Problem solved without seemingly meaningless constraint

[solbangwool]

Hi Mark!

First, I totally appreciate your kind reply with details which is understandable even for beginners like me!

And I’d like to ask you bit more about this near zero input problem.
Shown at the first post, even without the redundant constraint, CVX shows the near zero warning.

MOSEK warning 710: #1 (nearly) zero elements are specified in sparse col '' (1) of matrix 'A'.
MOSEK warning 710: #1 (nearly) zero elements are specified in sparse col '' (4) of matrix 'A'.
MOSEK warning 710: #1 (nearly) zero elements are specified in sparse col '' (6) of matrix 'A'.

I found a topic about the same problem in this fourm.

What does this Mosek error mean？

Stall itself is not an error, it just explains the termination reason https://themosekblog.blogspot.com/2019/04/response-codes-and-statuses.html Of course it is not ideal for the solver to stall, but you can yourself evaluate if you are happy with this solution or not. As you can see the duality gap is a bit large but the overall solution looks not too bad https://docs.mosek.com/9.1/toolbox/debugging-log.html#continuous-problem. Why not try latest Mosek 9.1. As for the question “Is the optima…

As mentioned in the answer, I’m not happy with the solution.
There should not be zero in the matrix ‘A’, but I found it’s like

A =
         0
         0.0007
         0.0022
         0.0033

Does this happen due to the near zero warning?

If so, I would like to solve this problem to get HAPPY solution.
But unfortunately, I cannot remove any near zeros in the matrix ‘Q’(I suspect this is the cirminal ) and also it seems quite tough to change unit of inputs as you suggested.

I need to check more by myself but
can you please share any other tips or techniques to solve this problem with me?

Thank you again!