Dear Kajsa,

Thanks very much for your kind help. However there's something I am not
very clear about the second point you mentioned above and I hope that you
could explain a little bit more.

Previously when I wanted to resume a PsN run I used the -directory= in the
command, and according to the PsN project homepage, this would enable a
resume of a PsN run after stop. Such a method works fine without the
-clean=3 option, but initiated a new search for covariates if I have
-clean=3 option. However, this method seems to be different from the above
mentioned.

It seems to me that the method you mentioned requires 2 steps. The first
one is to have only the included relations at the time of stop in the scm
file. Should I use the -directory= option in the command line?

Secondly, if I start a new run in a new directory, why should I use the
exactly same original input? By doing so, would be program being able to
skip the already established covariates and start from there onwards? What
if I use the unidentified relationships in the new run, and using a mod
file with relations in the scm logfile at the time of stop?

One last small question is that a few days ago, an error message saying
"psn.lst" is not created [something like this] was put forward by the
program during the middle of searching. The cov-par relation was completed
successfully before crush. Do you have any idea what might be the possible
reasons of this?

I am sorry for throw so many questions, but would highly appreciate it if
you could help me out of this. Many thanks.

Best Regards
Xinting


On 19 May 2014 15:01, Kajsa Harling <[email protected]> wrote:

>  Dear Xinting,
>
> 1. This seems like an error during the NONMEM run itself. I suggest you
> run the same control stream with parallel nmfe72/73 on its own, without
> PsN, to see if the problem persists. If the model runs fine in parallel
> without PsN then please contact me directly and I will help you diagnose
> the problem. If the errors occurs independently of PsN then I hope someone
> else can help you.
>
> 2. You do not need to rerun the 13 iterations. To resume an interrupted
> scm it is always best, regardless of clean option, to set
> [included_relations] in the scm config file to the set of relations that
> were included at the time of the interruption. To see which those relations
> are you look in the scm logfile in the top level of the scm directory. Then
> you start a new scm run in a new directory with the new scm config file and
> the *same* input control stream as in the original run (no relations added
> in the input control stream). For details and syntax of the
> [included_relations] section please see the scm userguide.
>
> Best regards,
> Kajsa
>
>
>
> On 05/17/2014 05:03 PM, Xinting Wang wrote:
>
>  Dear all,
>
>  I would very much appreciate it if you could help me solve the below
> problem.
>
>  1. During the running of PsN, I came across a problem where no
> computation takes place. After the usual conduction, during some step the
> process seemed to be stopped. Although for parallel processing the worker1
> to worker5 directory was created, nothing followed Monitoring of Search in
> the OUTPUT, psn.lst file. This condition continued for 24 hours. I am not
> sure if this is a problem coming from the code or some errors with the
> computation system. Has anybody else come across a similar issue?
>
>  2. To reduce the hard disk burden I used -clean=3 in the scm process.
> However, after the process was stopped, it was impossible to resume the
> program using the statement -directory. Is it still possible resume the
> previous task? If so, how to? Repeating 13 rounds of problem is certainly
> something nobody want to do.
>
>  Thanks a lot.
>
> --
> Xinting
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Kajsa Harling, PhD
> System Developer
> Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences
> Uppsala University
> [email protected]+46-(0)18-471 4308
> http://www.farmbio.uu.se/research/researchgroups/pharmacometrics/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>


-- 
Xinting

Reply via email to