Welcome to MilkyWay@home

source v0.16 :P


Advanced search

Message boards : Application Code Discussion : source v0.16 :P
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge14 year member badge
Message 9129 - Posted: 25 Jan 2009, 20:45:02 UTC
Last modified: 26 Jan 2009, 1:59:31 UTC

I found the problem. What a royal pain in the butt :P

Line 84, evaluation_state.c

fprintf(file, "background integral: %.20lf\n", ia->background_integral);


needs to be:

fprintf(file, "background_integral: %.20lf\n", ia->background_integral);


facepalm. damned underscores.

I think that should be the last of it. I'll update to v0.16 today.


*edit*

v0.16 is released with the above change and looks like it's running smoothly.
ID: 9129 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Cluster Physik

Send message
Joined: 26 Jul 08
Posts: 627
Credit: 94,940,203
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge13 year member badgeextraordinary contributions badge
Message 9131 - Posted: 25 Jan 2009, 20:50:53 UTC - in response to Message 9129.  

I found the problem. What a royal pain in the butt :P

Line 84, evaluation_state.c

fprintf(file, "background integral: %.20lf\n", ia->background_integral);


needs to be:

fprintf(file, "background_integral: %.20lf\n", ia->background_integral);


facepalm. damned underscores.

I think that should be the last of it. I'll update to v0.16 today.

You should read my posts in the first checkpointing thread a bit better! ;)
ID: 9131 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge14 year member badge
Message 9133 - Posted: 25 Jan 2009, 20:53:16 UTC - in response to Message 9131.  

I found the problem. What a royal pain in the butt :P

Line 84, evaluation_state.c

fprintf(file, "background integral: %.20lf\n", ia->background_integral);


needs to be:

fprintf(file, "background_integral: %.20lf\n", ia->background_integral);


facepalm. damned underscores.

I think that should be the last of it. I'll update to v0.16 today.

You should read my posts in the first checkpointing thread a bit better! ;)


oh geez how did i miss that :( probably distracted by people complaining about credits :P
ID: 9133 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilespeedimic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Feb 08
Posts: 260
Credit: 57,387,048
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9140 - Posted: 25 Jan 2009, 21:12:11 UTC - in response to Message 9129.  

Damn...


mic.


ID: 9140 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bobgoblin

Send message
Joined: 8 Dec 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 67,028,931
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9175 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 3:13:41 UTC

you've probably noticed by now, but all the v0.16's are erring at download:

<core_client_version>6.2.19</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
app_version download error: couldn't get input files:
<file_xfer_error>
<file_name>milkyway_0.16_windows_intelx86.exe</file_name>
<error_code>-120</error_code>
<error_message>signature verification failed</error_message>
</file_xfer_error>

</message>
]]>
ID: 9175 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileDebs

Send message
Joined: 15 Jan 09
Posts: 169
Credit: 6,734,481
RAC: 0
5 million credit badge12 year member badge
Message 9177 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 3:28:54 UTC

Likewise on XP64, running on a Core 2 Duo E6750, I am getting a string of errors along the lines of:

26/01/2009 03:15:32|Milkyway@home|Finished download of milkyway_0.16_windows_x86_64.exe
26/01/2009 03:15:32|Milkyway@home|[error] Signature verification failed for milkyway_0.16_windows_x86_64.exe
26/01/2009 03:15:32|Milkyway@home|[error] Checksum or signature error for milkyway_0.16_windows_x86_64.exe
26/01/2009 03:17:13|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 1401608 seconds of work, reporting 4 completed tasks
26/01/2009 03:17:38|Milkyway@home|Scheduler request completed: got 4 new tasks
26/01/2009 03:17:40|Milkyway@home|Started download of milkyway_0.16_windows_x86_64.exe
26/01/2009 03:17:40|Milkyway@home|Started download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65527_1232939798
26/01/2009 03:17:48|Milkyway@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 1349849 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
26/01/2009 03:17:52|Milkyway@home|Finished download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65527_1232939798
26/01/2009 03:17:52|Milkyway@home|Started download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65511_1232939797
26/01/2009 03:17:54|Milkyway@home|Finished download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65511_1232939797
26/01/2009 03:17:54|Milkyway@home|Started download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65512_1232939797
26/01/2009 03:17:55|Milkyway@home|Finished download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65512_1232939797
26/01/2009 03:17:55|Milkyway@home|Started download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65513_1232939797
26/01/2009 03:17:56|Milkyway@home|Finished download of nm_s79_e28_search_parameters_65513_1232939797
26/01/2009 03:18:03|Milkyway@home|Finished download of milkyway_0.16_windows_x86_64.exe
26/01/2009 03:18:03|Milkyway@home|[error] Signature verification failed for milkyway_0.16_windows_x86_64.exe
26/01/2009 03:18:03|Milkyway@home|[error] Checksum or signature error for milkyway_0.16_windows_x86_64.exe

etc etc

Needless to say it will not keep the wu for an app that has failed to download...
ID: 9177 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileKevint
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Nov 07
Posts: 285
Credit: 1,076,786,368
RAC: 0
1 billion credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9178 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 3:31:16 UTC - in response to Message 9175.  
Last modified: 26 Jan 2009, 3:35:09 UTC

you've probably noticed by now, but all the v0.16's are erring at download:

<core_client_version>6.2.19</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
app_version download error: couldn't get input files:
<file_xfer_error>
<file_name>milkyway_0.16_windows_intelx86.exe</file_name>
<error_code>-120</error_code>
<error_message>signature verification failed</error_message>
</file_xfer_error>

</message>
]]>



Common cause.. VERY SLOW NETWORK.. I am also having trouble loading the web pages. and upload issues.

1/25/2009 8:21:21 PM|Milkyway@home|Temporarily failed upload of nm_s82_u28_43279_1232933264_0_0: system connect


Maybe one of the "big dogs" joined up and is sucking down all the bandwidth...
.
ID: 9178 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge14 year member badge
Message 9179 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 3:32:46 UTC - in response to Message 9175.  

you've probably noticed by now, but all the v0.16's are erring at download:

6.2.19

app_version download error: couldn't get input files:

milkyway_0.16_windows_intelx86.exe
-120
signature verification failed



]]>


It looks like Dave might have had an issue with the permissions on the files he updated. I think this should be fixed now. Let me know if it's still happening. I'm assuming this is just for windows because all linux/osx versions seem to be crunching fine.
ID: 9179 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bobgoblin

Send message
Joined: 8 Dec 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 67,028,931
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9180 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 3:38:27 UTC - in response to Message 9179.  

i just had 3 more fail on download
ID: 9180 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileDebs

Send message
Joined: 15 Jan 09
Posts: 169
Credit: 6,734,481
RAC: 0
5 million credit badge12 year member badge
Message 9183 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 3:52:42 UTC

Well, the push to v0.17 (not bad - is that 10 updates in a week? Do we have a world record yet, or is there a way to go yet? LOL) seems to have fixed it, as mentioned in another thread :)
ID: 9183 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge14 year member badge
Message 9184 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 3:53:28 UTC - in response to Message 9180.  

i just had 3 more fail on download


It looks like there was a problem with the signature files Dave used. I resigned it myself and released a v0.17 so hopefully that will work.
ID: 9184 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John Clark

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 08
Posts: 1734
Credit: 64,228,409
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9197 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 8:36:41 UTC
Last modified: 26 Jan 2009, 8:46:16 UTC

Looks like my very last 0.14 WU is being crunched, and I have started crunching my first 0.17. The WUs that are ready to start are all 0.17, so I assume there was no D/L problems.

On my slow rigs I have a few 0.14s to work through before reaching the 0.17s.

Seems to be OK at this early stage.

(Oh! Windose and the stock client)

NOTE: Before the successful D/L of the 0.17 WUs, I see one rig had 38 V0.16 WUs client error on download. Looks like that was quite a problem for over an hour about 02.25an and 03.45am.

This was a message repeated on two of my other rigs, but the slowest did not have problems.

I bet the servers were being hammered then with repeated requests for more work. How did they cope, Travis?
ID: 9197 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bobgoblin

Send message
Joined: 8 Dec 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 67,028,931
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9201 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 11:00:06 UTC - in response to Message 9184.  

the download problem seems to be gone. i only have one machine that's actually ran v0.17 yet, but they ran fine. thanks, travis.
ID: 9201 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bobgoblin

Send message
Joined: 8 Dec 07
Posts: 60
Credit: 67,028,931
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9202 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 11:07:35 UTC - in response to Message 9201.  

i looked back through my tasks and found one v0.17 that did not download, but the next person got it fine:

Task ID 64578598
Name nm_s79_l28_42108_1232959219_0
Workunit 64548247
Created 26 Jan 2009 8:40:20 UTC
Sent 26 Jan 2009 8:42:22 UTC
Received 26 Jan 2009 10:29:58 UTC
Server state Over
Outcome Client error
Client state Downloading
Exit status -186 (0xffffffffffffff46)
Computer ID 41037
Report deadline 29 Jan 2009 8:42:22 UTC
CPU time 0
stderr out <core_client_version>6.4.5</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
WU download error: couldn't get input files:
<file_xfer_error>
<file_name>nm_s79_l28_search_parameters_42108_1232959219</file_name>
<error_code>-200</error_code>
</file_xfer_error>

</message>
]]>

Validate state Invalid
Claimed credit 0
Granted credit 0
application version 0.17
ID: 9202 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge14 year member badge
Message 9214 - Posted: 26 Jan 2009, 18:13:30 UTC - in response to Message 9197.  

I bet the servers were being hammered then with repeated requests for more work. How did they cope, Travis?


No crashes or fires, so I think they handled it ok :D
ID: 9214 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Otter

Send message
Joined: 20 Jan 09
Posts: 9
Credit: 17,289,621
RAC: 0
10 million credit badge12 year member badge
Message 9501 - Posted: 1 Feb 2009, 4:47:25 UTC

Hi I am fairly new to MilkyWay, to the devs, if possible could you add your Visual Studio solution/project files to the source release? I have VS 2005, but I am not sure how to get the BOINC source and milkyway to talk in VS.

Alternatively, if you could just put the entire source tree (plus the required boinc source code) in SVN/CVS/Git it would be much easier. Just checkout and click the solution.

I say this because I don't mind test compiling milkyway on windows, but I need to figure out how to compile it on Windows first ><, I do most of my development work on Linux (MPI/cluster applications).

Anyway, good luck on get windows optimized!
ID: 9501 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge14 year member badge
Message 9559 - Posted: 2 Feb 2009, 20:06:29 UTC - in response to Message 9501.  

Hi I am fairly new to MilkyWay, to the devs, if possible could you add your Visual Studio solution/project files to the source release? I have VS 2005, but I am not sure how to get the BOINC source and milkyway to talk in VS.


I don't have any solution/project files since that's all done by Dave P. I'll see if I can get him to make a post about what he does.


Alternatively, if you could just put the entire source tree (plus the required boinc source code) in SVN/CVS/Git it would be much easier. Just checkout and click the solution.


I can talk to our labstaff about having a remotely accessible CVS or SVN repository... although they've been pretty reluctant to set something like that up in the past. But I'll see what we can do here.


I say this because I don't mind test compiling milkyway on windows, but I need to figure out how to compile it on Windows first ><, I do most of my development work on Linux (MPI/cluster applications).

Anyway, good luck on get windows optimized!


Yeah, I hear you, thats mainly what i do too :D Windows can be a pain... Unix/Linux/OSX is so much easier once you're used to the command line tools :)
ID: 9559 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileDave Przybylo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Feb 08
Posts: 236
Credit: 49,648
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9560 - Posted: 2 Feb 2009, 20:08:47 UTC - in response to Message 9501.  

I use VS2008 (bad decision, should've stayed with 2005). I can give you the sln files if you wish but i doubt you'll be able to use them in 2005.
Dave Przybylo
MilkyWay@home Developer
Department of Computer Science
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
ID: 9560 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileGavin Shaw
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 08
Posts: 98
Credit: 1,371,299
RAC: 0
1 million credit badge13 year member badge
Message 9580 - Posted: 2 Feb 2009, 23:20:16 UTC - in response to Message 9560.  

I use VS2008 (bad decision, should've stayed with 2005). I can give you the sln files if you wish but i doubt you'll be able to use them in 2005.


I use VS2008 and have the evaluation version of the Intel Compiler (looking for somewhere is Aus that sells the student version so I can get it much cheaper). So if you wish, I can use the sln file(s). Put them in the code release or mail them to me (you have my email in your database :)

Thanks.

Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope.

ID: 9580 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : Application Code Discussion : source v0.16 :P

©2021 Astroinformatics Group