For university of houston rcdc infrastructure and platform teams
University of Houston RCDC: Carya resource request or Sabine runtime?
Connect the first useful exception with the relevant runtime evidence. Did the request match the selected Houston cluster?
Free 30-day Team evaluation. No card or automatic subscription. Work email verification required.
Replay a resolved University of Houston RCDC workflow incident
Upload your log file. Review the selected evidence and masking, then run diagnosis. Keep the original log for any follow-up questions.
Before uploading, review cloud data handling and local options.
Upload your log file. Large files are processed in your browser. Only selected evidence is submitted when you run diagnosis.
Try Denpex for 30 days. FREE.
No credit card. No automatic subscription. See whether Denpex helps with an incident you already understand.
Start your free 30-day Team evaluation
Up to 50 diagnoses a day for 30 days. Verify your work email to activate an eligible company evaluation, then replay a resolved incident and compare the evidence and next steps with your team's confirmed cause.
What a useful evaluation should establish
Compare one incident your team already resolved with the first failure, cited evidence and remaining questions. Did the request match the selected Houston cluster? Only assign a rank, device or safe recovery state when the submitted evidence establishes it.
Did the request match the selected Houston cluster?
Evidence to compare: Cluster name, CPU and GPU request and scheduler eligibility or startup result.
A recipe from a different cluster can request an unavailable combination before any worker runs. Compare the selected system before interpreting the rejection as damaged hardware.
Was the job pending or had application execution begun?
Evidence to compare: Scheduler reason, allocation start time and the first application output.
A queued request has not necessarily run model code. Separate resource eligibility and scheduling from a process that starts successfully and later crashes.
Did the container expose the expected runtime and device?
Evidence to compare: Container image revision, device visibility and first library initialization error.
Host and container environments can differ. Confirm the failing process context before interpreting a missing library or unavailable device as a hardware fault.
Use Denpex alongside your existing telemetry tools to investigate submitted incident evidence. With monitoring configured on a supported plan, detected failures can trigger alerts and an automatic diagnosis from the captured evidence.
Inside Denpex
See the evidence, not just the claim
Follow the causal chain, inspect the quoted evidence and prepare the next handoff. These actual product captures use founder-account examples and the VS Code extension, with the source identified under each image. Open a capture to inspect it at full size.
Follow the failure through the cascade
Prepare the hardware escalation
Ask for the evidence that is missing
Keep the investigation in the editor
