Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Strange rejection error

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Halifax, NS - Canada
    Posts
    17

    Strange rejection error

    I had a proth test rejected, and then re-accepted. I'll post from my sb.log:

    (snip)
    [Tue Apr 15 15:47:17 2003] n.high = 271836 . 135 blocks left in test
    [Tue Apr 15 16:01:56 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 15 16:01:56 2003] login successful
    [Tue Apr 15 16:01:56 2003] n.high = 294489 . 134 blocks left in test
    [Tue Apr 15 16:14:39 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 15 16:14:40 2003] login successful
    [Tue Apr 15 16:15:00 2003] server had no record of proth test
    [Tue Apr 15 16:15:00 2003] connecting to server
    [Tue Apr 15 16:15:01 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 15 16:15:23 2003] couldn't report to server [report denied], retry in 120 secs [error: -3]
    [Tue Apr 15 16:17:23 2003] connecting to server
    [Tue Apr 15 16:17:26 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 15 16:17:46 2003] couldn't report to server [report denied], retry in 120 secs [error: -3]
    (snip - over and hour worth of this error -3)

    Then I restart my client
    [Tue Apr 15 17:28:15 2003] block processing paused
    [Tue Apr 15 17:28:26 2003] got k and n from cache
    [Tue Apr 15 17:28:26 2003] restarting proth test from cache (k=55459, n=3321994) [9.3%]
    [Tue Apr 15 17:32:23 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 15 17:32:23 2003] login successful

    And it happily continues!

    As you can see from the timestamps the 10-day-limit is not an issue here.

    Anyone know what can be the cause of this?

    Thanks,
    Marco

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Halifax, NS - Canada
    Posts
    17
    It seems my happiness was a bit premature:

    [Wed Apr 16 19:08:41 2003] n.high = 3058155 . 12 blocks left in test
    [Wed Apr 16 19:21:12 2003] temporarily unable to connect -- block added to submit queue
    [Wed Apr 16 19:33:41 2003] logging into server
    [Wed Apr 16 19:33:41 2003] login successful
    [Wed Apr 16 19:34:01 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned
    [Wed Apr 16 19:34:01 2003] connecting to server
    [Wed Apr 16 19:34:10 2003] logging into server
    [Wed Apr 16 19:34:10 2003] requesting a block


    What's going on here? Too many users? Or did someone "fake"
    this proth test (k=55459, n=3321994)?

    Thanks,
    Marco

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    61
    I have seen several other posts regarding this, but no answer (only guesses). This leave the issue open for speculation. I think this is a bug that cause tests to wrongfully be abandoned. At least 25% of my clients are working on just above 10 days old proth tests, tests that have been abandoned. I relate those things together. If this is true we waste a lot of CPU power in this project. I wish we could get an "official" explaination.

    I have also experienced this problem along with other connection type problems that also reduced my production in this project. However, one month ago I checked off the "transmit intermediate blocks" in the config page and since I have not had any problem of any kind.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    479
    When others have commented on this problem, I had always assumed that maybe this was due to a factor in the sieving effort being submitted for the candidate under test.

    I have just checked the sieving results for about 12 hours ago, and there is no factor for the candidate quoted above (k=55459, n=3321994).

    Therefore this must be due to either someone else completing a PRP test of the same candidate (any chance the 10 day rule could have been applied?) or some strange bug.

    Although I now remember a conversation with Louie where he said that a second reported PRP result for a test would be retained as a bonus double check. So I guess looks more like some strange bug!

  5. #5
    I'll explain the 10 day rule again. It does not say, "you must complete a test within 10 days" It says, "You must have some kind of progress, by contacting the server with updated info on the test, at least once every 10 days during the run of the test.

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Halifax, NS - Canada
    Posts
    17
    Hi all,

    the 10 day rule is not applicable in this case;
    [Tue Apr 15 13:11:01 2003] got proth test from server (k=55459, n=3321994)

    The first sign of trouble was:
    [Tue Apr 15 16:15:00 2003] server had no record of proth test

    Which is only about 3 hours later. The client kept retrying to submit the block (therefore no work but only CPU time was lost):
    [Tue Apr 15 16:15:23 2003] couldn't report to server [report denied], retry in 120 secs [error: -3]
    etc. etc.

    When I became aware of this problem I tried pausing and restarting the client, which seemed to satisfy the server that it was indeed a legit proth test:
    [Tue Apr 15 17:28:26 2003] got k and n from cache
    [Tue Apr 15 17:28:26 2003] restarting proth test from cache (k=55459, n=3321994) [9.3%]
    [Tue Apr 15 17:32:23 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 15 17:32:23 2003] login successful
    [Tue Apr 15 17:32:24 2003] n.high = 317142 . 133 blocks left in test

    But near the end of the test:
    [Wed Apr 16 19:08:41 2003] n.high = 3058155 . 12 blocks left in test
    [Wed Apr 16 19:21:12 2003] temporarily unable to connect -- block added to submit queue
    [Wed Apr 16 19:33:41 2003] logging into server
    [Wed Apr 16 19:33:41 2003] login successful
    [Wed Apr 16 19:34:01 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned

    This is almost the same error as before, except in this case it had ", test abandoned" postpended (discarding the test in progress).

    Everything happened within 48 hours of first receiving the test from the server.

    - Marco

    If this problem re-occurs, I'll try to disable sending intermediate results (blocks).

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    61
    Originally posted by Jwb52z
    I'll explain the 10 day rule again.
    Thanks for reminding us again. I think most of the forumists know it by now though.

    I was talking about abandoned tests that were reissued 10 days after they were abandoned. Some claim they can complete a test within 12 hours. I have a 3+ year old Athlon that can do them in 4 days. I therefore assume that most tests are done within 5 days. If they are abandoned it will have to be within a few days after they are issued the first time. My clients receive a lot of tests that seem to have been abandoned by somebody else. They are 10 + a few days old. (I look in my logs, but do not have an exact record of how old they are.) I always have at least one of these running, 25% (A few days ago I had 3 running, 75%). It is sad if these are from people quitting, it is not much better if we redo work because somebody gets half way and run into a problem that cause work to be lost.

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Halifax, NS - Canada
    Posts
    17
    Another thing i just noticed on my stats page and may help tracking the bug down:

    Currently pending tests: 2 tests


    The 'rejected' proth test must somehow still be assigned to me, because I have only one client running.

    - Marco

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Halifax, NS - Canada
    Posts
    17
    And again!

    [Tue Apr 22 03:23:38 2003] requesting a block
    [Tue Apr 22 03:23:42 2003] got proth test from server (k=33661, n=3514560)
    [Tue Apr 22 03:34:49 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 03:34:49 2003] login successful
    [Tue Apr 22 03:34:51 2003] n.high = 20239 . 173 blocks left in test

    So far so good.... but 15 *hours* of heavy crunching later...

    [Tue Apr 22 18:33:06 2003] n.high = 1356013 . 107 blocks left in test
    [Tue Apr 22 18:44:54 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 18:44:57 2003] login successful
    [Tue Apr 22 18:45:17 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned
    [Tue Apr 22 18:45:17 2003] connecting to server
    [Tue Apr 22 18:45:27 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 18:45:28 2003] requesting a block
    [Tue Apr 22 18:45:33 2003] got proth test from server (k=67607, n=3519491)

    Woot!

    I'd like to submit a bug report with the creators concerning this matter but I can't find a report form on the project site. I'm not able to tell whether the client is at fault (submitting wrong/corrupted data) or the server (incorrectly declining data, timeout on the query?).

    "Currently pending tests: 3 tests": somehow the tests are there.


    - Marco

  10. #10
    You *may* be able to force it to take up the previous test by stopping the client, adjusting the cache (to k=33661,n=3514560) and then restarting the client. The only question is whether or not the zxxxxxx file is still around (sometimes the client deletes them, sometimes not). If the server rejects it again, then that block probably really has been abandoned by the server (for whatever reason...)

    The main advantage of this would be to not lose your 15 hours of crunch time...Assuming this works, my recommendation would be to wait until it finishes and acquires a new test, then stop it quickly and do the same thing again to put it back on your current (k=67607, n=3519491) test. When *that* finishes, just let it fly...the server will still think you've got an extra test, but it won't be one that you've spent any crunch time on - just let that one expire.

    If you're using the Windows client, I can give you more details on how to do this.

  11. #11
    Sieve it, baby!
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Potsdam, Germany
    Posts
    959
    AFAIK the cache files gets deleted once the "server had no record of proth test, test abandoned" message occurs.

    I just looked at the sieve results - there was no factor for 3514560 yet. Maybe this changes with tomorrow's update. We'll see...

  12. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Halifax, NS - Canada
    Posts
    17
    Unfortunately, the z(n) file was deleted. I'm not too worried about the 15 hours, I am worried that lately this is happening a little too often for my taste.

    For now I have disabled transmitting intermediate blocks. The server needs be congenial only once per test instead for each and every intermediate block (and the test result) which should increase my client's chances of success.

    If that doesn't work, maybe i'll just need to look into building a simple script that saves the relevant registry keys and the z(n) file every hour.

    - Marco

    PS in Stats the tests are still assigned to me, so I suspect the dropped tests will be re-assigned in 10 days. However, I'd still be grateful if this matter could be investigated to insure the integrity of the results database (i.e. rejection was not because of 'fake' results being uploaded by a rogue client).

  13. #13
    Some time ago, I thought about doing something similar in the service handler since it's monitoring the clients already...the problem I had was what to do with these partially finished blocks once I had them! I could certainly (attempt to) fire up another client to finish it off, but if/when that finishes, you always get another test assigned to you. If there were a convenient way to report a block in without getting another one, I could easily do a workaround for this irritant.

    I'm reminded of an old (and I do mean *old*) computer science adage - "trapping errors is like trapping bobcats - the problem is what to do with them once you've got them"

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Haverhill, MA
    Posts
    76
    i now have 17 tests assigned to me even tho i only have 4 machines testing my windows xp machine keeps getting new numbers

    [Tue Apr 15 14:24:09 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned
    [Wed Apr 16 14:03:12 2003] logging into server
    [Wed Apr 16 14:03:12 2003] login unsuccessful -- check your username
    [Wed Apr 16 14:32:42 2003] logging into server
    [Wed Apr 16 14:32:43 2003] login successful
    [Thu Apr 17 07:47:14 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned
    [Thu Apr 17 17:47:52 2003] logging into server
    [Thu Apr 17 17:48:15 2003] login unsuccessful -- check your username
    [Thu Apr 17 18:16:34 2003] logging into server
    [Thu Apr 17 18:16:41 2003] login successful
    [Fri Apr 18 16:24:15 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned
    [Fri Apr 18 17:42:17 2003] server had no record of proth test
    [Mon Apr 21 16:41:06 2003] logging into server
    [Mon Apr 21 16:41:06 2003] login unsuccessful -- check your username
    [Mon Apr 21 17:11:23 2003] logging into server
    [Mon Apr 21 17:11:25 2003] login successful
    [Mon Apr 21 18:41:57 2003] logging into server
    [Mon Apr 21 18:41:57 2003] login unsuccessful -- check your username
    [Mon Apr 21 19:11:30 2003] logging into server
    [Mon Apr 21 19:11:37 2003] login successful
    [Mon Apr 21 22:56:04 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned
    [Tue Apr 22 03:24:56 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 03:25:06 2003] login unsuccessful -- check your username
    [Tue Apr 22 03:52:54 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 03:53:06 2003] login unsuccessful -- check your username
    [Tue Apr 22 04:20:28 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 04:20:35 2003] login successful
    [Tue Apr 22 17:17:17 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 17:17:17 2003] login unsuccessful -- check your username
    [Tue Apr 22 17:45:56 2003] logging into server
    [Tue Apr 22 17:46:02 2003] login successful
    [Tue Apr 22 22:34:31 2003] server had no record of proth test, test abandoned

    this is a log of all the failure of either my user name or the proth not having a record over the last 10 days on my fastest of my 4 machines

  15. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Halifax, NS - Canada
    Posts
    17
    For what it's worth: I disabled intermediate block sending. I completed a few tests and they were all uploaded successfully. The stats look a bit off now, which seems to be the only drawback, but at least my results are getting in (which is more important, of course )

    - Marco

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    132
    Louie, could you say something about this problem?, please. I have never seen you give a reply about this problem, and I think you're the "key person" to resolve this annoying bug (computing power waste!).

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    132
    Louie?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •