Post any problems with the 64 bit windows app here. (Details about your OS and particular architecture would be nice too).

---

My first test work unit 53631584 failed with a Compute Error:

22/11/2008 13:27:17|Milkyway@home|Output file nm_test0_33_1227318083_0_0 for task nm_test0_33_1227318083_0 absent

-------

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1 (0xffffffff)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
Error reading into background_parameters

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Computer is 8787:
AMD Athlon 3400 dual core CPU clocked to 2.75 GHz,
8 GB RAM
2 x 500 GB SATA 300 hard disks
1 GB NVidia GForce 85000 video card

BOINC has its own 10GB partition, and I'm running MW and Einstein on this box.

O/S: Windows XP Pro 64-bit, SP3

Thats really strange, because the code doesn't print that out anywhere... Maybe Dave didn't update all the code when he was compiling the 64 bit windows app.

---

I just had a second test work unit, which completed in 10min 30sec. The older app was taking about 5hr 15min per work unit on average. I'm impressed.

One small problem - the progress bar in BOINC manager went back to zero when the work unit was half completed and then stepped all the way across to 100%. I know that's purely cosmetic, but just to let you know. :-)

Rob.

I just had a second test work unit, which completed in 10min 30sec. The older app was taking about 5hr 15min per work unit on average. I'm impressed.

One small problem - the progress bar in BOINC manager went back to zero when the work unit was half completed and then stepped all the way across to 100%. I know that's purely cosmetic, but just to let you know. :-)

Rob.

the new WUs are also doing more work than the older WUs :P glad to hear it's running much faster. app v0.2 should fix the bug with the progress bar.

---

Running 0.02 on xp64, Q9450, 4gb RAM.

Running about 7 minutes, Milksop's version was running just over 4, so pretty close here.

For me the test 8 is ~1400 secs, milksop's ~550-600 secs. Are these doing the same amount of work as the old wu's?

Should I run the rest of the wu's since I keep getting the same error?

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

Seems to be running fine here, about 2.5 times longer than Milksop's app.

For me the test 8 is ~1400 secs, milksop's ~550-600 secs. Are these doing the same amount of work as the old wu's?

Should I run the rest of the wu's since I keep getting the same error?

They are doing a bit more work, not 2.5x though, so it looks like we still have a bit more optimization to do :)

---

I've got several platforms not getting any work units when requesting from server... I've waited it out a few hours, but here's the message that I'm getting on 3 different OS's (Vista64, Server 2003, and XP)

11/24/2008 3:26:43 PM|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: Requested by user. Requesting 0 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
11/24/2008 3:26:48 PM|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks
11/24/2008 3:26:48 PM|Milkyway@home|Message from server: Server error: can't attach shared memory


"Cant attach shared memory" - What does that mean?

^Nevermind that.. I see the huge thread started because of this.

My "test" WUs crash with exit code 22, does anyone know what that means?

My "test" WUs crash with exit code 22, does anyone know what that means?

Someone else had this error today and I found an answer to that here.

HTH ;-)

---

Lovely greetings, Cori

I keep getting "download failed" on the test 21 apps. Any ideas?

---

A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory

I keep getting "download failed" on the test 21 apps. Any ideas?

See 'testing assimilator' thread

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=491

---

Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.

I keep getting "download failed" on the test 21 apps. Any ideas?

See 'testing assimilator' thread

http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=491

OK, thanks. Now if I can just get rid of all these 21's!

Edit: Now it says I've reached my daily quota of 232wus, even though they were all failed downloads!!

---

A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory

Had my first version 0.3-WU on my lappy. It ran successfully but the stderr out says:

stderr out

<core_client_version>6.4.1</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0
APP: error writing checkpoint (flushing checkpoint file) 0

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Another one: http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/result.php?resultid=55082131

---

Lovely greetings, Cori

Running initial 3s here. Initially looks like it is functioning, appears to be a speed improvement over version 2 of between 10 and 15% depending on computer

My two Q9300 boxes are both erroring immediately on test24 tasks.

stderr out shows

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005)
</message>
<stderr_txt>


Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x00000001400121D3 read attempt to address 0xFFFFFFFF

the interesting part at least to me is both are the exact same address on all these tasks. rebooting has no effect to correct the problem. all memory tests are good, and all my other projects are running normally.

[edit] set both boxes to NNT until I have some time to play with it more.[/edit]

My two Q9300 boxes are both erroring immediately on test24 tasks.

stderr out shows

5.10.45

- exit code -1073741819 (0xc0000005)




Unhandled Exception Detected...

- Unhandled Exception Record -
Reason: Access Violation (0xc0000005) at address 0x00000001400121D3 read attempt to address 0xFFFFFFFF

the interesting part at least to me is both are the exact same address on all these tasks. rebooting has no effect to correct the problem. all memory tests are good, and all my other projects are running normally.

[edit] set both boxes to NNT until I have some time to play with it more.[/edit]

I think there's some problem with reading/writing the checkpoint file, which is causing some os/architectures to crash. I'm looking into it.

---