If one thing goes sour . . .

Message boards : Number crunching : If one thing goes sour . . .
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile Fred J. Verster
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Apr 04
Posts: 3252
Credit: 31,903,643
RAC: 0
Netherlands
Message 784240 - Posted: 19 Jul 2008, 7:42:33 UTC

Hi crunchers, yesterday evening, was browsing the SETI forums, BOINC(6.1.0.) crashes.X9650 @ 3.4G
8 G RAM, WIN XP64. Somehow, I don't trust the RAM
A BSOD tell's me that an error in 0000000F has occurred. Normal BOOT after that and BOINC also starts.
In a few seconds 30 to 40 WU's were 'calculated/destroyed', to fast to stop it.
They all had time till the end off july or the first week in august.
Apologies to my wingman for this inconvenient event.
No error's to be found, using it now for this message.
This morning, saturday, 19 july, i looked at my other host's and the Q6600 HP with VISTA (32BIT), had stopped???
It had tried to install service pack 1, but somehow failed and stopped.
Is now installing SP1 again, looks OK, this time.
Looks like Murphy's Law :(

ID: 784240 · Report as offensive
Profile Keck_Komputers
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 1575
Credit: 4,152,111
RAC: 1
United States
Message 784257 - Posted: 19 Jul 2008, 8:46:35 UTC

I'm surprized you get anything returned successfully. 6.1.0 was a very unstable test version that did not even make it to alpha testing. Currently there is a 6.2.14 release candidate that should be better than that version.
BOINC WIKI

BOINCing since 2002/12/8
ID: 784257 · 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 784267 - Posted: 19 Jul 2008, 10:07:09 UTC - in response to Message 784257.  

I'm surprized you get anything returned successfully. 6.1.0 was a very unstable test version that did not even make it to alpha testing. Currently there is a 6.2.14 release candidate that should be better than that version.


Hi, this isn't the first time it crashed without any reason, I think to replace it inmediatly.
Never heard off any problems, with this 6.1.0. version.
Thanks for your reply :)

ID: 784267 · Report as offensive
Fred W
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 13 Jun 99
Posts: 2524
Credit: 11,954,210
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 784294 - Posted: 19 Jul 2008, 11:29:46 UTC - in response to Message 784257.  

I'm surprized you get anything returned successfully. 6.1.0 was a very unstable test version that did not even make it to alpha testing. Currently there is a 6.2.14 release candidate that should be better than that version.

I think this was the Crunch3r (pseudo) 6.1.0 version, IIRC

F.
ID: 784294 · Report as offensive
1mp0£173
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 8423
Credit: 356,897
RAC: 0
United States
Message 784388 - Posted: 19 Jul 2008, 16:15:36 UTC - in response to Message 784294.  

I'm surprized you get anything returned successfully. 6.1.0 was a very unstable test version that did not even make it to alpha testing. Currently there is a 6.2.14 release candidate that should be better than that version.

I think this was the Crunch3r (pseudo) 6.1.0 version, IIRC

F.

It seems IOTTMCO that if someone is going to release a customized version of something that they keep the numbering really clean -- like maintain the original number plus add their own, just so we don't get this kind of confusion.
ID: 784388 · 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 786317 - Posted: 24 Jul 2008, 10:37:23 UTC - in response to Message 784388.  

I'm surprized you get anything returned successfully. 6.1.0 was a very unstable test version that did not even make it to alpha testing. Currently there is a 6.2.14 release candidate that should be better than that version.

I think this was the Crunch3r (pseudo) 6.1.0 version, IIRC

F.

It seems IOTTMCO that if someone is going to release a customized version of something that they keep the numbering really clean -- like maintain the original number plus add their own, just so we don't get this kind of confusion.


That's right, never knew, there were difficulties, with this version.
In the past days, i've updated 2 quad's to BOINC 6.2.14
Work's OK, also has more (local)options in the CPU settings.

ID: 786317 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Number crunching : If one thing goes sour . . .


 
©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.