For toronto scinet infrastructure and platform teams
Toronto SciNet: Trillium migration or obsolete Mist environment?
Connect the first useful exception with the relevant runtime evidence. Was a legacy Mist environment carried into Trillium?
Free 30-day Team evaluation. No card or automatic subscription. Work email verification required.
Replay a resolved Toronto SciNet 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. Was a legacy Mist environment carried into Trillium? Only assign a rank, device or safe recovery state when the submitted evidence establishes it.
Was a legacy Mist environment carried into Trillium?
Evidence to compare: Target cluster, executable architecture and software environment provenance.
A migrated binary can fail before GPU work begins. Verify the destination architecture and current guide instead of applying instructions for the retired Mist cluster.
Does the executable match the allocated architecture?
Evidence to compare: Actual CPU and GPU architecture, image identity and the first loader error.
A binary built for another architecture can fail before useful computation. Confirm the allocated hardware and software combination before recommending changes to the device.
Is the selected recovery artifact complete and compatible?
Evidence to compare: Saved-artifact identity, writer completion and proposed resume configuration.
Automatic retry cannot establish checkpoint integrity. Verify the selected saved state independently and keep resume blocked if completion or compatibility remains uncertain.
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
