![]() |
|
|
#12 |
|
Jan 2006
deep in a while-loop
10100100102 Posts |
stats are up
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
"Lennart"
Jun 2007
25×5×7 Posts |
Last fiddled with by Lennart on 2010-06-06 at 01:04 |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
102538 Posts |
Quote:
Code:
// Size limit in bytes for the prpclient.log file. // 0 - no limit // -1 - no log loglimit=0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3·2,083 Posts |
Quote:
I must say, that problem is extremely weird and I don't have much of an idea what could have caused it. prpserver.log having gotten too large is a possible cause, but I don't really see why the size of the file matters when all the server's doing is blindly appending to it. I currently have the logging set to debuglevel=1, which outputs an enormous amount of information and can make prpserver.log balloon rather quickly, especially under heavy load as it is now. (As we saw here, that log file which I hadn't touched for a few weeks was already half a gigabyte.) However, I have been bitten way too many times by rare bugs in the server that showed up once and were nearly impossible to trace because I wasn't logging in enough detail; then the bugs conveniently didn't show up for a good long time after that. Hence, I have been keeping all the servers on maximum logging, since there's plenty of disk space on the server.The strangest thing is that the prpserver executable actually self-destructed after the segfault. I have never, ever seen that happen in all of my experience with computers. Fortunately it was easy to remedy since you could just copy the executable from another server, but still it's the craziest thing I have ever seen. I'll take a look at the tail end of the old prpserver.log either tonight or tomorrow and see if I can get anything of use to send to Mark. Unfortunately, when dealing with a segfault things often fall apart so quickly that the server doesn't even have a chance to record what happened to it in its dying words, so I may or may not have any luck with that. Usually the most helpful thing is a stack trace, but I'd have to have the server running under a debugger to catch that, which it wasn't since it was running stably besides this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
1039510 Posts |
I was thinking of something but I don't know if it is possible from a technical perspective.
I think it would be the most fair thing to do to extend the rally time on the PRPnet server by 3 hours since that is how long it was down. That would allow everyone a nearly equal amount of time for the rally. We don't have a way to keep people from running PRPnet that were on LLRnet during the PRPnet outage so that will be on the honor system. What does everyone think? Max and Dave, is it possible to make the times for the rally different for the 2 servers? Would that overly complicate things? This would make it June 4th at 7 PM GMT to June 6th at 7 PM GMT for LLRnet port 3000 and June 4th at 7 PM GMT to June 6th at 10 PM GMT for PRPnet port 9000. Gary |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3·2,083 Posts |
Quote:
Meanwhile, it looks like it's going to be a somewhat tight race between ROLP and PrimeSearchTeam. Last night I calculated that ROLP was doing about 300 pairs/hour, and PrimeSearchTeam averaging 378 pairs/hour. Yet PrimeSearchTeam (i.e. Lennart) didn't join the rally until 5 hours into it (accounting correctly for time zone differences), and didn't really get up to ideal levels until 7 hours into the rally; thus, ROLP has been ahead of the game the whole while, with PrimeSearchTeam steadily gaining. The question is...will PrimeSearchTeam catch ROLP before the end of the rally (which is only 3 hours away)?
Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2010-06-06 at 16:04 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
"Lennart"
Jun 2007
46016 Posts |
You don't need to make any changes for me. But there are more user on that server, you have to ask them
![]() Lennart |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
186916 Posts |
I think we should go for it. As I recall, we did this once or twice before in the past when we had servers go down; thus, the precedent would be to extend the rally on that server to account for the downtime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31×67 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3·2,083 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Mar 2006
Germany
23×3×112 Posts |
@all participants using the new LLRnet script:
If you stop crunching the 5th Drive here, please stop the script after the rally is over and start it with calling 'do -c' to cancel all reserved pairs of that client. This won't stay those pairs 2 days in the server-joblist before they sent to a client again! Thanks. |
|
|
|
![]() |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| LLRnet/PRPnet rally April 4th-11th | mdettweiler | No Prime Left Behind | 55 | 2011-04-25 09:35 |
| LLRnet/PRPnet rally January 3rd-10th | mdettweiler | No Prime Left Behind | 48 | 2011-01-12 10:14 |
| LLRnet/PRPnet rally Oct. 27th-Nov. 3rd | mdettweiler | No Prime Left Behind | 33 | 2010-12-24 19:16 |
| LLRnet/PRPnet rally August 12th-19th | mdettweiler | No Prime Left Behind | 88 | 2010-09-09 12:50 |
| LLRnet server rally 400<k<1001 June 20-22 | mdettweiler | No Prime Left Behind | 67 | 2008-06-23 15:32 |