Anonumous host throwing only errors, 3223 right now

Message boards : Number crunching : Anonumous host throwing only errors, 3223 right now
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Wiggo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 34744
Credit: 261,360,520
RAC: 489
Australia
Message 1242758 - Posted: 7 Jun 2012, 13:28:29 UTC - in response to Message 1242725.  

Host
6469701
has a lot of overflows or -9 errors.
Yet another anonymous host with an GTX 560 and a GTS8800!

I listed that machine earlier as its 1 of a few that are making a mess of things in my pendings. ;)

Cheers.
ID: 1242758 · Report as offensive
Profile Yanivicious
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 12
Posts: 157
Credit: 15,529,301
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1242772 - Posted: 7 Jun 2012, 14:07:00 UTC - in response to Message 1242758.  

i just looked at my own tasks, and I have 4 of these -12 errors on my laptop (Gtx 8800M)- I remember these errors happening and all of them happened when my GPU was overloaded because I have SETI crunching enabled 24/7 on both CPUs and GPU, and if I load up a video on youtube or media player etc.. without suspending the BOINC usage first, that happens every now and then.
ID: 1242772 · Report as offensive
LadyL
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Sep 11
Posts: 1679
Credit: 5,230,097
RAC: 0
Message 1242788 - Posted: 7 Jun 2012, 14:50:40 UTC - in response to Message 1242772.  
Last modified: 7 Jun 2012, 14:58:29 UTC

i just looked at my own tasks, and I have 4 of these -12 errors on my laptop (Gtx 8800M)- I remember these errors happening and all of them happened when my GPU was overloaded because I have SETI crunching enabled 24/7 on both CPUs and GPU, and if I load up a video on youtube or media player etc.. without suspending the BOINC usage first, that happens every now and then.


That is probably coincidence. [aka supersticious pidgeon*]

There was a condition where not enough memory for tasks could lead to false -12 instead of triggering the 'not enough mem' functions [CPU fallback for stock and up to x38g, task wait for x41g and later] but that got ironed out somewhere between x41g and x41x.

In general -12 are 'too may triplets found' or something like two triplets too close together iirc. High occurance in stock, low occurrence in x41g and eliminated in x41x.

* the event is random, but you notice those instances most when it happens in conjuction with something else. the belief in connection gets reinforced, the instances when it's not connected are either overlooked or seen as exceptions from a rule. Fascinating thing, Psychology.
I'm not the Pope. I don't speak Ex Cathedra!
ID: 1242788 · Report as offensive
Profile Swordfish
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Aug 06
Posts: 72
Credit: 3,014,493
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1242793 - Posted: 7 Jun 2012, 14:54:25 UTC

Further to my post below I found these as well

Host 6112618 Host 4202271 Host 6257665

Pending 3257 5041 65
Valid 1 102 8
Invalid 397 353 3
Error 44 12 24

All these are in my pending as inconsistants, with another wingman, having to redo the work.

Why don't people check their results periodically, to see if they are throwing out crap results, and take action if they are.

I agree with the comments, below, aand would go further, and blacklist those who are consistantly, throwing out erroneous results.

We all have the occasional bum result, but the majority of us do not have the large number quoted above, and in my previous post.
ID: 1242793 · Report as offensive
Alwana

Send message
Joined: 5 Oct 01
Posts: 1
Credit: 1,210,501
RAC: 0
Malaysia
Message 1244391 - Posted: 10 Jun 2012, 16:11:45 UTC - in response to Message 1242793.  

Don't understand this error. any advice on how to solve. error occur near 90% completed.

msg from system
Stderr output
<core_client_version>7.0.25</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
setiathome_enhanced 6.02 DevC++/MinGW
libboinc: 6.3.6

Work Unit Info:
...............
WU true angle range is : 0.011385
Optimal function choices:
-----------------------------------------------------
name
-----------------------------------------------------
v_BaseLineSmooth (no other)
v_vGetPowerSpectrumUnrolled2 0.00057 0.00000
sse3_ChirpData_ak 0.01955 0.00000
v_vTranspose4np 0.01383 0.00000
BH SSE folding 0.00453 0.00000
Restarted at 0.21 percent.

</stderr_txt>
]]>
ID: 1244391 · Report as offensive
Stick Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 26 Feb 00
Posts: 100
Credit: 5,283,449
RAC: 5
United States
Message 1244409 - Posted: 10 Jun 2012, 17:19:12 UTC
Last modified: 10 Jun 2012, 17:28:17 UTC

Here's another one: anonymous host 3378825. It has a small number of valid tasks, quite a few invalid tasks, plus a boatload of pending inconclusives. And it's getting bunches of new work.
ID: 1244409 · Report as offensive
Profile Yanivicious
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 12
Posts: 157
Credit: 15,529,301
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1244522 - Posted: 10 Jun 2012, 22:52:24 UTC - in response to Message 1244409.  

i just spent some time looking through a lot of the tasks that my computers have completed and seeing how the various wingmen are faring, and i was suprised to see how many of the wingmen's systems are throwing out hundreds of invalid and errored tasks. i sent private messages to all of the non anonymous wingmen to give them a heads up about their systems. i suggest other people do the same. but we still need a permanent solution for alerting or blocking all of those anonymous crunchers out there..
ID: 1244522 · Report as offensive
Profile Ex: "Socialist"
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 3433
Credit: 2,616,158
RAC: 2
United States
Message 1244537 - Posted: 10 Jun 2012, 23:31:38 UTC

I still think it's time for server-side intervention.


Others have mentioned the same thing.. If someone out there had their heart set on screwing with our DC project, they could setup two or more PC's in the same way to throw errors on both and reinforce tons of bad validated results.

This is not cool. there needs to be an error quota. If you screw up over 50% of any type of given task, you should not get any more of that task type without getting your stuff fixed and contacting us here to get your account reactivated.
#resist
ID: 1244537 · Report as offensive
Profile Yanivicious
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Mar 12
Posts: 157
Credit: 15,529,301
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1244539 - Posted: 10 Jun 2012, 23:36:44 UTC - in response to Message 1244537.  

I still think it's time for server-side intervention.


Others have mentioned the same thing.. If someone out there had their heart set on screwing with our DC project, they could setup two or more PC's in the same way to throw errors on both and reinforce tons of bad validated results.

This is not cool. there needs to be an error quota. If you screw up over 50% of any type of given task, you should not get any more of that task type without getting your stuff fixed and contacting us here to get your account reactivated.


exactly. i'm relatively new around here so i don't know the answer, but is there somebody this can be addressed to? has anybody done that recently? some of us spend a lot of time & money on this project (and other BOINC projects) and really believe in the work we are doing here and want to see that the integrity of this project isn't in jeopardy!
ID: 1244539 · Report as offensive
Profile Wiggo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 34744
Credit: 261,360,520
RAC: 489
Australia
Message 1244544 - Posted: 11 Jun 2012, 0:24:32 UTC - in response to Message 1244539.  

I still think it's time for server-side intervention.


Others have mentioned the same thing.. If someone out there had their heart set on screwing with our DC project, they could setup two or more PC's in the same way to throw errors on both and reinforce tons of bad validated results.

This is not cool. there needs to be an error quota. If you screw up over 50% of any type of given task, you should not get any more of that task type without getting your stuff fixed and contacting us here to get your account reactivated.


exactly. i'm relatively new around here so i don't know the answer, but is there somebody this can be addressed to? has anybody done that recently? some of us spend a lot of time & money on this project (and other BOINC projects) and really believe in the work we are doing here and want to see that the integrity of this project isn't in jeopardy!

Something should be done soon or a lot of work of mine will likely be lost to being errored out wrongly by these rogue machines plus my inconclusive pendings are still increasing at a bad rate.

Cheers.


ID: 1244544 · Report as offensive
Profile Wiggo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 34744
Credit: 261,360,520
RAC: 489
Australia
Message 1244923 - Posted: 12 Jun 2012, 4:59:00 UTC - in response to Message 1244544.  

ID: 1244923 · Report as offensive
Profile HAL9000
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6534
Credit: 196,805,888
RAC: 57
United States
Message 1244931 - Posted: 12 Jun 2012, 5:14:06 UTC - in response to Message 1244923.  

I did a bit of homework today to find out how many machines are mucking my end of things up (and many others to I bet) so here they are,

<snip>

and I bet that there would be many others besides them but the bigger question is, what are these doing to the load on the databases?

Cheers.

Even thought they are throwing out mostly errors they are still chewing though less tasks per day then several of the top machines. I imagine the global errors or invalid tasks per day would be something like 50,000-100,000 per day. However with around 2 million being returned a day it isn't that much. Drops in a bucket as they say.
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[
ID: 1244931 · Report as offensive
Profile betreger Project Donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 11360
Credit: 29,581,041
RAC: 66
United States
Message 1244934 - Posted: 12 Jun 2012, 5:24:09 UTC - in response to Message 1244931.  
Last modified: 12 Jun 2012, 5:25:18 UTC

Hal, you speak like our fearless leader, Dr. D.A.
ID: 1244934 · Report as offensive
Profile Ex: "Socialist"
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 3433
Credit: 2,616,158
RAC: 2
United States
Message 1245072 - Posted: 12 Jun 2012, 15:01:19 UTC

Two machines erroring in the same fashion will produce valids if they wing each other...

So I guess it's a good thing these rogue machines give us grief as opposed to working silently as a team..
#resist
ID: 1245072 · Report as offensive
Josef W. Segur
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Oct 99
Posts: 4504
Credit: 1,414,761
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1245080 - Posted: 12 Jun 2012, 15:11:14 UTC

The overall effect seems to be that on average there are about 2.2 results for each MB WU:
Workunits waiting for db purging     620,658    0    0m
Results waiting for db purging     1,345,459   37    0m

The extra results of course extend the duration of the database and storage impact, so it's more than the indicated 10%. When there are stats for AP, that ratio is often higher.
                                                                   Joe
ID: 1245080 · Report as offensive
Profile Fred J. Verster
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Apr 04
Posts: 3252
Credit: 31,903,643
RAC: 0
Netherlands
Message 1245289 - Posted: 13 Jun 2012, 10:14:33 UTC - in response to Message 1245080.  

The overall effect seems to be that on average there are about 2.2 results for each MB WU:
Workunits waiting for db purging     620,658    0    0m
Results waiting for db purging     1,345,459   37    0m

The extra results of course extend the duration of the database and storage impact, so it's more than the indicated 10%. When there are stats for AP, that ratio is often higher.
                                                                   Joe


Resulting in extra NET-Traffic, DataBase strain, this >10% is 10% too
much and probably even higher, as Joe stated.

I see more and more results requiering a 3rd wingman.
Is it the quota-system unable to limit the amount of work of those hosts?


ID: 1245289 · Report as offensive
JohnDK Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 May 00
Posts: 1222
Credit: 451,243,443
RAC: 1,127
Denmark
Message 1245448 - Posted: 13 Jun 2012, 17:39:51 UTC

ID: 1245448 · Report as offensive
Profile Khangollo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Aug 00
Posts: 245
Credit: 36,410,524
RAC: 0
Slovenia
Message 1245500 - Posted: 13 Jun 2012, 19:04:36 UTC - in response to Message 1244923.  
Last modified: 13 Jun 2012, 19:10:39 UTC

...
Computer 5345364
...
That's a nasty one.
I just noticed that my pending list keeps growing and I found a few pages of inconclusives, all with this host as wingman.

Why is it fetching workunits for cuda/cuda23 when there's no GPU shown on its host details page?
(stderr says GTX 280 and GTX 295)
ID: 1245500 · Report as offensive
Josef W. Segur
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 30 Oct 99
Posts: 4504
Credit: 1,414,761
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1245529 - Posted: 13 Jun 2012, 20:29:32 UTC - in response to Message 1245500.  

...
Computer 5345364
...
That's a nasty one.
I just noticed that my pending list keeps growing and I found a few pages of inconclusives, all with this host as wingman.

Why is it fetching workunits for cuda/cuda23 when there's no GPU shown on its host details page?
(stderr says GTX 280 and GTX 295)

Its last work fetch was about 31 hours ago, I judge the user has recognized the problem and either told BOINC not to use it or removed it completely.
                                                                   Joe
ID: 1245529 · Report as offensive
Profile Area 51
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 31 Jan 04
Posts: 965
Credit: 42,193,520
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1245541 - Posted: 13 Jun 2012, 20:51:31 UTC

Sad though this is (to the extent it makes a complete mockery of our efforts to produce good results), and given that the project has the capacity to black-list hosts should they want to, I can only assume that the impact of these hosts is considered largely insignificant. Either that, or the project just don't want to get into the business of micro managing individual hosts.....

The trouble with the quota system as it is, is that it doesn't really protect against invalids - as they don't materialise until quorum cannot be reached (by which time, a rogue host has downloaded another 1,000 tasks). Fixing that would alleviate a lot of the issues....

ID: 1245541 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Anonumous host throwing only errors, 3223 right now


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.