Has anyone got any ideas what is going on?

2004-11-04 21:00:01 [---] Starting BOINC client version 4.13 for sparc-sun-solaris2.7
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [SETI@home] Project prefs: using separate prefs for work
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [SETI@home] Host ID is 184782
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [---] General prefs: from SETI@home (last modified 2004-09-23 10:01:12)
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [---] General prefs: using separate prefs for work
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [SETI@home] Resuming computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.0_1 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [SETI@home] Resuming computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.239_2 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [SETI@home] Resuming computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.13_0 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-04 21:00:01 [SETI@home] Resuming computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.1_1 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-05 03:50:31 [SETI@home] Computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.13 finished
2004-11-05 03:50:31 [SETI@home] Starting result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.229_2 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-05 03:50:31 [SETI@home] Started upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.13_0_0
2004-11-05 03:50:33 [SETI@home] Finished upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.13_0_0
2004-11-05 03:50:33 [SETI@home] Throughput 1692529 bytes/sec
2004-11-05 03:50:35 [SETI@home] Computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.239 finished
2004-11-05 03:50:35 [SETI@home] Starting result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.177_2 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-05 03:50:35 [SETI@home] Started upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.239_2_0
2004-11-05 03:50:37 [SETI@home] Finished upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.239_2_0
2004-11-05 03:50:37 [SETI@home] Throughput 2286370 bytes/sec
2004-11-05 03:51:24 [SETI@home] Result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.229_2 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file
2004-11-05 03:51:24 [SETI@home] If this happens repeatedly you may need to reset the project.
2004-11-05 03:51:24 [SETI@home] Restarting result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.229_2 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-05 03:54:20 [SETI@home] Computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.1 finished
2004-11-05 03:54:20 [SETI@home] Starting result 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.2_0 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-05 03:54:20 [SETI@home] Started upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.1_1_0
2004-11-05 03:54:22 [SETI@home] Finished upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.1_1_0
2004-11-05 03:54:22 [SETI@home] Throughput 2254569 bytes/sec
2004-11-05 04:01:33 [SETI@home] Computation for result 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.0 finished
2004-11-05 04:01:33 [SETI@home] Starting result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.179_2 using setiathome version 4.02
2004-11-05 04:01:33 [SETI@home] Started upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.0_1_0
2004-11-05 04:01:35 [SETI@home] Finished upload of 01mr04ab.14630.20273.54816.0_1_0
2004-11-05 04:01:35 [SETI@home] Throughput 3477712 bytes/sec
2004-11-05 04:02:35 [SETI@home] Result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.179_2 exited with zero status but no 'finished' file
2004-11-05 04:02:35 [SETI@home] If this happens repeatedly you may need to reset the project.
2004-11-05 04:02:35 [SETI@home] Restarting result 01mr04ab.14630.20225.386062.179_2 using setiathome version 4.02

---

I've seen it a few times and, on my system, subsequent processing of the work unit has picked up mid-way through and completed processing correctly. I'd chalk it up as a "don't worry about it" issue. If you do happen to see this particular work unit suffering from the error repeatedly, reset the project, but I'd give it a chance to sort itself out first.

---

> I've seen it a few times and, on my system, subsequent processing of the work
> unit has picked up mid-way through and completed processing correctly. I'd
> chalk it up as a "don't worry about it" issue. If you do happen to see this
> particular work unit suffering from the error repeatedly, reset the project,
> but I'd give it a chance to sort itself out first.
>
>
My Solaris 9 box will do this if the OS is restarted. At least that is what appears to have happened.

I had to restart the machine twice after getting the client running, and both times the same error occurred. The WU resumed processing after the error message, and completed successfully.

This error also happened when I first got the client running; but again, only once.

Seems to be a minor glitch when WU precessing is interrupted without some sort of graceful shutdown of the client. I no longer worry about the error message.

---

> Seems to be a minor glitch when WU precessing is interrupted without some sort
> of graceful shutdown of the client. I no longer worry about the error message.

Hmmmm. It could be. I'll pay closer attention to determine whether I see this. Normally, I give BOINC a 'kill' before going single-user. Hmmm ...

---

> > Seems to be a minor glitch when WU precessing is interrupted without some
> sort
> > of graceful shutdown of the client. I no longer worry about the error
> message.
>
> Hmmmm. It could be. I'll pay closer attention to determine whether I see this.
> Normally, I give BOINC a 'kill' before going single-user. Hmmm ...
>
A 'reboot' issued as root sends a kill signal to running processes as well, and this is my usual mode of restart when patching the OS, and installing software; actually any time a reboot is recommended.

_Apparently_, a kill sent to the running (BOINC or Seti) process is not a graceful shutdown, at least as far as the process is concerned... ;)

---

> _Apparently_, a kill sent to the running (BOINC or Seti) process is not a
> graceful shutdown, at least as far as the process is concerned... ;)

'kill'ing any of the science apps is definitely not graceful. 'kill'ing BOINC should be just fine. If you Ctrl-C at the command line, it's the equivalent of a kill with a SIG 2. A plain 'kill' is a similarly harmless SIG 15 -- handled the same as a SIG 2 from an app viewpoint. I don't see a difference there as long as any shutdown script gives BOINC enough time to clean up after itself before moving onward.

If a SIG2 or SIG15 aren't considered graceful, I can't imagine what would be.

---