Windows S5R3 "power users" App 4.32 available

Bernd Machenschalk
Bernd Machenschalk
Moderator
Administrator
Joined: 15 Oct 04
Posts: 4,027
Credit: 215,662,186
RAC: 76,719

RE: Got an other one that

Message 78720 in response to message 78718

Quote:
Got an other one that failed on the same host with the same error (0xC0000005). No point of using this version on this host, reverting back to stock 4.26.


If it's really related to network problems, a client with "asynchonous DNS" could fix it. I think it's currently only in development versions, though.

BM

BM

Brian Silvers
Brian Silvers
Joined: 26 Aug 05
Posts: 772
Credit: 282,700
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: I've got

Message 78721 in response to message 78719

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

I've got first that failed: 37057616
This is a Pentium D930 with WinXP, it has also one succesful WU, both were started with stock 4.26 and finished with 4.32.

This machine had a few incidents of similar errors when S5R3 started with stock applications, those errors did not happen with stock 4.26 application anymore.

Got an other one that failed on the same host with the same error (0xC0000005). No point of using this version on this host, reverting back to stock 4.26.

Could it be that 4.32 needs a newer boinc-version than your installed 5.8.15?
I think on Rieselsieve. They recommended 5.10.20 for further usage...

Some time ago, Bernd "recommended" 5.10.28 here, however 5.8.16 works here just fine. From what I understand, it will cut off a debug crash output if I run into one, but so far I have not had a result crash here other than two tasks that crashed due to bad checkpoints due to power outages. 5.10.28 or so was supposed to correct the issue with the crash output, but since I've never had a meaningful (new) crash to report, and as Jord (Ageless) knows that I think anything newer than 5.8.16 == "junk", I'm not updating until I have to...

googloo
googloo
Joined: 11 Feb 05
Posts: 39
Credit: 10,848,160
RAC: 547

FWIW, I'm running BOINC

FWIW, I'm running BOINC 5.10.30 and have had no (that's zero) problems with app 4.32, eighteen work units now. I hope I haven't jinxed myself.

rbpeake
rbpeake
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 256
Credit: 312,532,394
RAC: 629,452

RE: FWIW, I'm running BOINC

Message 78723 in response to message 78722

Quote:
FWIW, I'm running BOINC 5.10.30 and have had no (that's zero) problems with app 4.32, eighteen work units now. I hope I haven't jinxed myself.


Me, either, I am using BOINC 5.10.42 and have processed more than 18 work units.

Richard Haselgrove
Richard Haselgrove
Joined: 10 Dec 05
Posts: 2,041
Credit: 692,060,374
RAC: 939,181

And I've done 149 on one box

And I've done 149 on one box alone (see dedicated thread), plus a more modest share on six other boxes, all under BOINC v5.10.13

No problems.

Jord
Joined: 26 Jan 05
Posts: 2,952
Credit: 5,779,100
RAC: 3

Nice speed test. This

Nice speed test.

This task was half done with 4.26 and half with 4.32, coming out at 66,261 seconds.

This task was fully done with 4.32, coming out at 61,483 seconds. Check my wingman, who ran with 4.26 on a P4 3.0GHz, at 99,290 seconds (and on 5.8.15 for those wondering ;-)).

Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3,516
Credit: 468,678,238
RAC: 58,101

RE: Nice speed test. This

Message 78726 in response to message 78725

Quote:

Nice speed test.

This task was half done with 4.26 and half with 4.32, coming out at 66,261 seconds.

This task was fully done with 4.32, coming out at 61,483 seconds. Check my wingman, who ran with 4.26 on a P4 3.0GHz, at 99,290 seconds (and on 5.8.15 for those wondering ;-)).

Well, but to be fair, your wingman has hyperthreading enabled, any your host hasn't, rigth?

CU
Bikeman

Brian Silvers
Brian Silvers
Joined: 26 Aug 05
Posts: 772
Credit: 282,700
RAC: 0

In case anyone is curious,

In case anyone is curious, I'm about 1 day away from making the change to see if AMD processors have penalties...

If someone has already checked this out with a performance monitor / whatever, please speak up... :-)

niterobin
niterobin
Joined: 24 Nov 07
Posts: 10
Credit: 301,002
RAC: 0

RE: In case anyone is

Message 78728 in response to message 78727

Quote:

In case anyone is curious, I'm about 1 day away from making the change to see if AMD processors have penalties...

If someone has already checked this out with a performance monitor / whatever, please speak up... :-)

For what it's worth:

4.28: h1_0863.15_S5R3__423_S5R3b_1 finished in 59,512.87 seconds.

4.32: h1_0863.15_S5R3__373_S5R3b_1 finished in 42,090.45 seconds.

That's on an AMD Athlon XP 3000+, running WIndowz XP at 2.16 GHz with 2048 GB RAM.

I know the workunits are different sets so they can't be compared directly, but that should give you some idea. :-)

There's one failed result between them - I was partway through a workunit and forgot to copy the XML file for the new client over along with the other files, so BOINC killed the workunit. That's totally due to my stupidity.

HTH,

Rob.

niterobin
niterobin
Joined: 24 Nov 07
Posts: 10
Credit: 301,002
RAC: 0

RE: That's on an AMD Athlon

Message 78729 in response to message 78728

Quote:
That's on an AMD Athlon XP 3000+, running WIndowz XP at 2.16 GHz with 2048 GB RAM.

Make that Windows...

:-D

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.