Misfit and worktodo.add with mfaktc

[Thecmaster]

Hi. I'm using misfit to fetch work from GPU72. I have a problem where misfit puts work in worktodo.add and then it stays there. And next time misfit wants to add work or it wants to drain MISFITworktodo.txt it complains that worktodo.add have work in it already.

The thing that's bothers me is that it's not constant. Someone it works and if I move the work from .add to .txt and then delete .add it will work at least once. All way from fetch to .txt and then deleting .add.

Have anyone had the same problem or is there something I can check to make it work constant. Do I need to go through .add or is there any option to let misfit add work to .txt directly?

And if anyone can explain more in detail how it is supposed to work I might find what I have done wrong. And what is triggering the work in .add to get moved in to .txt? Is that misfit or mfaktc?
/Thecmaster

[kriesel]

Originally Posted by Thecmaster

Hi. I'm using misfit to fetch work from GPU72. I have a problem where misfit puts work in worktodo.add and then it stays there. And next time misfit wants to add work or it wants to drain MISFITworktodo.txt it complains that worktodo.add have work in it already.

The thing that's bothers me is that it's not constant. Someone it works and if I move the work from .add to .txt and then delete .add it will work at least once. All way from fetch to .txt and then deleting .add.

Have anyone had the same problem or is there something I can check to make it work constant. Do I need to go through .add or is there any option to let misfit add work to .txt directly?

And if anyone can explain more in detail how it is supposed to work I might find what I have done wrong. And what is triggering the work in .add to get moved in to .txt? Is that misfit or mfaktc?
/Thecmaster

Haven't used misfit myself, but:
mfaktc version you're using is v0.21? (0.20 or earlier doesn't check for .add file)
worktodo.add file is created in mfaktc's working directory by misfit?
Next check file permissions, and ownership and privilege of the misfit and mfaktc processes.

[Thecmaster]

Originally Posted by kriesel

Haven't used misfit myself, but:
mfaktc version you're using is v0.21? (0.20 or earlier doesn't check for .add file)
worktodo.add file is created in mfaktc's working directory by misfit?
Next check file permissions, and ownership and privilege of the misfit and mfaktc processes.

Yes. I'm using 0.21 and the .add is created in mfaktc directory. I can check privileges and ownership. Haven't done that. I can try to run everything as administrator to.

[kriesel]

Originally Posted by Thecmaster

Yes. I'm using 0.21 and the .add is created in mfaktc directory. I can check privileges and ownership. Haven't done that. I can try to run everything as administrator to.

what does mfaktc.ini say about check interval?

# How often to check for more work to add to worktodo file; 3600 second max

WorkFileAddDelay=3600

[Thecmaster]

Originally Posted by kriesel

what does mfaktc.ini say about check interval?

# How often to check for more work to add to worktodo file; 3600 second max

WorkFileAddDelay=3600

Oooh. I don't know. I have to check that. That can be something to check in to. Thinking if misfit wants to add work more often than mfaktc wants to.

I'm not home before Sunday. I'll report back when I have checked.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Thecmaster

I'm not home before Sunday. I'll report back when I have checked.

kriesel has given you good advise.

What he has described is very similar to what is known as a "race condition", or alternatively a "temporal harmonic". It could well explain why you see this issue sometimes, but not others.

[Thecmaster]

Originally Posted by chalsall

kriesel has given you good advise.

What he has described is very similar to what is known as a "race condition", or alternatively a "temporal harmonic". It could well explain why you see this issue sometimes, but not others.

Yeah. I got some solid advice from kriesel. And I'm grateful again for fast responses and all solid advise and help you give me when I can't figure it out my self.

I'll get back when I have checked and also when I got a resault. Someone else could get the same problem in the future and find this thread.

[Thecmaster]

Originally Posted by kriesel

what does mfaktc.ini say about check interval?

# How often to check for more work to add to worktodo file; 3600 second max

WorkFileAddDelay=3600

I don't have WorkFileAddDelay= in my mfaktc.ini Does that meen it are suposed to add rightaway when worktodo.add is detected?

[nomead]

Originally Posted by Thecmaster

I don't have WorkFileAddDelay= in my mfaktc.ini Does that meen it are suposed to add rightaway when worktodo.add is detected?

No. If it is not defined, the default is 600 seconds.

[kriesel]

With worktodoadddelay=3600, it looks like it checks after each class completion that is more than 3600s past the previous check.

Apr 05 11:35 | 2971  64.5% | 644.59   2d13h |   1105.11    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 11:46 | 2976  64.6% | 644.46   2d12h |   1105.33    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 11:56 | 2979  64.7% | 644.56   2d12h |   1105.15    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 12:07 | 2980  64.8% | 651.02   2d13h |   1094.18    90677    n.a.%
Date    Time | class   Pct |   time     ETA | GHz-d/day    Sieve     Wait
Apr 05 12:18 | 2991  64.9% | 666.96   2d14h |   1068.04    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 12:30 | 2992  65.0% | 667.65   2d14h |   1066.93    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 12:41 | 3000  65.1% | 667.95   2d14h |   1066.46    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 12:52 | 3004  65.2% | 668.18   2d13h |   1066.08    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 13:03 | 3007  65.3% | 669.06   2d13h |   1064.70    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 13:14 | 3012  65.4% | 669.63   2d13h |   1063.79    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 13:25 | 3015  65.5% | 673.00   2d13h |   1058.46    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 13:44 | 3019  65.6% | 1130.0   4d07h |    630.37    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 14:03 | 3024  65.7% | 1154.5   4d09h |    617.00    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 14:23 | 3027  65.8% | 1157.2   4d09h |    615.56    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 14:42 | 3031  65.9% | 1157.5   4d09h |    615.41    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 15:02 | 3036  66.0% | 1174.5   4d10h |    606.48    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 15:21 | 3039  66.1% | 1194.4   4d11h |    596.38    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 15:41 | 3040  66.3% | 1194.4   4d11h |    596.38    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 16:01 | 3052  66.4% | 1195.0   4d11h |    596.09    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 16:21 | 3055  66.5% | 1194.9   4d10h |    596.15    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 16:34 | 3060  66.6% | 739.37   2d17h |    963.44    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 17:02 | 3064  66.7% | 1716.0   6d08h |    415.12    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 17:35 | 3067  66.8% | 1973.4   7d06h |    360.97    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 18:08 | 3075  66.9% | 1973.6   7d06h |    360.93    90677    n.a.%
Date    Time | class   Pct |   time     ETA | GHz-d/day    Sieve     Wait
Apr 05 18:41 | 3084  67.0% | 1976.0   7d05h |    360.49    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 19:14 | 3091  67.1% | 1973.2   7d05h |    361.01    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 19:47 | 3096  67.2% | 1974.6   7d04h |    360.74    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 20:20 | 3099  67.3% | 1974.5   7d04h |    360.77    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 20:52 | 3111  67.4% | 1957.4   7d02h |    363.91    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found
Apr 05 21:24 | 3112  67.5% | 1936.6   6d23h |    367.82    90677    n.a.%
Apr 05 21:57 | 3115  67.6% | 1945.9   7d00h |    366.07    90677    n.a.%
checking for "worktodo.add"... not found

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Thecmaster

I don't have WorkFileAddDelay= in my mfaktc.ini Does that meen it are suposed to add rightaway when worktodo.add is detected?

Technically, undefined. You have to drill down on the code to be sure. Is it never, or the default plus some value.

Sorry for being pedantic here, but I'm currently involved in a somewhat serious debate which involves only the word "and" in some code (law).

Seriously.