About half the WU run on Linux failed to validate against Windows :-(.
Usually this kind of validation problem happens less frequently (also the host produced better results with a different datapack in the past).
CU
BRM
Wow. If my Mac was coming out on the short end that frequently, I'd be thinking about putting both cores on CPDN or Rosetta until they had solved the problem here at Einstein. As it is, I've only had one WU that failed to validate against Windows (ID #33893916).
Yes, this is quite exceptional. Most of the time, all my Linux hosts including the one mentioned above are doing fine, only losing about 1 in 10..15 WUs due to validation problems.
There could be a light at the end of the tunnel.
In this WU the validator didn’t think that my windows result agreed with bprokopow’s Darwin result and we have both been waiting for a 3rd result to sort it out. A couple of days ago the validator decided that we did agree after all and granted the credit. Clearly there has been some tweaking to good effect.
The downside is that when Grant subsequently returned the 3rd result overdue he got nothing for 414,404 second work. :(
First computer to receive is running Win98, wingman is on XP, and they didn't agree.
Third one was a Mac, which seemed not to agree to either result.
Then the workunit got send to "RiversideCityCampus" which is best described as a Super massive Black Hole for workunits because workunits are sucked into this site and disapper forever :-)
Now my veteran Pentium III got the workunit, and it's running on Linux, the third OS involved. Hopefully it will validate against the Darwin Mac, or else the WU will reach "initial replication 5" and be sent to yet another host.
Come on little Workunit, hang in there!! You'll finally make it to the science database :-) :-)
The first two hosts are a P4 and an AMD Turion both running XP, surprisingly they didn't agree and the WU was sent to my C2Q running Linux. Not wanting to get involved in the battle of the validator, I aborted the WU.
The WU has now been sent to a PD also running XP....
Will the two Intel boxes validate, or will the WU be sent out to a 5th host...
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers. - Richard Feynman
All that should mean is that your two results ended up being weakly similar. I'd start worrying if a 3rd result gets assigned and returned and then there is still no consensus. There is obviously a chance though that the 3rd result comes in and is strongly similar with only one of you and the other result may not get credit. Without something explaining "why", those scenarious are the toughest to accept, but they could be legitimate. For example, your system may have had some sort of memory glitch or whatnot that fouled a math routine, so the result is truly non-similar.
I still believe that expansion of the "outcome" column and better explanation of invalid results is needed BOINC-wide...
First computer to receive is running Win98, wingman is on XP, and they didn't agree.
Third one was a Mac, which seemed not to agree to either result.
Then the workunit got send to "RiversideCityCampus" which is best described as a Super massive Black Hole for workunits because workunits are sucked into this site and disapper forever :-)
Now my veteran Pentium III got the workunit, and it's running on Linux, the third OS involved. Hopefully it will validate against the Darwin Mac, or else the WU will reach "initial replication 5" and be sent to yet another host.
Come on little Workunit, hang in there!! You'll finally make it to the science database :-) :-)
CU
BRM
YESSS! The WU finally validated (Darwin + Linux). I'm sorry for the Windows users.... ;-)
YESSS! The WU finally validated (Darwin + Linux). I'm sorry for the Windows users.... ;-)
Yeah, those two Windows hosts combine for more than a weeks worth of of waisted CPU time, that's a lot of electricity!!!
At this point I'm starting to worry about the environmental impact of these validation problems, screw the credit... I hope Al Gore doesn't peruse this forum ;-)
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers. - Richard Feynman
RE: RE: Well, if
)
Yes, this is quite exceptional. Most of the time, all my Linux hosts including the one mentioned above are doing fine, only losing about 1 in 10..15 WUs due to validation problems.
CU
BRM
There could be a light at the
)
There could be a light at the end of the tunnel.
In this WU the validator didn’t think that my windows result agreed with bprokopow’s Darwin result and we have both been waiting for a 3rd result to sort it out. A couple of days ago the validator decided that we did agree after all and granted the credit. Clearly there has been some tweaking to good effect.
The downside is that when Grant subsequently returned the 3rd result overdue he got nothing for 414,404 second work. :(
Hi! This one's funny (the
)
Hi!
This one's funny (the first one to be replicated to 4 PCs that I noticed):
http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/33712959
First computer to receive is running Win98, wingman is on XP, and they didn't agree.
Third one was a Mac, which seemed not to agree to either result.
Then the workunit got send to "RiversideCityCampus" which is best described as a Super massive Black Hole for workunits because workunits are sucked into this site and disapper forever :-)
Now my veteran Pentium III got the workunit, and it's running on Linux, the third OS involved. Hopefully it will validate against the Darwin Mac, or else the WU will reach "initial replication 5" and be sent to yet another host.
Come on little Workunit, hang in there!! You'll finally make it to the science database :-) :-)
CU
BRM
That is a good
)
That is a good one....
Gotta love the "RCC Black hole" ;-)
I'd put money down that your host and the OSX host validate and put this monstrosity of a WU to rest.
Here's another interesting one:
http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/33925402
The first two hosts are a P4 and an AMD Turion both running XP, surprisingly they didn't agree and the WU was sent to my C2Q running Linux. Not wanting to get involved in the battle of the validator, I aborted the WU.
The WU has now been sent to a PD also running XP....
Will the two Intel boxes validate, or will the WU be sent out to a 5th host...
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers. - Richard Feynman
I haven't seen this one
)
I haven't seen this one before.
http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/33985700
Anders n
RE: I haven't seen this one
)
All that should mean is that your two results ended up being weakly similar. I'd start worrying if a 3rd result gets assigned and returned and then there is still no consensus. There is obviously a chance though that the 3rd result comes in and is strongly similar with only one of you and the other result may not get credit. Without something explaining "why", those scenarious are the toughest to accept, but they could be legitimate. For example, your system may have had some sort of memory glitch or whatnot that fouled a math routine, so the result is truly non-similar.
I still believe that expansion of the "outcome" column and better explanation of invalid results is needed BOINC-wide...
Brian
Work unit
)
Work unit http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/33669231
was a success for my host http://einsteinathome.org/host/847237/tasks
with 56,425.47 sec CPU time and a claimed credit of 175.05 but granted credit 0.00
What went wrong?
RE: Work unit
)
Your result was compared with 1 from a MAC and it did not match:(
There are validation problems between diff. OS right now. But they are working
on fixing it.
Anders n
RE: Hi! This one's funny
)
YESSS! The WU finally validated (Darwin + Linux). I'm sorry for the Windows users.... ;-)
RE: YESSS! The WU finally
)
Yeah, those two Windows hosts combine for more than a weeks worth of of waisted CPU time, that's a lot of electricity!!!
At this point I'm starting to worry about the environmental impact of these validation problems, screw the credit... I hope Al Gore doesn't peruse this forum ;-)
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers. - Richard Feynman