ProofOfSpace farm benchmark shows Threw: offsets.size() != 1 (qfc) for one k32-c20 plot

[bladeuserpi]

Hi,

when running ProofOfSpace farm benchmark, I get such messages: Threw: offsets.size() != 1 (qfc)

That only happens with this specific plot so far, another k32-c20 plot does not show these messages. Is this a serious problem or "can happen" (as long as it happens only sporadic)?

Best Regards `` Complete output:

 1  [root@40b3d632df90 data1]#  time ./ProofOfSpace-gh20-fff731f farm -r 8 -f plot-k32-c20-2023-10-23...
 2  operation: farm
 3  [chiapos] Using 16 / 80 CPU threads
 4  [chiapos] Using 1 / 2 CUDA devices
 5  Progress: 10 / 1000
 6  Progress: 17 / 1000
 7  i: 7
 8  challenge: 0x1
 9  proof: 0x0c
10  quality: b1
11  Proof verification succeeded. k = 32
12  Progress: 29 / 1000
13  Progress: 37 / 1000
14  Progress: 44 / 1000
15  Progress: 50 / 1000
16  Progress: 57 / 1000
17  Progress: 62 / 1000
18  i: 47
19  challenge: 0xd
20  proof: 0xfa
21  quality: b1
22  Proof verification succeeded. k = 32
23  Progress: 74 / 1000
24  Progress: 84 / 1000
25  Progress: 88 / 1000
26  Progress: 98 / 1000
27  Progress: 102 / 1000
28  Progress: 112 / 1000
29  Progress: 116 / 1000
30  Progress: 121 / 1000
31  Progress: 130 / 1000
32  Progress: 138 / 1000
33  Progress: 145 / 1000
34  Progress: 147 / 1000
35  Progress: 152 / 1000
36  i: 138
37  challenge: 0x0
38  proof: 0x2f
39  quality: b11
40  Proof verification succeeded. k = 32
41  Progress: 156 / 1000
42  Progress: 165 / 1000
43  Progress: 166 / 1000
44  Progress: 173 / 1000
45  Progress: 174 / 1000
46  Progress: 186 / 1000
47  Progress: 204 / 1000
48  Progress: 216 / 1000
49  Progress: 217 / 1000
50  Progress: 229 / 1000
51  Progress: 230 / 1000
52  Progress: 244 / 1000
53  Progress: 257 / 1000
54  Progress: 266 / 1000
55  Progress: 276 / 1000
56  Progress: 291 / 1000
57  Progress: 300 / 1000
58  Progress: 304 / 1000
59  Progress: 318 / 1000
60  Progress: 326 / 1000
61  Progress: 328 / 1000
62  Progress: 337 / 1000
63  Progress: 354 / 1000
64  Progress: 365 / 1000
65  Progress: 373 / 1000
66  Progress: 382 / 1000
67  Progress: 401 / 1000
68  Progress: 412 / 1000
69  Progress: 413 / 1000
70  Threw: offsets.size() != 1 (qfc)
71  Progress: 424 / 1000
72  Progress: 426 / 1000
73  Progress: 442 / 1000
74  Progress: 456 / 1000
75  Progress: 472 / 1000
76  Progress: 485 / 1000
77  Progress: 499 / 1000
78  Progress: 502 / 1000
79  Progress: 514 / 1000
80  Progress: 521 / 1000
81  i: 505
82  challenge: 0xf
83  proof: 0x84
84  quality: b01
85  Proof verification succeeded. k = 32
86  Progress: 530 / 1000
87  Progress: 540 / 1000
88  Progress: 555 / 1000
89  Progress: 567 / 1000
90  Progress: 581 / 1000
91  Progress: 596 / 1000
92  Progress: 612 / 1000
93  Progress: 619 / 1000
94  Progress: 620 / 1000
95  Progress: 633 / 1000
96  Progress: 642 / 1000
97  Progress: 653 / 1000
98  Progress: 665 / 1000
99  Progress: 675 / 1000

100 Progress: 686 / 1000 101 Progress: 695 / 1000 102 Progress: 698 / 1000 103 Progress: 708 / 1000 104 Progress: 721 / 1000 105 Progress: 723 / 1000 106 Progress: 737 / 1000 107 Progress: 755 / 1000 108 Progress: 768 / 1000 109 Progress: 771 / 1000 110 Threw: offsets.size() != 1 (qfc) 111 Progress: 783 / 1000 112 Progress: 787 / 1000 113 Progress: 799 / 1000 114 Progress: 809 / 1000 115 i: 801 116 challenge: 0xe 117 proof: 0xe 118 quality: b1 119 Proof verification succeeded. k = 32 120 Progress: 822 / 1000 121 Progress: 833 / 1000 122 Progress: 836 / 1000 123 Progress: 845 / 1000 124 Progress: 852 / 1000 125 Progress: 856 / 1000 126 Progress: 866 / 1000 127 Progress: 873 / 1000 128 Progress: 885 / 1000 129 Progress: 889 / 1000 130 Progress: 894 / 1000 131 i: 871 132 challenge: 0xe 133 proof: 0x701 134 quality: b0 135 Proof verification succeeded. k = 32 136 Progress: 899 / 1000 137 Progress: 907 / 1000 138 Progress: 913 / 1000 139 Progress: 931 / 1000 140 Progress: 944 / 1000 141 Progress: 952 / 1000 142 i: 938 143 challenge: 0xa 144 proof: 0xd 145 quality: b11 146 Proof verification succeeded. k = 32 147 Progress: 958 / 1000 148 Progress: 971 / 1000 149 Progress: 974 / 1000 150 Progress: 982 / 1000 151 Progress: 983 / 1000 152 Progress: 997 / 1000 153 Total success: 1022 / 1000, 102.2 % 154 Total failures: 2 / 1000, 0.2 % 155 Total filtered: 1015 / 1022, 99.3151 % 156 Partial Difficulty: 100 (0.555701 % chance) 157 Max Farm Size @512: 0.426786 PiB (physical) 158 Max Farm Size @256: 0.213393 PiB (physical) 159 Max Farm Size @128: 0.106696 PiB (physical) 160 Average time to compute quality: 0.516783 sec 161 Maximum time to compute full proof: 7.215 sec 162
163 real 8m48.666s 164 user 8m42.776s 165 sys 0m3.829s ``

[madMAx43v3r]

I've seen it one time before myself, could be a minor issue, but as long as it only happens rarely I wouldn't worry about it.

[madMAx43v3r]

It's probably not an issue with this specific plot, I suspect all plots have a small chance of that happening.