I have upgraded one machine from 4.21 and I got this:
2008-01-21 18:25:09 [Einstein@Home] Sending scheduler request: To fetch work
2008-01-21 18:25:09 [Einstein@Home] Requesting 123032 seconds of new work
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Scheduler RPC succeeded [server version 601]
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.85_S5R2__56_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0826.80_S5R2__415_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.85_S5R2__98_S5R3a_2
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.90_S5R2__4_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Deferring communication for 1 min 0 sec
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Reason: requested by project
2008-01-21 18:25:16 [Einstein@Home] [file_xfer] Started download of file h1_0712.85_S5R2
2008-01-21 18:25:16 [Einstein@Home] [file_xfer] Started download of file l1_0712.85_S5R2
I have upgraded one machine from 4.24 and I got this:
2008-01-21 18:25:09 [Einstein@Home] Sending scheduler request: To fetch work
2008-01-21 18:25:09 [Einstein@Home] Requesting 123032 seconds of new work
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Scheduler RPC succeeded [server version 601]
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.85_S5R2__56_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0826.80_S5R2__415_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.85_S5R2__98_S5R3a_2
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.90_S5R2__4_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Deferring communication for 1 min 0 sec
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Reason: requested by project
2008-01-21 18:25:16 [Einstein@Home] [file_xfer] Started download of file h1_0712.85_S5R2
2008-01-21 18:25:16 [Einstein@Home] [file_xfer] Started download of file l1_0712.85_S5R2
I am getting the same thing, really strange is that it says S5R2 - "R-TWO" apps which should be history for a long time by now ?
Sorry, missed the end of the file name, but anyway, got the same message, but only with one of 4 Linux computers that I switched.
I am getting the same thing, really strange is that it says S5R2 - "R-TWO" apps which should be history for a long time by now ?
S5R3 uses the same datasets as from S5R2. You can tell the difference between a "real live" S5R2 task vs. a S5R3 task by the fact it has S5R3a in the task name... If you were doing an actual S5R2 task, there would be no mention of S5R3.
Looks like you guys got some 64bit compatibility problems there. And once again im reminded of why i uses 32bit linux on my 64bit capable computers. =)
2 results with 4.27 is almost finished, looks a tad slower than 4.21 on my Core 2 Xeon3060, but the WUs im comparing then are from slightly different data files. I will have to revert to 4.21 and fill up the work cache with WUs from same data file, then crunch some of them with 4.21 and then change to 4.27, that should give a definitive answer to which one performs best on Core 2.
01-21 17:02:22 [---] Starting BOINC client version 5.10.21 for x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
[...]
2008-2008-01-21 17:02:22 [Einstein@Home] Found app_info.xml; using anonymous platform
[...]
2008-01-21 17:02:22 [Einstein@Home] Restarting task h1_0762.95_S5R2__242_S5R3a_1 using einstein_S5R3 version 421
2008-01-21 17:02:23 [Einstein@Home] Restarting task h1_0762.95_S5R2__239_S5R3a_0 using einstein_S5R3 version 421
But that windows stuff in the app_info.xml is funny. :)
But that windows stuff in the app_info.xml is funny.
Sorry, the app_info.xml was derived from the Windows one. Maybe I should delete the tag altogether. All people having trouble on 64 bit: give it a try. Remove the line manually.
Can someone look at the work done on my 6000 using linux and see if 4.27 appears to be faster? The top wu was started with 4.24 and finished with 4.27. The rest were 4.24.
If it appears to be faster, than I can't wait for one "solely" run by 4.27.
[edit]just noticed the C/H (claimed credit/hour) is right up there with optimized seti now(or nearly so). OH yeah, G/H is granted/hour
But that windows stuff in the app_info.xml is funny.
Sorry, the app_info.xml was derived from the Windows one. Maybe I should delete the tag altogether. All people having trouble on 64 bit: give it a try. Remove the line manually.
BM
Justed tested it on Vista 64bit. The errormessage is away. Thanks a lot.
But that windows stuff in the app_info.xml is funny.
Sorry, the app_info.xml was derived from the Windows one. Maybe I should delete the tag altogether. All people having trouble on 64 bit: give it a try. Remove the line manually.
BM
I was getting the same message, so I deleted all 4 "platform" lines, and now I'm getting work again, and BM labels it as 4.27 to boot.
I see a lot of
)
I see a lot of windows_intelx86 in the app_info.xml, OK?
It seems to run fine anyway with fresh units.
Opened the graphics just for fun and it wasn't pretty, but I don't care.
I have upgraded one machine
)
I have upgraded one machine from 4.21 and I got this:
2008-01-21 18:25:09 [Einstein@Home] Sending scheduler request: To fetch work
2008-01-21 18:25:09 [Einstein@Home] Requesting 123032 seconds of new work
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Scheduler RPC succeeded [server version 601]
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.85_S5R2__56_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0826.80_S5R2__415_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.85_S5R2__98_S5R3a_2
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Message from server: Resent lost result h1_0712.90_S5R2__4_S5R3a_1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] [error] No app version for result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu -1
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Deferring communication for 1 min 0 sec
2008-01-21 18:25:14 [Einstein@Home] Reason: requested by project
2008-01-21 18:25:16 [Einstein@Home] [file_xfer] Started download of file h1_0712.85_S5R2
2008-01-21 18:25:16 [Einstein@Home] [file_xfer] Started download of file l1_0712.85_S5R2
RE: I have upgraded one
)
I am getting the same thing, really strange is that it says S5R2 - "R-TWO" apps which should be history for a long time by now ?
Sorry, missed the end of the file name, but anyway, got the same message, but only with one of 4 Linux computers that I switched.
RE: I am getting the same
)
S5R3 uses the same datasets as from S5R2. You can tell the difference between a "real live" S5R2 task vs. a S5R3 task by the fact it has S5R3a in the task name... If you were doing an actual S5R2 task, there would be no mention of S5R3.
Looks like you guys got some
)
Looks like you guys got some 64bit compatibility problems there. And once again im reminded of why i uses 32bit linux on my 64bit capable computers. =)
2 results with 4.27 is almost finished, looks a tad slower than 4.21 on my Core 2 Xeon3060, but the WUs im comparing then are from slightly different data files. I will have to revert to 4.21 and fill up the work cache with WUs from same data file, then crunch some of them with 4.21 and then change to 4.27, that should give a definitive answer to which one performs best on Core 2.
Team Philippines
No problem with upgrade
)
No problem with upgrade here:
01-21 17:02:22 [---] Starting BOINC client version 5.10.21 for x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
[...]
2008-2008-01-21 17:02:22 [Einstein@Home] Found app_info.xml; using anonymous platform
[...]
2008-01-21 17:02:22 [Einstein@Home] Restarting task h1_0762.95_S5R2__242_S5R3a_1 using einstein_S5R3 version 421
2008-01-21 17:02:23 [Einstein@Home] Restarting task h1_0762.95_S5R2__239_S5R3a_0 using einstein_S5R3 version 421
But that windows stuff in the app_info.xml is funny. :)
cu,
Michael
RE: But that windows stuff
)
Sorry, the app_info.xml was derived from the Windows one. Maybe I should delete the tag altogether. All people having trouble on 64 bit: give it a try. Remove the line manually.
BM
BM
Can someone look at the work
)
Can someone look at the work done on my 6000 using linux and see if 4.27 appears to be faster? The top wu was started with 4.24 and finished with 4.27. The rest were 4.24.
If it appears to be faster, than I can't wait for one "solely" run by 4.27.
[edit]just noticed the C/H (claimed credit/hour) is right up there with optimized seti now(or nearly so). OH yeah, G/H is granted/hour
RE: RE: But that windows
)
Justed tested it on Vista 64bit. The errormessage is away. Thanks a lot.
RE: RE: But that windows
)
I was getting the same message, so I deleted all 4 "platform" lines, and now I'm getting work again, and BM labels it as 4.27 to boot.
64b Mandriva w/5.10.21X86-64 boinc