psummary upgrade

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby jcoffland » Fri Dec 18, 2009 9:29 pm

toTOW wrote:Are you sure that the atoms count doesn't trigger a bug ? These WUs have more than 1M atomsn and used to show nothing in the old psummary for the atoms count because of that.

I cannot find these projects on any of the assignment servers. Do you know the IP of the WS they belong to? They may have been listed in a very stale file.
Cauldron Development LLC
http://cauldrondevelopment.com/
User avatar
jcoffland
Pande Group Member
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:42 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby jcoffland » Fri Dec 18, 2009 9:29 pm

Duplicates are fixed.
User avatar
jcoffland
Pande Group Member
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:42 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby toTOW » Fri Dec 18, 2009 9:30 pm

bollix47 wrote:
These projects have been active for months now and are currently being assigned to server 171.67.108.22. They were on psummary before you made your changes. I'm currently crunching 4 of them. They are commonly referred to as bigadv WUs.

Here's an example of one that's currently running:

Code: Select all
[14:11:24] + Attempting to get work packet
[14:11:24] - Will indicate memory of 5966 MB
[14:11:24] - Connecting to assignment server
[14:11:24] Connecting to http://assign.stanford.edu:8080/
[14:11:24] Posted data.
[14:11:24] Initial: 43AB; - Successful: assigned to (171.67.108.22).
[14:11:24] + News From Folding@Home: Welcome to Folding@Home
[14:11:24] Loaded queue successfully.
[14:11:24] Connecting to http://171.67.108.22:8080/
[14:12:03] Posted data.
[14:12:03] Initial: 0000; - Receiving payload (expected size: 30236150)
[14:12:28] - Downloaded at ~1181 kB/s
[14:12:28] - Averaged speed for that direction ~975 kB/s
[14:12:28] + Received work.
[14:12:33] Project: 2683 (Run 5, Clone 0, Gen 26)


If I remember correctly the CONTACT said kasson.

Hope this helps you track down the problem. :ewink:


bollix47 gave you the required information on the previous page ;)
Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.

FAH-Addict : latest news, tests and reviews about Folding@Home project.

Image
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5618
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby jcoffland » Sat Dec 19, 2009 2:57 am

I found the missing projects. All the big betas were being dropped.
User avatar
jcoffland
Pande Group Member
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:42 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby Grandpa_01 » Sun Dec 20, 2009 6:52 am

All of the ATI betas are missing I believe 5724 - 5730 can't really remember the #
Image
2 - SM H8QGi-F AMD 6xxx=112 cores @ 3.2 & 3.9Ghz
5 - SM X9QRI-f+ Intel 4650 = 320 cores @ 3.15Ghz
2 - I7 980X 4.4Ghz 2-GTX680
1 - 2700k 4.4Ghz GTX680
Total = 464 cores folding
User avatar
Grandpa_01
 
Posts: 1122
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:36 am

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby toTOW » Sun Dec 20, 2009 12:42 pm

Grandpa_01 wrote:All of the ATI betas are missing I believe 5724 - 5730 can't really remember the #


Servers 171.64.65.102 and 171.64.65.103 ;)
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5618
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby lanbrown » Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:15 am

anandhanju wrote:The GRO-PS3 projects appear to be classified as GROMACS in the new psummary page.


That was done over a month ago and not anything new.
lanbrown
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 2:21 am

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby harlam357 » Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:05 pm

Project 2669 Core is listed as GRO-SMP. It should be GROCVS. Apologize if this has already been mentioned.

I've had to update my parsing code for HFM as well... many of the Contact fields are now empty, and they never were previously.

Thanks to Joe for getting the ProtoMol Projects listed.
harlam357
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:03 am
Location: Alabama - USA

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby toTOW » Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:39 pm

I think all SMP projects doesn't have the right atom count.

Also, Protomol projects are still missing (they should be listed as they are in Advmethods).
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5618
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby jcoffland » Wed Dec 23, 2009 11:19 pm

- There were more missing projects. I fixed a problem with the new psummary logic that should take care of that. Please let me know if there are any more missing projects.

Project 2669 Core is listed as GRO-SMP. It should be GROCVS. Apologize if this has already been mentioned.

- I don't know why there are so many claims that the psummary is mixing up project types. Project 2669's files clearly use the GRO-SMP project type not GROCVS. Maybe there was an error before possibly even in some third-party code.

- Regarding parsing the psummary, it should be easier now as the code is valid XML as well as valid XHTML meaning you can use an XML parser rather than an adhoc one. We will aim to keep it this way.

- The projects wo/ a contact name were introduced because I added some projects that weren't listed before in an attempt to bring back the missing projects. These projects did not list a contact name. They are gone now. However, third-party apps should allow for empty fields.

I believe psummary is back to 100%. Please let me know if it is not.
User avatar
jcoffland
Pande Group Member
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:42 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby toTOW » Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:33 am

GRO-SMP and GROCVS were used to differentiate SMP A1 projects (GRO-SMP) and SMP A2 projects (GROCVS) ... but maybe it was only a manual hack in old psummary :?

I think that atoms count for GRO-SMP and GROCVS are still wrong ... and BigAdv projects (p268x) should also appear on psummary.
User avatar
toTOW
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 5618
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Bordeaux, France

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby jcoffland » Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:49 am

toTOW wrote:GRO-SMP and GROCVS were used to differentiate SMP A1 projects (GRO-SMP) and SMP A2 projects (GROCVS) ... but maybe it was only a manual hack in old psummary :?

This was not in anything I saw.

toTOW wrote:I think that atoms count for GRO-SMP and GROCVS are still wrong

Could be. Psummary just reports what the project maintainer puts in their configuration files. That may not match what the actual simulation is doing.

toTOW wrote:and BigAdv projects (p268x) should also appear on psummary.

Those projects are there. Psummary has always only reported projects it can contact at the moment so they can go away and come back.

The psummary system is not perfect. It should be working now a little better than before. One day we will address its deficiencies more thoroughly.
User avatar
jcoffland
Pande Group Member
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:42 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby codysluder » Thu Dec 24, 2009 3:55 am

jcoffland wrote:The psummary system is not perfect. It should be working now a little better than before. One day we will address its deficiencies more thoroughly.


Good.

Some of the 3rd party apps have addressed this shortcoming by maintaining a local history. *It really should be addressed within the psummary code. When a new project goes on-line, it should appear in the next update. When a project goes off-line, that does NOT maan that we're no longer processing the WUs. The logic should keep the project on the list for a while (ideally for the time it takes us to process the assignment, but that's much too complicated).
codysluder
 
Posts: 1022
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:43 pm

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby harlam357 » Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:15 am

jcoffland wrote:
Project 2669 Core is listed as GRO-SMP. It should be GROCVS. Apologize if this has already been mentioned.

- I don't know why there are so many claims that the psummary is mixing up project types. Project 2669's files clearly use the GRO-SMP project type not GROCVS. Maybe there was an error before possibly even in some third-party code.

- Regarding parsing the psummary, it should be easier now as the code is valid XML as well as valid XHTML meaning you can use an XML parser rather than an adhoc one. We will aim to keep it this way.

- The projects wo/ a contact name were introduced because I added some projects that weren't listed before in an attempt to bring back the missing projects. These projects did not list a contact name. They are gone now. However, third-party apps should allow for empty fields.


p2669 == GROCVS - looks good to me :)

Had to make one slight adjustment to my code to handle any blank fields of little to no consequence on being able to monitor a project correctly - so I'm good, I'm sticking with my parser that's gotten me here, but that's good to know that it's now valid XHTML == better options for all involved and for the future.
harlam357
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:03 am
Location: Alabama - USA

Re: psummary upgrade

Postby 7im » Thu Dec 24, 2009 8:30 am

jcoffland wrote:
toTOW wrote:GRO-SMP and GROCVS were used to differentiate SMP A1 projects (GRO-SMP) and SMP A2 projects (GROCVS) ... but maybe it was only a manual hack in old psummary :?

This was not in anything I saw.


Not in anything you saw at Stanford? But you might remember this... FAH WIKI: Cores

For your convenience, there is a sample fahlog.txt of a GROCVS work unit here: http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?p=114172#p114172 Note the core name in the queue dump at the bottom.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
User avatar
7im
 
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:30 pm
Location: Arizona

PreviousNext

Return to Issues with a specific server

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron