We think we fixed the OSX10.3.9 issue. A local test runs succesfully on 10.3.9, so the next update,which will be soon, should have the fix.

I am getting a few WU's with low credit and showing the following error in the result: Too many restarts with no progress. Keep application in memory while preempted.

but my application preferences are to "Keep application in memory"

another one was: Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)

I have no idea what this means.

I am getting a few WU's with low credit and showing the following error in the result: Too many restarts with no progress. Keep application in memory while preempted...
I have no idea what this means.

It basically means that the task was restarted 5 times in a row from the same point. Restarted meaning that the task had in fact either been removed from memory by BOINC preemption to run something else, or by BOINC being ended (perhaps as the PC was rebooted?)

After 5 tries with no further progress, Rosetta decides that there must be something about this task that doesn't agree with your machine, it ends the task and reports any completed models.

From the looks of it, your credit is low because your CPU seconds was low. I mean credit is based on number of models crunched, and the value of a model varies by task, so you received credit for the completed models. But you completed less models then most of your tasks, because you spent less time working on the one with low credit.

---

Add this signature to your EMail:
Running Microsoft's "System Idle Process" will never help cure cancer, AIDS nor Alzheimer's. But running Rosetta@home just might!
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/

Some problems (maybe) with MS Vista. After restart:

Problem 1
<core_client_version>5.8.16</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741502 (0xc0000142)
</message>
]]>

Problem 2
<core_client_version>5.8.16</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code 1073807364 (0x40010004)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 7200
# random seed: 1516893

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Hi: Thanks for posting. We're working on getting a machine to run Vista, also
so that maybe we can start compiling for 64bit native apps. Stay tuned! I guess the good news is that your client has steadily been returning successes since that spate of errors, so maybe you found a fix for the problem.

Some problems (maybe) with MS Vista. After restart:

Problem 1
<core_client_version>5.8.16</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code -1073741502 (0xc0000142)
</message>
]]>

Problem 2
<core_client_version>5.8.16</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
- exit code 1073807364 (0x40010004)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# cpu_run_time_pref: 7200
# random seed: 1516893

</stderr_txt>
]]>

---

I have noticed several work units now take 450Meg + RAM during execution. Has the system requirements changed?

Specifically the "FRA_a016_STRUCTURAL_GENOMICS_hom001_2_a016_2_1i74A_IGNORE_THE_REST" series.

---

Upon reading Mike's post, I took a look. I have:
FRA_a016_STRUCTURAL_GENOMICS_hom001_2_a016_2_1i74A_IGNORE_THE_REST_3_1700_2871_0
using 400MB. Peak was 548MB.

I'm sure these WUs were flagged as only for high memory systems, but these usage numbers still seem to be about double previous high memory tasks.

---

Add this signature to your EMail:
Running Microsoft's "System Idle Process" will never help cure cancer, AIDS nor Alzheimer's. But running Rosetta@home just might!
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/

Just noticed that the aforementioned task is also taking about 3hrs per model.

---

Add this signature to your EMail:
Running Microsoft's "System Idle Process" will never help cure cancer, AIDS nor Alzheimer's. But running Rosetta@home just might!
https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/

Hi Mike and Feet1st,

You were right - these jobs were only sent out to high memory hosts! They are for a protein with 400 residues so it was expected to take up a bigger chunk of memory.

Bin

Upon reading Mike's post, I took a look. I have:
FRA_a016_STRUCTURAL_GENOMICS_hom001_2_a016_2_1i74A_IGNORE_THE_REST_3_1700_2871_0
using 400MB. Peak was 548MB.

I'm sure these WUs were flagged as only for high memory systems, but these usage numbers still seem to be about double previous high memory tasks.

---

Do work units with large memory requirements get granted more credit/hr due to the increase in resources consumed? I can sure tell when one of them is on my system (or worse, two of them at the same time). I understand I could limit the amount of memory consumed, but would rather not.

---

I don't think increased credit for memory use exists. However, Boinc management has been discussing such things, and also credit for wu size (network usage), and other participatory credit.

one of our members got a message from Windows, saying the Virual Memory was low, and he got a pop-up:
http://members.home.nl/goffinfam/rosetta.JPG

He got it with various WU's

---

Member of Dutch Power Cows