run the screen saver. Slow computers / low memory / no or very low end graphics card, can cause the screen saver to take up to 50% of the processor time. 2) Set the General prefs option: \"Leave in memory when pre-empted\" to yes. This will save a LOT of time when the model is either pre-empted by another project, or Suspended to do other work. 3) Check with the \"Show graphics\" button to find the best time to exit from the model and program. This is after the count down timer has returned from zero back to 432, which is just after the data has been saved. To see this timer, press Z, then 8. 1) Is there a way I can see how much cpu the screen saver uses? Since usually, when I touch a key the screen saver disappears. The computer isn\'t slow (look above), the graphics card isn\'t either (look below) and the memory is 512 Mb. 2) Since when shutting down my PC CPDN shuts down anyway (and the memory is detached), and the CPDN-WU is the only WU, at the moment this is irrelevant but that setting was on anyway. 3) I think when I do \'show graphics\' the computing time is slowed down considerably. My graphics settings are rubbish here, because everytime when I try to update the driver with a friggin\'-ATI driver my complete X-Windows screen settings crash and it won\'t start up again. SuSe/Novell and ATI are apparently NOT good buddies since SuSe had to make an ati-driver for its linux dis all by itself. Data up 2000 is Hindcast, and from there on, Forecast, so just getting to the year 2000 provides a lot of info. Every 10 years after that is good, too. I\'m just up to 1934 staring from 1920 (have I mentioned it takes A LOT of time yet? :-P) at the moment, so even 2000 is still a long way. Anyway, if I abort the WU when it reaches 2000 (January 1 or December 31?) CPDN will still be able to benefit from all my (pc\'s) hard work? After that, I think it\'ll be a long time before another CPDN WU shows up again, even if I didn\'t instruct BOINC to NOT get a new one (which I have, because even though BOINC complained it was overcommitted it managed to sneak in another CPDN WU nonetheless. Of course, with that new CPDN WU competing with the other one, neither would get finished by a long time, so that\'s why I set that).
8) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Is it normal for a CPDN WU to take this much time? (Message 25722) Posted 23 Dec 2006 by copycat Post: Downloaded a WU from CPDN on April 27, 2006. Granted, my pc is not on 24/7, due to my efforts on saving ss much energy as possible (which is why I turn of my computer most of the day). I also have an account at Seti@home and Einstein@home. When I receive WU\'s from those accounts they get finished in less than a month. Now I know the CPDN WU\'s are much larger than the S@H and E@H-WU\'s. But with a used processor time of more than 240 hours and a finished percent of only 8.529 %, I\'m wondering if I did not make a mistake when subscribing to CPDN. It would seem the way I use my computer a CPDN WU won\'t get finished in a long time.
9) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : New HADCM3L model (Message 22806) Posted 18 May 2006 by copycat Post: boinc versions 4.* are obsolete. Your machine has a string of errors of various sorts which might be related to the core-client vs. client mismatch. Suggest you download a current 5.n version of boinc. Of that string of errors a maximum of one could be related to a core-client vs client-mismatch. All the other errors are due to a faulty memory module. I\'ve already downloaded a 5.2.8 version a time ago, installing it is another thing though...
10) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : New HADCM3L model (Message 22774) Posted 15 May 2006 by copycat Post: Suse 9.2 has the same problem by the looks of it mine just seg faults out as well most anoying it\'s the most productive box as well .. Pete . That\'s strange. I\'m also mainly running SuSe 9.2 (64-bit), with the occasional sideway to 9.1 (32-bit) due to some things that just seem to run better in a 32-bit OS than 64-bit OS, and it started up just fine. My BOINC 4.43-core seems to misunderstand its EDF-policy thouhg, it\'s EDF-ing a deadline on Nov27 before a Nov22, but since deadlines don\'t matter on CPDN, I don\'t mind. Last log entry: hadcm3lbm_9m1r_05217746 - PH 1 TS 0014689 A - 25/06/1921 00:30 - H:M:S=0009:47:09 AVG= 2.40 DLT= 1.23
11) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Linux Sulphur 4.23 Unstable (Message 22360) Posted 24 Apr 2006 by copycat Post: I\'m just wondering, is this sulphur_ilto_000868092 - PH 1 TS 0103459 A - 26/11/1816 09:30 - H:M:S=0078:58:21 AVG= 2.75 DLT= 1.88 2006-04-22 23:23:00 [climateprediction.net] Unrecoverable error for result sulphur_ilto_000868092_0 (process got signal 11) peculiar behavior also caused by the unstable version 4.23? I\'ve never had a full run due to a) memory problmems and b) trying to debug in wine whilst CPDN was running, but with this one I\'ve gotten farther than before. This one never rewound though, just out of the blue a signal 11, bam!
12) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Removing results in profile page (Message 19425) Posted 18 Jan 2006 by copycat Post: Ehrm, please disregard this question. I seem to bd suffering from some form of memory loss seeing as I had already submitted this question before. Sorry.
13) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Removing results in profile page (Message 19424) Posted 18 Jan 2006 by copycat Post: There\'s lots of results in my profile which had client errors and didn\'t get any credit, back from when I had a faulty memory module, which was craching CPDN-models before they could ever reach their first trickle. Is there any way I can remove them from my results page? Them being there is really useless.
14) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Deleting crashed results in profile (Message 16906) Posted 31 Oct 2005 by copycat Post: There\'s tens of crashed results (still) in my profile. Since only one of them ever created a trickle, I would like to get rid of all the other crashed ones. They clog up space unnecessary anyway. How is the deletion of crashed models handled?
15) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Rewinding (Message 16882) Posted 30 Oct 2005 by copycat Post: Some models are unstable and will crash, that\'s why they have this scheme of rewinding and quitting. I would think that if a model were unstable, it would a) cause problems very soon, and b) the unstable-ness would re-occur at (approximately) the same timestep. Very current example (happened no more than one hour ago (some lines have been edited out): Starting model ID 49v9_200299685 Phase 1 49v9_200299685 - PH 1 TS 000001 - 01/12/1810 00:30 - H:M:S=0000:00:00 AVG= 0.00 DLT= 0.00 Model crashed...retrying...restart level 0 Preparing for restart... Rewinding a model-day... Starting model ID 49v9_200299685 Phase 1 49v9_200299685 - PH 1 TS 000001 - 01/12/1810 00:30 - H:M:S=0000:00:00 AVG= 0.00 DLT= 0.00 Model crashed...retrying...restart level 1 Preparing for restart... Rewinding a model-month... Error: Restart files for dataout/restart.month not found Giving up, this result exceeded crash count for available restart files. THIS is what I call an unstable model. Having two crashes on the same timestep means something is very wrong. The crashes the model before was having were thousand of timesteps apart, the first a few thousand TS\'s from zero. This time I\'ve managed to postpone the restart.year to 10/21 PH 1. As you can see, no whole year yet, but only 3 model-crashes in this much time is a personal record. You see, I\'m having memory-problems, not model-problems. However, this is not the point here. As I\'ve demonstrated: when a model is bad, it\'s bad from the beginning. When it\'s not the model that\'s bad, but something else, it\'s exhibited in various circumstances, with absolutely no common denomintor. Therefor, in such cases, I feel a restart.day-policy should be applied everytime.
16) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Rewinding (Message 16842) Posted 28 Oct 2005 by copycat Post: Deleted. Huh?
17) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Rewinding (Message 16814) Posted 27 Oct 2005 by copycat Post: I don\'t get CPDN\'s re-winding policy. My model gets its first problem after a few thousand timesteps, so it rewinds a model-day and passes over the same timestep without any problem. Okay there, I can live with that. However, several thousand timesteps later it encounters a problem the second time in the same WU and it rewinds a model-month. Once again, it surpasses the timestep it crashed on. I\'m pretty sure it\'ll find a problem several thousand timesteps in the future again, and what then: try to rewind a model-year (which I may nor may not have passed by then?)? Why can\'t it just keep rewinding a model-day, seeing as how this problem is clearly not the WU\'s fault, but rather my pc\'s?
18) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : Client only runs when started by root? (Message 16790) Posted 26 Oct 2005 by copycat Post: Try a ps with your user name (ps -u [username]). Just looked at the faq and there doesn\'t seem to a a CLI-option for suspending. Killing the BOINC-process (NEVER kill the CPDN-process) exits the client. I also suspend via the GUI-manager.
19) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : What is the meaning of this? (Message 16002) Posted 14 Sep 2005 by copycat Post: In particular, the memory is stressed much more in CPDN than in any other distributed computing project. If you have errors in Prime95, I have no doubt you will also eventually error out in CPDN. In that case, there\'s probably something wrong with my memory, which doesn\'t affect S@H or E@H because they don\'t take up as much memory as CPDN, but in CPDN eventually it does, and always at about the same time. Guess I\'ll have to suspend CPDN then, until I can get my memory modules checked and (probably) replaced.
20) Questions and Answers : Unix/Linux : What is the meaning of this? (Message 15947) Posted 12 Sep 2005 by copycat Post: I would also like to add that Prime95 DID find discrepeancies whilst running its torture test but a) they were found very quick, much quicker than even CPDN gives a rewind message and b) alongside the torture tests an E@H WU was crunching and it did not give even the smallest hint of something going wrong!

Next 20