Immortalin / peptide-shaker

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/peptide-shaker
1 stars 0 forks source link

Memory issues #1

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
When trying to start the jar file, the program crashes with an error warning.  
By setting the memory limit below 1100M, program will start.  however, trying 
to load and x!tandem results in the progess bar being stuck at 25% and in an 
eventual crash of the software.

Does the jar require 64 bit java?  I only have the 32 bit java installed.

THe x!tandem results were from the test mgf file included with x!tandem so 
memory should not be a problem.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
0.9 on windows server 2008 R2 (64 bit) with 32 GB of memory and 4 cpus (32 
cores total)

Please provide any additional information below.
trying to use your software to view the results of x!tandem searches

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mreed1...@gmail.com on 13 Jul 2011 at 5:50

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Thank you for reporting your problem starting PeptideShaker.

First, if the startup failes a file called PeptideShaker.log should have been 
created. You'll find this file in the PeptideShaker/conf folder. The content of 
this file should tell us why the tool failed to start. If it's indeed a 
standard memory issue (which I find rather strange given your setup) or 
something else. So could you provide the content of this file?

PeptideShaker does not require 64 bit Java, but if you want to run it on bigger 
files you'll need the 64 bit version in order to use more than 2GB of memory.

Could you upload the files you are trying to open in PeptideShaker? I'll then 
verify if I'm able to make them work on our side.

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 13 Jul 2011 at 9:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Regarding the files you're trying to open in PeptideShaker: 

I assume that the mgf file is the test_spectra.mgf file found in the 
X!Tandem bin folder? 

And that the result file is the one created running 'tandem input.xml' 
with the default settings? 

In that case, which FASTA file do you use? As the FASTA files provided in 
the X!Tandem download are not true FASTA files but rather fasta.pro files 
and can not be used as PeptideShaker input.

BTW, if you want to make sure that your X!Tandem output is compatible with 
PeptideShaker I'd recommend using SearchGUI (http://searchgui.googlecode.com)
to set up the search.

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 13 Jul 2011 at 10:03

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I actually tried using on mgf file created from a 5500 Qtrap run on a
6 protein digest from Dionex using a derived uniprot database in
straight fasta format through your search gui.  When I did get
peptide-shaker to load and pointed to this file, the program still
hung.  I looked in task manager and a java process was slowly
consumming memmory all the way to ~1.6GB and just sitting there.  I
let it go for about 45 minutes with no result.  In the process, my
computer slowed to a crawl eventhough task manager showed little to no
cpu activity.  does peptide-shaker try to load the fasta file into
memory?  the xtandem result file is only 20 mb so I was not sure why
the java was loading so much memory.  I want to try again tomorrow
using a different mgf and just the uniprot reviewed fasta file and
also on a different computer running just win XP (32 bit).

Original comment by mreed1...@gmail.com on 13 Jul 2011 at 11:53

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Sounds like you are having some weird memory issues. How big is your FASTA file?

Will be interesting to see if it works better for you on standard win xp.

In the meantime, I found and fixed some minor issues related to loading the 
xtandem sample mgf file. And I am now able to load the default search result 
from xtandem using this files and all of UniProt as the FASTA file without 
any issues.

I'll release a new verion with these minor bug fixes shortly.

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2011 at 12:08

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
PeptideShaker version 0.9.1 has just been released. 

Should fix some of the issues related to the use if the xtandem example file.

Does not solve the strange memory issues though...

See http://code.google.com/p/peptide-shaker/wiki/ReleaseNotes for the list of 
changes.

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2011 at 12:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
The fasta file was a concatenated (real + decoy) file of about 900 MB.

Original comment by mreed1...@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2011 at 11:06

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Loading the fasta file might be the issue then. If you consider that human 
uniprot sequences only need 26MB (target+decoy) it seems that you are searching 
in a very very wide space. For the sake of searching time, search engine 
compatibility and loaded memory I would really suggest to limit your fasta file 
to the species needed.
I would thus suggest to use a simpler database as a first try (the desired 
species complement of uniprot for instance). Then eventually, if you really 
need a larger database we will adapt the code not to run into memory issues.
Finally, in order to identify decoy sequences properly we need the accessions 
to contain "REVERSED". Please make sure that your fasta file abides by this 
simple rule. This can be obtained by processing your target database using 
searchGUI or dbtoolkit.

Original comment by mvau...@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2011 at 12:04

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Okay.  I do try to target my databases to species needed but some of
samples have multiple species involved and underrepresented species so
I have to use for example unreviewed uniprot/trembl entries making for
some large fasta files.  I use Proteinscape as my main data repository
and it requires the rnd prefix in order to recognize decoy sequences
so that is what i normally use.  I sometimes even end up using NCBInr
because we don't know exactly is in the sample and it is a fishing
expedition and I just accept that I can't trust some of the low
scoring id's.  Sorry, I work in a core facility so we see a wide
variety of samples.

On the Server 2008 R2 (64bit) system, I am attaching a screenshot of
the error message. and the log file contains the following:

<ERROR>

Could not create the Java virtual machine.

The command line executed:
C:\Program Files (x86)\Java\jre6\bin\java -Xms128M  -Xmx1600M  -cp
"D:\PeptideShaker-0.9\PeptideShaker-0.9\PeptideShaker-0.9.jar"
eu.isas.peptideshaker.gui.PeptideShakerGUI

</ERROR>

<ERROR>

Could not create the Java virtual machine.

The command line executed:
C:\Program Files (x86)\Java\jre6\bin\java -Xms128M  -Xmx1600M  -cp
"D:\PeptideShaker-0.9\PeptideShaker-0.9\PeptideShaker-0.9.jar"
eu.isas.peptideshaker.gui.PeptideShakerGUI

</ERROR>

If I set -Xmx to 1500M or below, it runs fine.

Original comment by mreed1...@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2011 at 12:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Ok, so we have two related issues here: 1) not being able to set the memory 
limit 
high enough (even though there's plenty of memory) and 2) the huge FASTA files.

The use if FASTA files this big will require some changes to how we handle 
these 
files, as the files we used have never been of this size. We'll see what we can 
come up with and get back to you on that. Should be possible to fix.

As for the setting of the upper memory limit when starting the tool, this seems 
to be a general issue with your Java installation and not with PeptideShaker 
itself. If you have 32 GB of memory available you should be able to use more 
than 1500 MB of them...

I'd recommend trying to install the 64 bit Java version and see if that helps. 
After installing it try running the command above from the command line, but 
make sure that you are referring to the new Java 64 bit version, as Windows 
sometimes gets confused when both 32 and 64 bit Java is installed. See 
http://code.google.com/p/peptide-shaker/#Troubleshooting (Memory Issues II - 
Advanced).

It might also be that your machine has an upper limit for how much virtual 
memory Java can use. This can be changed though. See:
http://code.google.com/p/pride-converter/#Troubleshooting (Memory Issues IV) 
for help.

Let us know if any if this helps at all.

BTW, I cannot find the screenshot of the error message you mention...

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2011 at 9:18

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
As mentioned we are encountering several issues which are not necessarily 
Peptide-Shaker issue.
1) It is not possible to create a JVM with more than 1600MB of memory on a 32GB 
RAM machine: you should check your java installation.
2) The FASTA file is huge: on our side we will make it possible to work with 
such files in the following releases. On your side, we would suggest to 
consider reducing the search space: (1) MS/MS searches with such databases take 
ages, (2) the probability to find degenerated peptides will increase with the 
database size and the protein inference will quickly become extremely complex, 
(3) when analyzing a sample you will find isoforms of your proteins across all 
species: you will then need to know what kind of sample it was anyway. In 
conclusion, we will do our best but still strongly recommend to make realistic 
searches; and always start simple :)
3) the decoy tag is not compatible with your databases: I will correct that 
very soon. However we proofed the performance of Peptide-Shaker only with 
concatenated forward reversed sequences: if you use another kind of database it 
is at your own risks!

Original comment by mvau...@gmail.com on 15 Jul 2011 at 9:26

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 9 Oct 2011 at 7:29

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
PeptideShaker v0.10.0 has just been released. Please let us know if this solves 
your issues or not.

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:29

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by harald.b...@gmail.com on 19 Oct 2011 at 3:44