Author |
Topic: 2009 Arimaa Challenge (Read 7810 times) |
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender: 
Posts: 882
|
 |
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #30 on: Mar 18th, 2009, 4:39am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
on Mar 17th, 2009, 3:08pm, omar wrote:I do have checks in the bot starting script to check the servers and pick the one which is not busy. I am not sure why it didn't work. I added some logging and will be testing this out in a bit.
I'll wait for the TDs decision before I mark the games as unrated.
|
|
Clearly a server side error. Unrate and discount those games.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #31 on: Mar 18th, 2009, 5:09am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 17th, 2009, 6:33pm, omar wrote:| The output of the 'ps' command was formatted a little different than what my script was expecting. |
|
Ah, that explains why it worked last year and not this year. The logic was/is correct, but the darn 'ps' command changed. I guess that sort of thing comes with the territory when you upgrade the server every year.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #32 on: Mar 18th, 2009, 9:33am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 18th, 2009, 4:39am, RonWeasley wrote:
Clearly a server side error. Unrate and discount those games. |
|
Thanks for the confirmation Ned.
I've unrated those game and thus they will not count towards computing the bot scores.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
 
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #33 on: Mar 19th, 2009, 3:23am » |
Quote Modify
|
POST at Thu Mar 19 06:35:09 2009
maxwait = 300
sid = 811417636
what = gamestate
lastchange = 28
wait = 1
RESPONSE at Thu Mar 19 06:42:32 2009
My reading of this log is that a network delay caused clueless' latest timeout against aaaa.
By the way, since it was not a problem with the server the bot was on, continuing the game from the final position is a possibility. aaaa, am I right from our conversation about the very first timeout you had, that you view a continuation as the best solution, and a restart as unfair? I just want to test whether your opinion is consistent in cases where you are both winning and losing when the clock breaks.
|
| « Last Edit: Mar 19th, 2009, 3:30am by 99of9 » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #34 on: Mar 19th, 2009, 6:05pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I don't know what to make of this:
http://gold.arimaa.com/~clueless/logs/14494.netLog
The log file shows that at 06:42:32 clueless received move 12w and had 270 seconds in reserve plus 120 seconds for the move. Clueless took 160 seconds and sent its move at 06:44:08 and immeadiately the gameserver replied that the game had timed out. The game should not have timed out. Clueless should have still had 230 seconds in reserve. Very strange, but clearly not the fault of clueless.
Ned can you let us know how we should proceed on this. Thanks.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #36 on: Mar 19th, 2009, 6:43pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Quote:| Very strange, but clearly not the fault of clueless. |
|
I agree it's not clueless' fault, but I don't think it's very strange.
on Mar 19th, 2009, 6:05pm, omar wrote:| The log file shows that at 06:42:32 clueless received move 12w and had 270 seconds in reserve plus 120 seconds for the move. |
|
This message got to cluless at 06:42:32, but it was sent earlier (as soon as aaaa moved... most likely around 06:37). This seems like a typical network problem to me.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Janzert
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #247
Gender:
Posts: 1016
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #37 on: Mar 19th, 2009, 7:20pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Yes, it looks like the connection was broken while the bot interface was waiting for the move initially.
I believe the critical two lines are this:
Code: RESPONSE at Thu Mar 19 06:42:32 2009
=== http://arimaa.com/arimaa/java/ys/ms4/v5//bot1gs.cgi ====
|
|
This shows that the interface did not receive any response from the server while waiting the first time. It then issued another request and immediately gets the response back showing that it is clueless' turn.
In that response:
Code:
shows that 5 minutes have already passed since the beginning of the turn.
Janzert
P.S. One irony in all this is that I've tried to make OpFor fairly robust to these sort of problems, but now I wonder if this isn't a mistake as it would let the server error pass unnoticed while OpFor would be shortchanged on its thinking time.
|
| « Last Edit: Mar 19th, 2009, 7:21pm by Janzert » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #38 on: Mar 20th, 2009, 3:59am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 19th, 2009, 6:05pm, omar wrote:I don't know what to make of this:
http://gold.arimaa.com/~clueless/logs/14494.netLog
The log file shows that at 06:42:32 clueless received move 12w and had 270 seconds in reserve plus 120 seconds for the move. Clueless took 160 seconds and sent its move at 06:44:08 and immeadiately the gameserver replied that the game had timed out. The game should not have timed out. Clueless should have still had 230 seconds in reserve. Very strange, but clearly not the fault of clueless.
Ned can you let us know how we should proceed on this. Thanks.
|
|
There's plenty of evidence that the server was not operating correctly for this game, so it should not be counted. Added thanks to the people collecting data about this.
It's distressing that the server is acting up on clueless's games at this point. Why now? An easy TD directive would be to say, "Fix the server." Omar, do you think this is fixable?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #39 on: Mar 20th, 2009, 4:09am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 19th, 2009, 6:43pm, 99of9 wrote:
This seems like a typical network problem to me. |
|
If we believe this, we just keep playing and hope it doesn't happen too often. Whenever the client can prove it has fulfilled all its obligations, it's the server's/network/s fault and because bot games can't be continued (right Omar?), such a game must be discarded and replayed.
In our current situation, if Omar has no obvious action on the server, the only alternative is to continue playing.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #40 on: Mar 20th, 2009, 4:24am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 20th, 2009, 4:09am, RonWeasley wrote:| because bot games can't be continued (right Omar?) |
|
One of the Clueless vs Gnobot games was continued.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #41 on: Mar 20th, 2009, 8:33am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 20th, 2009, 4:24am, 99of9 wrote:
One of the Clueless vs Gnobot games was continued. |
|
That's a good point. It's not obvious that a bot v human game be continued. If it can, I would prefer that a network interrupted game be continued at the position of interruption, with clocks set at the start of the move to allow the mover to start the search tree again as if no interruption occurred, mainly out of consideration for the bot. There may be a scheduling issue with the human, in which case the game would be discarded if the human can't finish it.
So the ruling depends on what is technically feasible. Fix the server side if possible. Continue interrupted games if possible. Discard interrupted games otherwise.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #42 on: Mar 20th, 2009, 10:40am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 19th, 2009, 6:43pm, 99of9 wrote:
I agree it's not clueless' fault, but I don't think it's very strange.
This message got to cluless at 06:42:32, but it was sent earlier (as soon as aaaa moved... most likely around 06:37). This seems like a typical network problem to me. |
|
You're right the move was sent at 37:32 and got to clueless at 42:32. That explains it.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #43 on: Mar 20th, 2009, 10:46am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 19th, 2009, 7:20pm, Janzert wrote:| P.S. One irony in all this is that I've tried to make OpFor fairly robust to these sort of problems, but now I wonder if this isn't a mistake as it would let the server error pass unnoticed while OpFor would be shortchanged on its thinking time. |
|
I would suggest having OpFor log such situations so they do not go unnoticed.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2009 Arimaa Challenge
« Reply #44 on: Mar 20th, 2009, 10:49am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 20th, 2009, 3:59am, RonWeasley wrote:
It's distressing that the server is acting up on clueless's games at this point. Why now? An easy TD directive would be to say, "Fix the server." Omar, do you think this is fixable? |
|
I'll try but problems that occur intermittently are very hard to trace down.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print