LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for VUB-RECOIL Archives


VUB-RECOIL Archives

VUB-RECOIL Archives


VUB-RECOIL@LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

VUB-RECOIL Home

VUB-RECOIL Home

VUB-RECOIL  February 2006

VUB-RECOIL February 2006

Subject:

Re: help with ntuple production

From:

Roberto Sacco <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

14 Feb 2006 19:43:06 -0800Tue, 14 Feb 2006 19:43:06 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (66 lines)

Hi Sheila,

I had a quick look at your log files, and noticed again that you are 
running over >130000 events per job. I believe there are just too many 
memory leaks and VubRecoilUserApp can't handle such a number of events...
This is the end of your log/SP-1235-BSemiExcl-R18b-34.log:

Exited with exit code 134.

Resource usage summary:

     CPU time   :   6107.12 sec.
     Max Memory :      1760 MB
     Max Swap   :      2945 MB

Those number are definitively too large.

My suggestion is to reduce the number of events per job to ~70000.

Cheers,

Roberto

> Hello everyone,
> 
> I am still having trouble making ntuples.
> 
> The details are about the same as before:
> 
> Test release: ~penguin/vubrecoil/vub30
> Edits: VubXlnu.cc edited to keep events even if they 
> don't have a best lepton
> 
> Record of which jobs failed/succeeded: workdir/ck3.txt
> CPU times for failed jobs: workdir/cputimes.txt
> 
> Error message for failed jobs is always something 
> very similar to:
> 
> /nfs/farm/lsb_spool/1139883549.791383: line 8:  1222 Aborted
> VubRecoilUserApp VubXlnu.tcl SP-1235-BSemiExcl-R18b-2 MC
> 
> I ran started a gdb session for one of the jobs.  It took a few hours
> before it finally crashed.  You can read what happened in:
> 
> ~penguin/vubrecoi/vub30/workdir/gdb.txt
> 
> What confuses me is that a lot of the jobs ran OK.  
> If it was a problem with the code, I would have thought 
> all the jobs would crash.  I'm convinced it's not CPU time 
> (see workdir/cputimes.txt).
> 
> I am not sure if it could be one of those "memory leaks" 
> because I don't understand them very well.  I will look 
> into that.  But in the meantime, any help/suggestions 
> are welcome.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> sheila
> 
> 



Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2010
December 2009
August 2009
January 2009
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager

Privacy Notice, Security Notice and Terms of Use