Seti@Home optimized science apps and information

Optimized Seti@Home apps => Windows => Topic started by: Pepo on 13 Jun 2007, 04:30:23 am

Title: Weird problem, whether with optimized app?
Post by: Pepo on 13 Jun 2007, 04:30:23 am
After installing a new machine, I've attached it to Seti for some short time (worked fine), then later installed an optimized app the same way I was doing it before. Then the period with Seti's infrastructure problems came and (thinking that I'm just not getting work) I've not noticed that my host (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=3288587) have got some problems too.

Currently there is Boinc 5.9.10 and happily crunching for plenty other projects.

Upon project update, I'm getting a loooooot of similar mesages:

13.6.2007 10:13:15|SETI@home|Sending scheduler request: To fetch work
13.6.2007 10:13:15|SETI@home|Requesting 45831 seconds of new work
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|Scheduler RPC succeeded [server version 509]
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|Message from server: Resent lost result 09fe05aa.547.14912.647150.3.238_0
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|Message from server: Resent lost result 10fe05aa.25686.7232.628392.3.109_1
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|Didn't resend lost result 02mr05ad.9818.18161.92308.3.84_0 (expired)
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|Message from server: Resent lost result 10fe05aa.25686.9488.640888.3.223_2
....
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|[error] No app version for result: windows_intelx86 -1
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|[error] No app version for result: windows_intelx86 -1
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|[error] No app version for result: windows_intelx86 -1
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|[error] No app version for result: windows_intelx86 -1
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|[error] No app version for result: windows_intelx86 -1
13.6.2007 10:13:49|SETI@home|[error] No app version for result: windows_intelx86 -1


What does it mean?

I've tried the automatic benchmarker & installer too, but it behaves the same.
My app_info.xml was/is now the pretty usual one:

<app_info>
    <app>
        <name>setiathome_enhanced</name>
    </app>
    <file_info>
        <name>KWSN_2.2B_SSE3-C2_Ben-Joe_GFX.exe</name>
        <executable/>
    </file_info>
    <app_version>
        <app_name>setiathome_enhanced</app_name>
        <version_num>515</version_num>
        <file_ref>
            <file_name>KWSN_2.2B_SSE3-C2_Ben-Joe_GFX.exe</file_name>
            <main_program/>
        </file_ref>
    </app_version>
</app_info>


Peter
Title: Re: Weird problem, whether with optimized app?
Post by: Vyper on 13 Jun 2007, 06:23:45 am
Hi

I see in your app inf file that you've only informed S@H client that you can crunch 5.15 WUs, i bet that your other app inf file didnt look the same or that it simply didn't exist.

If S@H client starts to download other than 5.15 you will get that message that the app required to run for instance 5.17 - 5.20 doesn't exist..

If you edit the file and make alot of differnent posts there pointing 5.17 -  5.20 to the same exe file it will work, but other than that i don't know if that isn't the problem.

Kind Regards Vyper
Title: Re: Weird problem, whether with optimized app?
Post by: Pepo on 13 Jun 2007, 06:43:29 am
I see in your app inf file that you've only informed S@H client that you can crunch 5.15 WUs, i bet that your other app inf file didnt look the same or that it simply didn't exist.

Since the (which one? not that important, maybe already a year ago?) Boinc alpha version came out, which corrected the issue with enhanced apps in app_info files on both Seti and Seti beta projects, I've never used something other in my app_info.xml's than 5.15 on main and 5.17 on beta (I was Crunch3r's tester back then).

Quote
If S@H client starts to download other than 5.15 you will get that message that the app required to run for instance 5.17 - 5.20 doesn't exist..

sure, but as I explained above...
And the text "No app version for result: windows_intelx86" sugests me something like if "windows_intelx86" would be necesary instead of "setiathome_enhanced"? Or is it some issue related to Boinc's attempts to better support 64-bit platform? I might try the newest Boinc alpa, whether it is really related... (no idea)

Quote
If you edit the file and make alot of differnent posts there pointing 5.17 -  5.20 to the same exe file it will work, but other than that i don't know if that isn't the problem.

Just now there is the full version from automatic installer, but possibly because of my daily quota 1/day I'll not notice any difference until tomorrow.

Peter
Title: Re: Weird problem, whether with optimized app?
Post by: Pepo on 13 Jun 2007, 07:24:46 am
And the text "No app version for result: windows_intelx86" sugests me something like if "windows_intelx86" would be necesary instead of "setiathome_enhanced"? Or is it some issue related to Boinc's attempts to better support 64-bit platform?

Me bad, I did not investigate deep enough (http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=39418&nowrap=true#566959)...

Quote from: Neil Walker
...the app_info.xml file for the anonymous platform. Berkeley have added a <platform> parameter. If it's not there, you get that error.
The fix is to add the appropriate line for your <platform> after the <version_num> line(s), like:
...
<version_num>512</version_num>
<platform>x86_64-pc-linux-gnu</platform>
...

Thanks for listening and hints.

Peter

BTW, no idea whether this solves my problem, I'm offline 'till the evening.
Title: Re: Weird problem, whether with optimized app?
Post by: Pepo on 13 Jun 2007, 04:41:57 pm
BTW, no idea whether this solves my problem, I'm offline 'till the evening.

It worked, I've got 77 resent WUs (resending seems to work correctly!), enough work for 36 CPU days  :D

Peter