again with dump file, xp pro x64 sp2 (mui Spaniard), done the crash test
(typed "silver bullet" in Log windows), all steps followed, created dmp file
QuoteBoincTasks_065_16-07-2010_08-06.dmp
in
QuoteC:\Documents and Settings\XXXX\Application Data\eFMer\BoincTasks\crash
file with 0 bytes length and empty :o, this is with version x64
I'll try later with version x32 (in a x32 machine off course :))
Quote from: Corsair on July 16, 2010, 08:13:35 AM
again with dump file, xp pro x64 sp2 (mui Spaniard), done the crash test
(typed "silver bullet" in Log windows), all steps followed, created dmp file
QuoteBoincTasks_065_16-07-2010_08-06.dmp
in
QuoteC:\Documents and Settings\XXXX\Application Data\eFMer\BoincTasks\crash
file with 0 bytes length and empty :o, this is with version x64
I'll try later with version x32 (in a x32 machine off course :))
Lo siento Corsair, hay mucha lastima :(
I recreated Corsair's
silver bullet test on Vista_x64 SP2 (English version) with BT 0.65 (installed as English). I got a .dmp of length 140,521,872 bytes (which .zips down to a trim 32,128,239).
Quote from: jjwhalen on July 16, 2010, 12:40:28 PM
Lo siento Corsair, hay mucha lastima :(
I recreated Corsair's silver bullet test on Vista_x64 SP2 (English version) with BT 0.65 (installed as English). I got a .dmp of length 140,521,872 bytes (which .zips down to a trim 32,128,239).
For some reason it doesn't work with XP, it needs these files in the same location as the BoincTasksxx.exe. The 32 or the 64 bit version.
I will include them next time, according to the documentation it should work, but it doesn't.
http://www.efmer.eu/download/boinc/boinc_tasks/crashdump_dbghelp.zip (http://www.efmer.eu/download/boinc/boinc_tasks/crashdump_dbghelp.zip)
The window with BOINC preferences only shows in combination with the tabs Projects, Work and Messages.
Quote from: XP_Freak on July 17, 2010, 11:57:57 PM
The window with BOINC preferences only shows in combination with the tabs Projects, Work and Messages.
Welcome, noted as a bug.
Quote from: fred on July 18, 2010, 08:30:48 AM
Quote from: XP_Freak on July 17, 2010, 11:57:57 PM
The window with BOINC preferences only shows in combination with the tabs Projects, Work and Messages.
Welcome, noted as a bug.
The same is true for 'BOINC proxy settings'
Quote from: XP_Freak on July 18, 2010, 03:55:37 PM
The same is true for 'BOINC proxy settings'
Yep everything that does something on a computer.
Quote from: Pepo on July 02, 2010, 04:37:13 PM
On the Projects window, I can see weird "Tasks" and/or "Time Left" values for nCi projects QCN and WU-Prop@Home. Sometimes the values are sane, but I've seen numbers like "1701079397 / 1816338542 Tasks, 11109d,11:09:02 (1)" or "1886650430 / 1664036666 Tasks , 19310d,15:57:35 (1)". Such values come and go and vary.
I'm still seeing these huge numbers appearing on BT 0.65 (local Win7 x64 client with 4 CPUs (3 enabled for BOINC)). The weird values come and go pretty regularly.
BTW, an externally connected Win XP x32 client (1 CPU) running both of those projects is not getting such estimates displayed in BT.
Quote from: Pepo on July 19, 2010, 12:17:12 PM
I'm still seeing these huge numbers appearing on BT 0.65 (local Win7 x64 client with 4 CPUs (3 enabled for BOINC)). The weird values come and go pretty regularly.
BTW, an externally connected Win XP x32 client (1 CPU) running both of those projects is not getting such estimates displayed in BT.
The () value = number of CPU and GPU is correct? Check the Time left column in Projects.
Quote from: fred on July 19, 2010, 01:59:02 PM
Quote from: Pepo on July 19, 2010, 12:17:12 PM
I'm still seeing these huge numbers appearing on BT 0.65 (local Win7 x64 client with 4 CPUs (3 enabled for BOINC)). The weird values come and go pretty regularly.
BTW, an externally connected Win XP x32 client (1 CPU) running both of those projects is not getting such estimates displayed in BT.
The () value = number of CPU and GPU is correct? Check the Time left column in Projects.
If the values are low, then yes, if they are huge, then there is additionally the (1) for GPU, although both of the non-CPU-intensive projects are for CPU only (e.g. 0.01 CPUs + 0.00 GPUs). Although - sometimes the GPU's " / -" time part is even missing (like my third case in the table).
I've made a couple of screenshots (in chronological order, a couple of seconds apart) with various combinations and will try to build a summarization table:
(Note: QCN@V-1c32b is suspended, so it is displayed just once. There are 2 hosts, V-1c32b (1 CPU 32bit) and P-3c1g64b (3 CPU 1 GPU 64bit).)
| Proj | | Host | | Tasks | | Time left | | ------ | ----------- | ----------------------------- | --------------------------------------------- |
| QCN | V-1c32b | 0 / 0 | - / - | | QCN | P-3c1g64b | 1713402723 / 1461744239 | 23070d,04:49:19 (3) / 20472d,18:18:21 (1) |
| WUProp | V-1c32b | 1 / 0 | 09:56:02 (1) / - | | WUProp | P-3c1g64b | 2032166511 / 544372079 | 6825d,12:23:39 (3) / 22221d,03:40:16 (1) | | ---- | ---- | ---- | -------------- |
| QCN | P-3c1g64b | 1713402723 / 1461744239 | 23070d,04:49:19 (3) / 20472d,18:18:21 (1) |
| WUProp | V-1c32b | 1 / 0 | 09:53:04 (1) / - | | WUProp | P-3c1g64b | 1 / 0 | 10d,20:59:31 (3) / - | | ---- | ---- | ---- | -------------- |
| QCN | P-3c1g64b | 1 / 0 | 10d,20:59:06 (3) / - |
| WUProp | V-1c32b | 1 / 0 | 09:53:34 (1) / - | | WUProp | P-3c1g64b | 1864396393 / 1746956917 | 21166d,00:35:49 (1) | | ---- | ---- | ---- | -------------- |
| QCN | P-3c1g64b | 1 / 0 | 10d,20:58:53 (3) / - |
| WUProp | V-1c32b | 1 / 0 | 09:54:05 (1) / - | | WUProp | P-3c1g64b | 2032166511 / 544372079 | 6825d,12:23:39 (3) / 22221d,03:40:16 (1) | | ---- | ---- | ---- | -------------- |
| QCN | P-3c1g64b | 1 / 0 | 06d,08:28:56 (3) / - |
| WUProp | V-1c32b | 1 / 0 | 09:54:35 (1) / - | | WUProp | P-3c1g64b | 1 / 0 | 00:34:42 (3) / - | | ------ | ----------- | ----------------------------- | --------------------------------------------- | | Proj | | Host | | Use | | Time left |
| QCN | P-3c1g64b | 0.01C | 20:35:16 |
| WUProp | V-1c32b | 0.01C | 06:54:17 | | WUProp | P-3c1g64b | 0.01C | 07:30:36 | | ------ | ----------- | ----------------------------- | --------------------------------------------- |
|
While looking at the data from a distance - the calculated approximations at the Projects tab, whether they seemed huge or normal, did never match values at the Tasks tab, regardless of being divided by the number of CPUs or not.
Quote from: Pepo on July 19, 2010, 04:47:22 PM
While looking at the data from a distance - the calculated approximations at the Projects tab, whether they seemed huge or normal, did never match values at the Tasks tab, regardless of being divided by the number of CPUs or not.
Finally I see it. Looked over it a couple of times, but sometimes......
I check for non cpu intensive work.
And they are not calculated at all.
And I provided a nice check.
if (!bNonCpuIntensive) // this is not a core.
{
This is going ok = normal work
}
Forgot the else..... ;D
But I forgot to set the values to 0, no CPU no GPU.
So the values are all over the place depending what's in the memory at the time.
Good and fast catch!