Message boards : Sixtrack Application : SIXTRACKTEST
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next

AuthorMessage
Alessio Mereghetti
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 29 Feb 16
Posts: 89
Credit: 1,149,162
RAC: 128
Message 31254 - Posted: 3 Jul 2017, 14:23:22 UTC - in response to Message 31221.  

I am playing with WUs to be crunched with sixtracktest. In particular, in the last batch of jobs submitted last week, the discrimination between successful and un-successful results was a missing setting in the template output .xml file.

Now the next batch of jobs (34) is aimed at verifying that we can collect more data then the usual output we get back from you.

Thanks a lot to everyone supporting sixtracktest!
ID: 31254 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 843
Credit: 1,578,195
RAC: 0
Message 31267 - Posted: 3 Jul 2017, 20:38:50 UTC - in response to Message 31221.  

Yes indeed, but some may miss the deadline but won't cost you. Eric.
(I have the same problem!)
ID: 31267 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Harri Liljeroos
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Sep 04
Posts: 309
Credit: 11,649,944
RAC: 19,221
Message 31479 - Posted: 18 Jul 2017, 9:51:09 UTC

I got one sixtracktest task last night. Here: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/result.php?resultid=151408364
This failed for me and for two other hosts so far with error:

upload failure: <file_xfer_error>
  <file_name>wTest_madxCode_withCC__1__s__26.13_26.18__4_6__4__85_1_sixvf_boinc34_2_1</file_name>
  <error_code>-131 (file size too big)</error_code>
</file_xfer_error>

ID: 31479 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 843
Credit: 1,578,195
RAC: 0
Message 31486 - Posted: 18 Jul 2017, 16:39:20 UTC - in response to Message 31479.  

Seems to be a problem probably with the result template/xml.
The result probably is too big but I don't see any "nbytes"...
I'll leave this to my colleagues. Eric.

I got one sixtracktest task last night. Here: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/result.php?resultid=151408364
This failed for me and for two other hosts so far with error:

upload failure: <file_xfer_error>
  <file_name>wTest_madxCode_withCC__1__s__26.13_26.18__4_6__4__85_1_sixvf_boinc34_2_1</file_name>
  <error_code>-131 (file size too big)</error_code>
</file_xfer_error>

ID: 31486 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Toby Broom
Volunteer moderator

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 08
Posts: 476
Credit: 157,462,303
RAC: 402,527
Message 31488 - Posted: 18 Jul 2017, 16:45:14 UTC
Last modified: 18 Jul 2017, 16:45:59 UTC

I see the same results on my computers, my mac even got one :)

9.Mac

118 LHC@home 07/18/17 05:09:03 Output file wTest_madxCode_withCC__1__s__26.13_26.18__4_6__4__85_1_sixvf_boinc34_3_1 for task wTest_madxCode_withCC__1__s__26.13_26.18__4_6__4__85_1_sixvf_boinc34_3 exceeds size limit.
119 LHC@home 07/18/17 05:09:03 File size: 20866468.000000 bytes. Limit: 20000000.000000 bytes
ID: 31488 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Alessio Mereghetti
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 29 Feb 16
Posts: 89
Credit: 1,149,162
RAC: 128
Message 31538 - Posted: 21 Jul 2017, 13:42:45 UTC - in response to Message 31488.  

Thanks a lot, Toby, Eric, and Harri, for the very valuable feedback! It was essential to spot the actual problem!
Indeed, it is an issue of maximum size of the result file as described in the template file of the sixtrack output.

One of the new features of the new exes (sixtracktest) is the possibility to produce further output than the one strictly required for evaluating the dynamic aperture - eg for frequency map analysis, bunch evolution during tracking, ... This is collected in a second output file, of variable size. Initially it was set to 20MB, but the test I was submitting required slightly more - I have increased it by a factor 10.

First results have been already produced and successfully uploaded, eg:
https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome_ops/db_action.php?table=workunit&id=73333800
Many many thanks to all you!
ID: 31538 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Harri Liljeroos
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Sep 04
Posts: 309
Credit: 11,649,944
RAC: 19,221
Message 31607 - Posted: 24 Jul 2017, 21:11:40 UTC

Some validated sixtracktest tasks finally, here's one: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/result.php?resultid=153267772
Very short though, around 20...25 seconds each.
ID: 31607 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 843
Credit: 1,578,195
RAC: 0
Message 31615 - Posted: 25 Jul 2017, 4:15:13 UTC - in response to Message 31607.  

That sounds encouraging. I'll be submitting myself once I have figured
out how to do it. I think we try and keep tests short to avoid wasting the
volunteer CPU, we are testing some SixTrack or other system functionality.
However, I want to try going for 10 million turns, a first, by running a series
of 100,000 turn tasks, and I want to see the growth in the Checkpoint/Restart
file size and the network activity. Eric.

Some validated sixtracktest tasks finally, here's one: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/result.php?resultid=153267772
Very short though, around 20...25 seconds each.

ID: 31615 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Alessio Mereghetti
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 29 Feb 16
Posts: 89
Credit: 1,149,162
RAC: 128
Message 31619 - Posted: 25 Jul 2017, 10:48:35 UTC - in response to Message 31615.  

Dear all,

just to let you know that finally all tests performed so far on sixtracktest are successful! I think we will see soon new exes being released for production!

The tests were pretty small, to check that all new features were working properly, and the necessary adjustments to BOINC settings (eg template output) were applied. At the same time, it was possible to better track problems and have a negligible impact on the credit granted to you, in case of failures at different stages of processing.

Thanks again to all you who contributed with these tests!
Alessio, for the SixTrack team.
ID: 31619 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Toby Broom
Volunteer moderator

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 08
Posts: 476
Credit: 157,462,303
RAC: 402,527
Message 31638 - Posted: 26 Jul 2017, 18:16:31 UTC

Great news
ID: 31638 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Harri Liljeroos
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Sep 04
Posts: 309
Credit: 11,649,944
RAC: 19,221
Message 31789 - Posted: 2 Aug 2017, 18:05:41 UTC

I just received 15 new sixtracktest tasks, they went back in the queue behind 17 sixtrack tasks. Let's see how they perform.
ID: 31789 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 843
Credit: 1,578,195
RAC: 0
Message 31790 - Posted: 2 Aug 2017, 18:20:37 UTC - in response to Message 31789.  

Great; I can now run on sixtracktest thanks to my colleague Alessio.
There will be many more to come as I need statistics and error analysis
for my upcoming paper. Just meed to check results first. Eric.

I just received 15 new sixtracktest tasks, they went back in the queue behind 17 sixtrack tasks. Let's see how they perform.

ID: 31790 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Harri Liljeroos
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Sep 04
Posts: 309
Credit: 11,649,944
RAC: 19,221
Message 31798 - Posted: 3 Aug 2017, 21:27:02 UTC - in response to Message 31790.  

Great; I can now run on sixtracktest thanks to my colleague Alessio.
There will be many more to come as I need statistics and error analysis
for my upcoming paper. Just meed to check results first. Eric.

I just received 15 new sixtracktest tasks, they went back in the queue behind 17 sixtrack tasks. Let's see how they perform.


First tasks have finished OK, took about 40 minutes each. Waiting for the quorum partner to finish their bit.
ID: 31798 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
gyllic

Send message
Joined: 9 Dec 14
Posts: 185
Credit: 1,938,300
RAC: 3,279
Message 31861 - Posted: 7 Aug 2017, 7:17:16 UTC
Last modified: 7 Aug 2017, 7:18:26 UTC

had about 60 sixtracktest, all still waiting for validation (wingman), but no errors were reported (on windows and linux).

what i recognized is that compared to the "production sixtrack tasks" they need roughly 5-8 times more ram per task (also on windows and linux).
ID: 31861 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 843
Credit: 1,578,195
RAC: 0
Message 31862 - Posted: 7 Aug 2017, 7:53:06 UTC - in response to Message 31861.  

Very good; your comment on memory is correct. My colleagues are
trying to use a "big" version to limit the total number of versions.
I am hoping that the working set size will be as before and that there will not be
excessive paging. Eric.

had about 60 sixtracktest, all still waiting for validation (wingman), but no errors were reported (on windows and linux).

what i recognized is that compared to the "production sixtrack tasks" they need roughly 5-8 times more ram per task (also on windows and linux).

ID: 31862 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Crystal Pellet
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 14 Jan 10
Posts: 553
Credit: 3,765,218
RAC: 5,644
Message 31879 - Posted: 7 Aug 2017, 17:48:20 UTC

I got several sixtracktest tasks on different systems: Linux64, Win7 64bit, Win10 32bit.
All tasks are running fine and meanwhile some are reported back.
On Windows I do not see the 10-60 minutes low cpu-usage init phase anymore.

One issue: On one Win7 64bit machine I first got a bunch that should run the 32 bit application. I don't know if that could be a performance problem.
The last 4 tasks I got were assigned with the 64bit application.
ID: 31879 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
computezrmle

Send message
Joined: 15 Jun 08
Posts: 830
Credit: 13,656,957
RAC: 109,652
Message 31880 - Posted: 7 Aug 2017, 18:03:53 UTC
Last modified: 7 Aug 2017, 18:09:36 UTC

I got some sixtracktest WUs on both of my hosts.

i7-2600:
lin64 version (as expected)

i7-3770K:
lin32 version (should have been lin64)

Both BOINC clients are configured to accept alternative platforms so that may be the reason for the mismatch.

<edit>
Oops:
The lin64 walltimes on the i7-2600 are very short.
https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/results.php?hostid=10486393&offset=0&show_names=0&state=0&appid=10
This may be investigated.
</edit>
ID: 31880 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 843
Credit: 1,578,195
RAC: 0
Message 31884 - Posted: 7 Aug 2017, 21:09:24 UTC - in response to Message 31879.  

Thanks a lot; I was about to ask if the "real time" problem
had gone away on Windows 10! Great news. Eric.
(More news tomorrow.)

I got several sixtracktest tasks on different systems: Linux64, Win7 64bit, Win10 32bit.
All tasks are running fine and meanwhile some are reported back.
On Windows I do not see the 10-60 minutes low cpu-usage init phase anymore.

One issue: On one Win7 64bit machine I first got a bunch that should run the 32 bit application. I don't know if that could be a performance problem.
The last 4 tasks I got were assigned with the 64bit application.

ID: 31884 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Sergey Kovalchuk

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 4
Credit: 166,275
RAC: 0
Message 31889 - Posted: 8 Aug 2017, 6:31:57 UTC

https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/results.php?hostid=10480067&offset=0&show_names=0&state=6&appid=
https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/results.php?hostid=10317541&offset=0&show_names=0&state=6&appid=10

sixtracktest v46.15 (sse2)
windows_x86_64
At line 2515 of file C:/msys64/home/kyrsjo/code/SixTrack/SixTrack/SixTrack_cmakesix_API_BIGNBLZ_BOINC_BUILD_TESTING_CR_LIBARCHIVE_defaultcompiler_defaultbuildtype/sixve.f
Fortran runtime error: Bad integer for item 1 in list input


sixtracktest v46.15 (sse2)
windows_intelx86
At line 2515 of file C:/msys64/home/kyrsjo/code/SixTrack-32bit/SixTrack/SixTrack_CMAKE_SHORTNAME/sixve.f
Fortran runtime error: Bad integer for item 1 in list input
ID: 31889 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Alessio Mereghetti
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 29 Feb 16
Posts: 89
Credit: 1,149,162
RAC: 128
Message 31891 - Posted: 8 Aug 2017, 7:15:39 UTC - in response to Message 31889.  

Hello Sergey,

thanks for reporting these errors. We will investigate the issue (suspect a problem of input).

As volunteer, I got 16 sixtracktest tasks, on both windows and linux - all ok for the moment:
https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/results.php?userid=384669&offset=0&show_names=0&state=0&appid=10

For the larger memory footprint, we are extending the capabilities of SixTrack also in view of way larger machines than the LHC, e.g. the Future Circular Collider (FCC), and we have quite some colleagues waiting to use the new version of the code, with a lot of brand new tasks for the next years. Hence, the idea to simplify things with only one version of the exe.
ID: 31891 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next

Message boards : Sixtrack Application : SIXTRACKTEST


©2018 CERN