Page 1 of 1

P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 2:25 am
by Gary480six
Has anyone completed this work unit? It has crashed out three times now.

i7-4770K with Windows 7

Code: Select all

Launch directory: C:\FAH-SMP
Executable: C:\FAH-SMP\FAH6.34-win32-SMP.exe
Arguments: -smp

[23:59:39] - Ask before connecting: No
[23:59:39] - User name: Gary480six (Team 11108)
[23:59:39] - User ID: blahblahblah
[23:59:39] - Machine ID: 1
[23:59:39] 
[23:59:40] Loaded queue successfully.
[23:59:40] 
[23:59:40] + Processing work unit
[23:59:40] Core required: FahCore_a3.exe
[23:59:40] Core found.
[23:59:40] Working on queue slot 01 [November 19 23:59:40 UTC]
[23:59:40] + Working ...
[23:59:40] 
[23:59:40] *------------------------------*
[23:59:40] Folding@Home Gromacs SMP Core
[23:59:40] Version 2.27 (Dec. 15, 2010)
[23:59:40] 
[23:59:40] Preparing to commence simulation
[23:59:40] - Ensuring status. Please wait.
[23:59:49] - Looking at optimizations...
[23:59:49] - Working with standard loops on this execution.
[23:59:49] - Previous termination of core was improper.
[23:59:49] - Going to use standard loops.
[23:59:49] - Files status OK
[23:59:49] - Expanded 3815163 -> 4182748 (decompressed 109.6 percent)
[23:59:49] Called DecompressByteArray: compressed_data_size=3815163 data_size=4182748, decompressed_data_size=4182748 diff=0
[23:59:49] - Digital signature verified
[23:59:49] 
[23:59:49] Project: 6095 (Run 7, Clone 28, Gen 49)
[23:59:49] 
[23:59:49] Entering M.D.
[23:59:56] Mapping NT from 8 to 8 
[23:59:56] Completed 0 out of 500000 steps  (0%)
[23:59:57] Gromacs cannot continue further.
[23:59:57] Going to send back what have done -- stepsTotalG=500000
[23:59:57] Work fraction=0.0000 steps=500000.
[00:00:12] logfile size=0 infoLength=0 edr=0 trr=23
[00:00:12] logfile size: 0 info=0 bed=0 hdr=23
[00:00:12] - Writing 640 bytes of core data to disk...
[00:00:16] CoreStatus = C0000005 (-1073741819)
[00:00:16] Client-core communications error: ERROR 0xc0000005
[00:00:16] Deleting current work unit & continuing...

Folding@Home Client Shutdown at user request.

Folding@Home Client Shutdown.

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 2:38 am
by bruce
So far, there has been only one error report -- from a Linux machine and not from Gary480six.

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:21 am
by Gary480six
This machine is not at my home. I asked the guy that is running it to delete the queue.dat, the unitinfo.txt and the work folder. That used to be enough to get a Folding PC assigned different work. This time it did not. Still getting that same P6095 and still failing at 0%.

If I recall, the last step is to also change your machine ID number - but it's been so long I've forgotten how.

Is it using the -config switch - and setting the new number is somewhere in there?

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:43 am
by Joe_H
If I recall correctly, deleting the file machinedependent.dat is how you change your ID number on the V6 client.

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:06 pm
by Gary480six
OK - I was right. I checked one of my local systems running the version 6.34 SMP client. In order to get to the machine ID number (the default is 1) you have to add the -configonly switch to the target line of your program launcher.
There in the advanced settings, is the machine ID number setting.

However, the guy running that system will not be able to get back to it till Monday. And when he does, he will have no choice but to dump that P6095 R7 C28 G49 work unit.

Is there a way to alert Stanford to this issue? Hopefully there is a way they can kick a given work unit back into production before the final deadline has passed?

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:23 pm
by 7im
-config only changes the Client ID.

deleting the file changes the Machine ID, hence the file name.

Delete the work folder, and delete the machinedependent.dat, then start the client. Should get new work unit.

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:45 pm
by bruce
Gary480six wrote: Is there a way to alert Stanford to this issue? Hopefully there is a way they can kick a given work unit back into production before the final deadline has passed?
Not in FAH V6.xx. Something like that was added in V7 but it's still not 100%.

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:37 pm
by Gary480six
Bruce - Nothing in version 6. OK thanks - that work unit will just have to time out on it's own.

7im - I looked at two different Windows 7 computers that used the No-Install version FAH6.34-win32-SMP client.

One that is currently Folding SMP work units and one that was - up until about six months ago.

I did not find the machinedependent.dat file in either PC. (nor did the windows search function)

Is it a hidden file? (or perhaps something added in version 7)

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:42 pm
by Joe_H
No, that file is not part of V7. I don't have an old Windows install of V6 to check if the file is hidden or not, on other OS's it was located in the same folder as the downloaded cores and log files. It might be a difference between the regular install and the version you are using.

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:22 pm
by 7im
Only linux used the machine file. It was stored in the registry in Windows. If deleting the work folder and changing the Client ID using -config doesn't work in Windows, we can show you where the reg entry is.

Re: P6095 R7 C28 G49 Bad?

Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:16 pm
by bruce
It would be a good idea to upgrade your V6 client to V7.