Panic Mode On (68) Server problems?

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (68) Server problems?

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 10 · Next

Author	Message
arkayn Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 14 May 99 Posts: 3148 Credit: 41,353,713 RAC: 33,992	Message 1196373 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 16:47:28 UTC
	Due to database errors and now shorties, it is time for another thread. ____________
	ID: 1196373 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7669 Credit: 40,257,494 RAC: 21,486	Message 1196387 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 17:11:26 UTC
	But don't let us lose Cliff's last post in the previous thread: message 1196377 Those 'lost' WU are becomming a problem, I've had about 7 resends of the same WU's dispite the fact I already have them on my rig. They are chewing up my ISP's data d/l quota with the endless resends of the exact same WU. The amount of space used on my HDD is static since these WU's simply overwrite the already there WU's Someone at S@H HQ needs to sort out the handshaking problem Boinc and the servers seem to have. That's a new one on me. Anybody else seeing it? I'll have a scout round my rigs, just in case. If there are a lot of multiple (unneccessary) resends, that might account for the high traffic flows we were seeing last week.
	ID: 1196387 ·

James Sotherden Volunteer moderator Send message Joined: 16 May 99 Posts: 6075 Credit: 15,234,656 RAC: 23,179	Message 1196389 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 17:16:00 UTC
	Any body else having slow response times in the forums? Just seems to lag. ____________
	ID: 1196389 ·

arkayn Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 14 May 99 Posts: 3148 Credit: 41,353,713 RAC: 33,992	Message 1196392 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 17:27:21 UTC - in response to Message 1196389.
	Any body else having slow response times in the forums? Just seems to lag. Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. ____________
	ID: 1196392 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7669 Credit: 40,257,494 RAC: 21,486	Message 1196400 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 18:03:20 UTC - in response to Message 1196387.
	But don't let us lose Cliff's last post in the previous thread: message 1196377 Those 'lost' WU are becomming a problem, I've had about 7 resends of the same WU's dispite the fact I already have them on my rig. They are chewing up my ISP's data d/l quota with the endless resends of the exact same WU. The amount of space used on my HDD is static since these WU's simply overwrite the already there WU's Someone at S@H HQ needs to sort out the handshaking problem Boinc and the servers seem to have. That's a new one on me. Anybody else seeing it? I'll have a scout round my rigs, just in case. If there are a lot of multiple (unneccessary) resends, that might account for the high traffic flows we were seeing last week. Well, I found about 80 resends across my two busiest rigs (which feels high) - but absolutely none of them were *repeat* resends. I'd need to see some real evidence before calling this one a bug.
	ID: 1196400 ·

uglybiker Send message Joined: 6 Dec 02 Posts: 14 Credit: 2,973,485 RAC: 719	Message 1196419 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 19:31:20 UTC - in response to Message 1196389.
	Any body else having slow response times in the forums? Just seems to lag. The only lag I'm seeing right now is from my wingmen. ____________
	ID: 1196419 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 23353 Credit: 4,628,783 RAC: 3,773	Message 1196428 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 19:44:59 UTC
	Yes I am seeing forum lag.
	ID: 1196428 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7669 Credit: 40,257,494 RAC: 21,486	Message 1196452 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 21:12:16 UTC - in response to Message 1196428.
	Yes I am seeing forum lag. A whole load of other sites that I was trying to access this afternoon were slow too. That seems to have cleared up, and with it access to SETI has returned to normal as well.
	ID: 1196452 ·

Sten-Arne Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 1 Nov 08 Posts: 2762 Credit: 8,386,512 RAC: 24,418	Message 1196455 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 21:17:34 UTC
	We've had such a good AP run for many hours now, but I fear we will soon once again run out of AP work. Crap, I haven't filled my caches yet, I still need at least 175 AP tasks. ____________ /The grumpy old Swede. "I'm so old, that 98% of all trees in the forest, are younger than I am"
	ID: 1196455 ·

Michel448a Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 27 Oct 00 Posts: 1144 Credit: 2,873,612 RAC: 330	Message 1196466 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 21:52:03 UTC - in response to Message 1196400. Last modified: 17 Feb 2012, 21:56:22 UTC
	But don't let us lose Cliff's last post in the previous thread: message 1196377 Those 'lost' WU are becomming a problem, I've had about 7 resends of the same WU's dispite the fact I already have them on my rig. They are chewing up my ISP's data d/l quota with the endless resends of the exact same WU. The amount of space used on my HDD is static since these WU's simply overwrite the already there WU's Someone at S@H HQ needs to sort out the handshaking problem Boinc and the servers seem to have. That's a new one on me. Anybody else seeing it? I'll have a scout round my rigs, just in case. If there are a lot of multiple (unneccessary) resends, that might account for the high traffic flows we were seeing last week. Well, I found about 80 resends across my two busiest rigs (which feels high) - but absolutely none of them were *repeat* resends. I'd need to see some real evidence before calling this one a bug. a thing is sure, if you got ''resent'' you never paid 2x the amount of kb downloaded. they only resent if you never downloaded already. the only way to have downloaded it 2 times, it s cause you formatted / manually deleted between both sending. so no worries, a resend = 1x unique download, and it s happening at the moment you see the word ''resend''. you can verify, open fast your boinc dir / seti / and check the name of the files which the download never started yet (like the bottom of the queue) ____________
	ID: 1196466 ·

Cosmic_Ocean Send message Joined: 23 Dec 00 Posts: 2086 Credit: 6,839,162 RAC: 4,065	Message 1196481 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 22:16:10 UTC Last modified: 17 Feb 2012, 22:45:07 UTC
	I've been seeing not only forum lag, but setiathome.berkeley.edu lag since yesterday afternoon. Sometimes it takes 15-20 seconds for a page to start loading, and other times it is nearly instant. I just updated my libcurl.dll since when one download server is chosen and fails, changing the hosts file didn't affect which server would get used when hitting "retry now." Doing an ipconfig /flushdns didn't do it, but /release and /renew would.. even though the hosts file is a DNS override, that was the only way I could get it to switch servers. Of course shutting BOINC down and starting it back up would probably work, but that should be moot now with the updated libcurl. And I saw something that I haven't seen in quite a while in my BOINC Manger. A scrollbar on the tasks tab. All APs. My manager is sized to 1024x720. 35 tasks is when the scrollbar appears for me. I'm excited. Had to push two B3_P1s through, and then the next-in-line started after I was done with that and a task finished.. it was a B6_P0 and it also has 100% blanking. I thought the common failures was one of the B5 channels.. but maybe it is B6_P0. edit: Okay, so this was annoying me. I pulled up job_log_setiathome.berkeley.edu.txt from the old rig and out of the last ~1800 APs that it did, there were 71 100% blanked tasks. 36 - B3_P1 30 - B6_P0 3 - B6_P1 1 - B0_P1 1 - B4_P0 So I think I have my answer. B6_P0 is the one that fails a lot.. but I think it sometimes has successes, unlike B3_P1. ____________ Linux laptop uptime: 1484d 22h 42m Ended due to UPS failure, found 14 hours after the fact
	ID: 1196481 ·

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 10555 Credit: 5,256,792 RAC: 6,046	Message 1196482 - Posted: 17 Feb 2012, 22:17:20 UTC - in response to Message 1196452.
	Yes I am seeing forum lag. A whole load of other sites that I was trying to access this afternoon were slow too. That seems to have cleared up, and with it access to SETI has returned to normal as well. www.googleanylitics.com ? ____________
	ID: 1196482 ·

Zapped Sparky Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 30 Aug 08 Posts: 2277 Credit: 655,647 RAC: 790	Message 1196551 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 1:19:37 UTC - in response to Message 1196389.
	Any body else having slow response times in the forums? Just seems to lag. Yep, I've had that for a few months. Pretty much "transferring data from setiathome.berkeley.edu", while nothing is actually being transferred. ____________ In an alternate universe, it was a ZX81 that asked for clothes, boots and motorcycle. Beer/wine o'clock, the best of the o'clocks. Humpty dumpty sat on a wall, along came a giant, and cooked him for breakfast.
	ID: 1196551 ·

cliff Send message Joined: 16 Dec 07 Posts: 322 Credit: 2,509,590 RAC: 0	Message 1196663 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 5:34:14 UTC - in response to Message 1196387.
	Hi, Quick update, got a trial copy of visual route and checked out from me to the seti web server.. VR reports that between IP address 128.32.255.105 and 128.32.18.150 there is a non responding link. it wont respond to VR asking for id or whatever.. Also shows from the UK to S@H traffic is routed via Chicago & White Plains and route is described as good up to that 1st ip address. Dunno if this is any help or not.. Do know that adding the download server addrsses to my hosts file has 'not' improved the connectivity, boinc is still having problems with http dropouts. However the 'lost' WU situation seems to have cleared up. I'm getting a LOT of WU.. 57, 49 at a time:-) Building up a fair reserve, but the endless 'retry' situation persists:-/ There is IMHO a problem somewhere in the Berkeley area thsts stuffing up contact between boinc and the servers.. Regards, ____________ Cliff, Been there, Done that, Still no damm T shirt!
	ID: 1196663 ·

Cosmic_Ocean Send message Joined: 23 Dec 00 Posts: 2086 Credit: 6,839,162 RAC: 4,065	Message 1196673 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 5:44:16 UTC
	Something is fishy. Still plenty of channels/tapes for AP to split.. but the creation rate is really low, and there isn't a pile of ready to send, either. ____________ Linux laptop uptime: 1484d 22h 42m Ended due to UPS failure, found 14 hours after the fact
	ID: 1196673 ·

Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 5284 Credit: 41,808,260 RAC: 32,482	Message 1196763 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 8:47:49 UTC - in response to Message 1196663.
	There is IMHO a problem somewhere in the Berkeley area thsts stuffing up contact between boinc and the servers.. For some time for those of us not in the US it's been quicker to use a US proxy than just go directly (50-100kB/s v 2kB/s or less). Lately i've just set my hosts file to use the "good" download server & have had no problems with downloads (within a couple of attempts the WU will download). ____________ Grant Darwin NT.
	ID: 1196763 ·

Terror Australis Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 14 Feb 04 Posts: 1443 Credit: 184,940,104 RAC: 115,317	Message 1196767 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 9:00:09 UTC - in response to Message 1196763.
	There is IMHO a problem somewhere in the Berkeley area thsts stuffing up contact between boinc and the servers.. For some time for those of us not in the US it's been quicker to use a US proxy than just go directly (50-100kB/s v 2kB/s or less). Lately i've just set my hosts file to use the "good" download server & have had no problems with downloads (within a couple of attempts the WU will download). +1 But then I'm only just down the road from Grant. (By NT standards anyway.) :-) T.A.
	ID: 1196767 ·

Anthony Arbuzoff Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 6 Apr 00 Posts: 200 Credit: 1,257,787 RAC: 1,912	Message 1196768 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 9:01:59 UTC
	Alarm! Count of "Results ready to send" is decreasing for last time! Again splitters have a holiday? ____________
	ID: 1196768 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 7669 Credit: 40,257,494 RAC: 21,486	Message 1196770 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 9:33:37 UTC
	Remember that Matt said (in Technical News): ...you have to recreate a whole new table from scratch ... and repopulate it with all the data from the "full" table. We have a billion workunits in that table, so to speed this process up we only moved over workunits 90 days old (or newer) before turning the projects on again. We only need 90 days of recent workunits around for the assimilators to work, but to get the NTPCkrs rolling again we need to repopulate the whole thing, which we'll do more casually. My guess is that they set the science database to copy the other 946 million workunits over the weekend: and if the science database is that busy, the splitters and assimilators - both of which need to access it - will be kept waiting quite a lot of the time.
	ID: 1196770 ·

Cosmic_Ocean Send message Joined: 23 Dec 00 Posts: 2086 Credit: 6,839,162 RAC: 4,065	Message 1196773 - Posted: 18 Feb 2012, 9:51:47 UTC - in response to Message 1196770.
	Remember that Matt said (in Technical News): ...you have to recreate a whole new table from scratch ... and repopulate it with all the data from the "full" table. We have a billion workunits in that table, so to speed this process up we only moved over workunits 90 days old (or newer) before turning the projects on again. We only need 90 days of recent workunits around for the assimilators to work, but to get the NTPCkrs rolling again we need to repopulate the whole thing, which we'll do more casually. My guess is that they set the science database to copy the other 946 million workunits over the weekend: and if the science database is that busy, the splitters and assimilators - both of which need to access it - will be kept waiting quite a lot of the time. I forgot about that. Does make sense now. I would have thought queries/sec would be higher than they are for that operation though. ____________ Linux laptop uptime: 1484d 22h 42m Ended due to UPS failure, found 14 hours after the fact
	ID: 1196773 ·

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 10 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Panic Mode On (68) Server problems?