mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Software (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Prime95 v30.3 (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=25823)

Uncwilly 2020-08-19 14:38

[QUOTE=Viliam Furik;554231]It happened to me twice already, that I got assigned CERT work for my manual results. Is it OK, or should it be fixed? I am not sure if the results could be counterfeited...[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=kriesel;554238]Not an issue, manual or otherwise. [url]https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=551951&postcount=181[/url][/QUOTE]
I confirmed one of my own results as well, different machines though.

Prime95 2020-08-19 15:16

[QUOTE=kruoli;554223]The sum-input-output-error-checking got removed? Because of GEC? Or is it rather needless these days, since flaky machines should not do LL-DC, but rather PRP with GEC?[/QUOTE]

Sum-input-output checking was removed because no one uses it. Optimizations made for AVX and later FFTs made this error check impossible. If you have a Pentium 4 or maybe some of the early Core/Core2 CPUs, then you could get the sum-input error checking.

All the code is still there, only the menu choice is gone. That is, you can activate the error checking on ancient CPUs by editing prime.txt.

pinhodecarlos 2020-08-19 16:58

Quick question. I’ve been running PRP DC CF but I want now to change to PRP DC, what line on prime.txt I need to change, what’s the work ID type?

My concern is how to swap work type without having to have a clean client installation and going throughout the configuration process, what I’m failing?

Prime95 2020-08-19 17:33

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;554265]Quick question. I’ve been running PRP DC CF but I want now to change to PRP DC, what line on prime.txt I need to change, what’s the work ID type?

My concern is how to swap work type without having to have a clean client installation and going throughout the configuration process, what I’m failing?[/QUOTE]

Work type is 151.

The easiest way to change is ./mprime -m
or the Worker Windows dialog box in prime95
or even the web pages (list your CPUs, then click on the one you want to change)

That said, there is no longer a PRP DC work type. Selecting work type 151 will give you DC assignments. These can be LL or PRP at the server's discretion. I've not yet decided if we should LL the big backlog of DCs or PRP-proof them if the client is 30.3 or greater.

pinhodecarlos 2020-08-19 17:53

Ah or duh for the worker Windows dialog box....
Looks like I’ll have to stay with current work type since I can’t do LL DC if I get one, laptop temp just fires up, not with PRP. I would “ PRP-proof them if the client is 30.3 or greater.” but it is your decision.

chalsall 2020-08-19 17:54

[QUOTE=Prime95;554268]I've not yet decided if we should LL the big backlog of DCs or PRP-proof them if the client is 30.3 or greater.[/QUOTE]

Which, in your opinion, is more useful?

Doing a DC will point out borderline kit, but I think Aaron's years-long SDC effort has cleared out most of the known noise.

How trusting are you of the PRP-proof mechanism (I presume, based on the extensive collaboration and peer-review, quite)?

The call, of course, is yours. And if I may please say, this has been truly awesome to observe!

Agile in Action; almost a case-study. :tu: :bow:

storm5510 2020-08-19 18:03

[QUOTE=Prime95;554268]..I've not yet decided if we should LL the big backlog of DCs or PRP-proof them if the client is 30.3 or greater.[/QUOTE]

Both, until you go public with 30.x. Then PRP-Proof [U]all[/U] of them. At that point, LL and LL-DC can be retired. Over time, the backlog will shrink.

kriesel 2020-08-19 18:48

[QUOTE=chalsall;554270]Doing a DC will point out borderline kit, but I think Aaron's years-long SDC effort has cleared out most of the known noise.

How trusting are you of the PRP-proof mechanism (I presume, based on the extensive collaboration and peer-review, quite)?[/QUOTE]Since the LL DC is lagging several years behind LL first time testing, the identification of borderline or reliably-unreliable kit may come years too late. Unless there are enough error codes caught in the prime95 /mprime result's errors field. Which does nothing for Mlucas, CUDALucas, clLucas, gpuowl runs.
I'm doing a systematic sampling of PRP & PRPDC (spaced ~1 per million of exponent range up to 200M), and don't recall a PRPDC failing to match a PRP. Some of the PRP-DC in this sampling effort are PRP-with-power8-proof. Some of the future first-PRP in this sampling effort will be PRP-power8-proof & a Cert to verify, no separate DC.
(I had started with LL/LLDC sampling in 2017, and made PRP sampling ahead a priority this year. PRP samples have been finished 74M-128M, so now precede the wavefront somewhat.)

Of the ~20 bad primality tests I've logged over the past few years, none are PRP, all are LL/LLDC/LLTC.

keisentraut 2020-08-19 19:14

[QUOTE=Prime95;554174]You do not need to re-arrange your worktodo.txt file. Cert work will get done quickly regardless of where it appears in the file.[/QUOTE]
That is not what I am experiencing. Just restarted mprime on my laptop and it got a new CERT test but then continued the the LL-DC which does not end before September:
[CODE]
[user@laptop mprime]$ ./mprime -d
[Main thread Aug 19 21:05] Mersenne number primality test program version 30.3
[Main thread Aug 19 21:05] Optimizing for CPU architecture: Core i3/i5/i7, L2 cache size: 2x256 KB, L3 cache size: 3 MB
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] Updating computer information on the server
[Main thread Aug 19 21:05] Starting worker.
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] URL: http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=dc79f1c52374fcc10162f12141161ca
b&hg=870ede87c0fa98649457adec85d4ad59&wg=&a=Linux64,Prime95,v30.3,build+2&c=Intel(R)+Core(TM)+i5-6200U+CPU+@+2.30GHz&f=
Prefetch,SSE,SSE2,SSE4,AVX,AVX2,FMA,&L1=32&L2=256&np=2&hp=2&m=7831&s=2540&h=1&r=4000&L3=3072&ss=5848&sh=89989C1E7296CC4
D15C466366144D1AA
[Work thread Aug 19 21:05] Worker starting
[Work thread Aug 19 21:05] Setting affinity to run worker on CPU core #1
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] pnErrorResult=0
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] pnErrorDetail=SUCCESS
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] g=dc79f1c52374fcc10162f12141161cab
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] u=gLauss
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] un=gLauss
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] cn=laptop-klaus
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] od=10
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] ==END==
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05]
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] Sending expected completion date for M57643127: Sep 28 2020
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] URL: http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=ap&g=dc79f1c52374fcc10162f12141161ca
b&k=27481014FF4CCAAE79090BF22E599FFE&stage=LL&c=0&p=33.7369&d=86400&e=3465350&ss=12763&sh=0D9E42398ECDEB1470895F7BADAE6
A58
[Work thread Aug 19 21:05] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on CPU core #2
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] pnErrorResult=0
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] pnErrorDetail=SUCCESS
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] ==END==
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05]
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] URL: http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=ga&g=dc79f1c52374fcc10162f12141161cab&c=0&cert=10.000000&ss=33072&sh=9F58D7017E911849EE1BC3F8F6B8E52D
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] pnErrorResult=0
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] pnErrorDetail=Server assigned CERT work.
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] g=dc79f1c52374fcc10162f12141161cab
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] k=4C8A4BBDFCBAFE2E7D6A480657D4DFE3
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] A=1
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] b=2
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] n=4991983
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] c=-1
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] w=200
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] ns=39000
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] ==END==
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05]
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] Server assigned CERT work.
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] Got assignment 4C8A4BBDFCBAFE2E7D6A480657D4DFE3: CERT M4991983
[Comm thread Aug 19 21:05] Done communicating with server.
[Work thread Aug 19 21:05] Running Jacobi error check. Passed. Time: 22.509 sec.
[Work thread Aug 19 21:05] Resuming primality test of M57643127 using FMA3 FFT length 3M, Pass1=512, Pass2=6K, clm=2, 2 threads
[Work thread Aug 19 21:05] Iteration: 19447019 / 57643127 [33.73%].

[/CODE]

chalsall 2020-08-19 19:29

[QUOTE=keisentraut;554280]That is not what I am experiencing. Just restarted mprime on my laptop and it got a new CERT test but then continued the the LL-DC which does not end before September:[/QUOTE]

Have you just let it run for a while, and then review the logs to see what George's code does in the temporal domain (without any human interaction)?

If not, give it a try...

chalsall 2020-08-19 19:33

[QUOTE=kriesel;554277]Since the LL DC is lagging several years behind LL first time testing, the identification of borderline or reliably-unreliable kit may come years too late. Unless there are enough error codes caught in the prime95 /mprime result's errors field. Which does nothing for Mlucas, CUDALucas, clLucas, gpuowl runs.[/QUOTE]

In my world, all data is interesting.

But, as you suggest, some might not be worth collecting in the bigger calculus (economic tradeoffs, expediency, etc).

henryzz question really perked up my ears. Is this seminal? Worth formally publishing?

edit: Discussion split into new thread. Henryzz's question is at [url]https://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=25852[/url]

Uncwilly 2020-08-19 20:23

If doing PRP-VDF's on the low end of the DC's is a good idea.....

It might be worth moving the assignments for v29 and below up to some set value (like 65,000,000) and above once v30 comes online (or after there is a 50% adoption of v30).
Or move them 10 or 15,000,000 above the DC milestone.
Or move them up 1,000,000 above the milestone each and every month for about a year and a half (first month 1M above, second month new assignments 2M above, 3rd 3M,

They will still get DC work done, but they will get moved away from the milestones enough so that these old slugs won't interfere.

Prime95 2020-08-20 02:28

Build 3 is available. See first post in this thread for links.

Not a whole lot there. Two bugs fixed as detailed in post #2 of this thread. Mihai improved P-1 probability calculator. You can opt out of CERT work in the worker Windows dialog box. There are undoc settings for controlling the exponent sizes you get for CERT assignments.

Prime95 2020-08-20 03:48

Just built 32-bit versions (which I hope nobody is using!) and 64-bit NT service version.


This is the first time I've built these since my Mac died and I'm now on Windows with a new Visual Studio compiler.


A MacOSX port will be difficult. I'll have to steal the wife's computer.

henryzz 2020-08-20 08:13

I have split the publication discussion into a new thread in the Math forum

ric 2020-08-20 12:03

I've joined the v30 beta testing a few days ago, with v30.3 b2 on a colab instance, working on PRP-CF candidates. So far, so good, apart from the last candidate who has entered an endless loop of
[CODE][Work thread Aug 20 10:55] Iteration: 10488602 / 10489856 [99.98%].
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] Gerbicz error check passed at iteration 10489826.
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] Generating proof for M10489607. Proof power = 8, Hash length = 64
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] Root hash = D9FEACD9545125105C0A88E19768DF99EA43BF97B183A15F42454E8569216911
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] hash0 = 772F19B5FDFDB1A5
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] hash1 = FA82BB6558F585A1
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] hash2 = FBA62EA2942D2DCF
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] hash3 = C35FC946454B1C33
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] hash4 = BABA2FED3B34B207
[Work thread Aug 20 10:55] hash5 = 8CCFECCFA556DE29
[Work thread Aug 20 10:56] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Work thread Aug 20 10:56] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Work thread Aug 20 10:56] Waiting five minutes before restarting.[/CODE]
probably because the colab session expired a few iterations before completion, and maybe left some file in an inconsistent state.

results.txt contains a bunch of [CODE]MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[/CODE] every 5 minutes for the last couple hours. There's no entry in results.json.txt so far for that exponent.

How do I get out of here? A restart from scratch?

TIA

kriesel 2020-08-20 13:29

phantom assignments
 
Recently got a TF assignment listed as assigned in a colab mprime instance, unexpectedly, in .[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/workload/[/URL].
[CODE]Factor=(AID),242692117,71,72[/CODE]I'll probably throw that minnow back. Especially since it does not appear in an actual worktodo file.
The same instance allegedly had been given a PRP assignment that does not appear in worktodo.
[CODE]PRP=(AID),1,2,98497291,-1,77,0,3,[/CODE]There's no record of those assignments in prime.log.
Both indicate as assigned 2020-08-19. Had another internet outage yesterday, but I would not expect that to affect colab instance interaction with PrimeNet.

All my colab mprime work preferences are set to 150 (PRP).
[QUOTE=Prime95;554343]Just built 32-bit versions (which I hope nobody is using!)[/QUOTE]Not currently, but might fire up some smaller silicon space heaters with whatever is the current 32bit version in a few months. Certs might be just the right size for those.

Prime95 2020-08-20 15:15

[QUOTE=ric;554368]

How do I get out of here? A restart from scratch?

[/QUOTE]

Set MaxProofgenWaits=1 in prime.txt

The default is to try proof generation for 2 days before giving up (in case the file is on an NFS mount that is offline).
It is on my to-do list to tailor the wait time to the error. A file open error might wait two days, while your MD5 error is
unlikely to get better - maybe try just twice.

Awesomeotts 2020-08-21 01:26

[QUOTE=kriesel;553475]
It will take a long time to get the bulk of the clients updated. Early adopters of prime95/mprime v30.x are bearing the brunt of CERT for both mprime/prime95 and gpuowl production. (Either curtisc or Ben Delo updating a fraction of their fleet would help a lot. But like for everyone in this all-volunteer project, their kit, their call. And if they had started already, we wouldn't know without doing some checking.)[/QUOTE]

I think Ben Delo has, [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=8664553&full=1"]https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=8664553&full=1[/URL]

pinhodecarlos 2020-08-21 15:42

Got a new MD5 error: MD5 of downloaded starting value doesn’t match, will retry later blablabla, and then aborting. Using latest version of prime95.

Uncwilly 2020-08-21 16:39

I am seeing something that looks odd. Every hour Prime95 stops a worker and restarts "to do priority work". That would be great if there was any in the queue, but there isn't.
It is only checking in with Primenet for priority work (cert) once every 6 hours.

[CODE][Aug 21 05:50] Iteration: 22461840 / xxxxxxxx [42.52%], ms/iter: 7.053, ETA: 59:29:13
[Aug 21 06:03] Restarting worker to do priority work.
[Aug 21 06:03] Stopping primality test of Mxxxxxxxx at iteration 22574063 [42.73%]
[Aug 21 06:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on CPU core #2
[Aug 21 06:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 3 on CPU core #4
[Aug 21 06:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 2 on CPU core #3
[Aug 21 06:03] Running Jacobi error check. Passed. Time: 14.649 sec.
[Aug 21 06:04] Resuming primality test of Mxxxxxxxx using FMA3 FFT length 2800K, Pass1=448, Pass2=6400, clm=1, 4 threads
[Aug 21 06:04] Iteration: 22574064 / xxxxxxxx [42.73%].
[Aug 21 06:09] Iteration: 22617825 / xxxxxxxx [42.81%], ms/iter: 7.036, ETA: 59:02:12
[Aug 21 06:27] Iteration: 22773810 / xxxxxxxx [43.11%], ms/iter: 7.054, ETA: 58:52:35
[Aug 21 06:47] Iteration: 22929795 / xxxxxxxx [43.40%], ms/iter: 7.672, ETA: 63:42:36
[Aug 21 07:03] Restarting worker to do priority work.
[Aug 21 07:03] Stopping primality test of Mxxxxxxxx at iteration 23051629 [43.63%]
[Aug 21 07:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on CPU core #2
[Aug 21 07:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 3 on CPU core #4
[Aug 21 07:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 2 on CPU core #3
[Aug 21 07:03] Running Jacobi error check. Passed. Time: 15.611 sec.
[Aug 21 07:04] Resuming primality test of Mxxxxxxxx using FMA3 FFT length 2800K, Pass1=448, Pass2=6400, clm=1, 4 threads
[Aug 21 07:04] Iteration: 23051630 / xxxxxxxx [43.63%].
[Aug 21 07:08] Iteration: 23085780 / xxxxxxxx [43.70%], ms/iter: 7.368, ETA: 60:51:54
[Aug 21 07:28] Iteration: 23241765 / xxxxxxxx [43.99%], ms/iter: 7.608, ETA: 62:31:10
[Aug 21 07:49] Iteration: 23397750 / xxxxxxxx [44.29%], ms/iter: 8.068, ETA: 65:56:52
[Aug 21 07:58] Running Jacobi error check. Passed. Time: 14.077 sec.
[Aug 21 08:03] Restarting worker to do priority work.
[Aug 21 08:03] Stopping primality test of Mxxxxxxxx at iteration 23510657 [44.50%]
[Aug 21 08:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on CPU core #2
[Aug 21 08:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 3 on CPU core #4
[Aug 21 08:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 2 on CPU core #3
[Aug 21 08:03] Running Jacobi error check. Passed. Time: 14.755 sec.
[Aug 21 08:04] Resuming primality test of Mxxxxxxxx using FMA3 FFT length 2800K, Pass1=448, Pass2=6400, clm=1, 4 threads
[Aug 21 08:04] Iteration: 23510658 / xxxxxxxx [44.50%].
[Aug 21 08:09] Iteration: 23553735 / xxxxxxxx [44.58%], ms/iter: 7.748, ETA: 62:59:48
[Aug 21 08:28] Iteration: 23709720 / xxxxxxxx [44.88%], ms/iter: 7.344, ETA: 59:23:21
[Aug 21 08:47] Iteration: 23865705 / xxxxxxxx [45.18%], ms/iter: 7.276, ETA: 58:31:44
[Aug 21 09:03] Restarting worker to do priority work.
[Aug 21 09:03] Stopping primality test of Mxxxxxxxx at iteration 23999395 [45.43%]
[Aug 21 09:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on CPU core #2
[Aug 21 09:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 3 on CPU core #4
[Aug 21 09:03] Setting affinity to run helper thread 2 on CPU core #3
[Aug 21 09:03] Running Jacobi error check. Passed. Time: 22.355 sec.
[Aug 21 09:04] Resuming primality test of Mxxxxxxxx using FMA3 FFT length 2800K, Pass1=448, Pass2=6400, clm=1, 4 threads
[Aug 21 09:04] Iteration: 23999396 / xxxxxxxx [45.43%].
[Aug 21 09:07] Iteration: 24021690 / xxxxxxxx [45.47%], ms/iter: 7.655, ETA: 61:14:43
[/CODE]

Prime95 2020-08-21 18:01

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;554528]I am seeing something that looks odd. Every hour Prime95 stops a worker and restarts "to do priority work". That would be great if there was any in the queue, but there isn't.
It is only checking in with Primenet for priority work (cert) once every 6 hours.[/QUOTE]

Can you send me the worktodo.txt file? THanks.

DrobinsonPE 2020-08-22 01:49

I am still running 30.3 build 2 on my computers so I need to upgrade them all to build 3 this weekend. Today one of my computers got a MD5 error.

This is when it started:

[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Restarting worker to do priority work.
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Stopping primality test of M54082711 at iteration 39137183 [72.36%]
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on CPU core #2
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Setting affinity to run helper thread 3 on CPU core #4
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Setting affinity to run helper thread 2 on CPU core #3
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Starting certification of M1158401 using type-1 FFT length 56K, Pass1=224, Pass2=256, clm=4, 4 threads
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] MD5 of downloaded starting value does not match.
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Aborting processing of this work unit -- will try again later.

Is there a file you want me to send or should I just upgrade to build 3 and start up again to see if that fixes it?

Strange thing is... this exponent does not show up in my assignments list but it does show up in my worktodo.

Cert=UID,1,2,1158401,-1,18101

Prime95 2020-08-22 02:45

[QUOTE=DrobinsonPE;554553]I am still running 30.3 build 2 on my computers so I need to upgrade them all to build 3 this weekend. Today one of my computers got a MD5 error.

This is when it started:

[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] MD5 of downloaded starting value does not match.
[Work thread Aug 21 06:50] Aborting processing of this work unit -- will try again later.

Is there a file you want me to send or should I just upgrade to build 3 and start up again to see if that fixes it?

Strange thing is... this exponent does not show up in my assignments list but it does show up in my worktodo.

Cert=UID,1,2,1158401,-1,18101[/QUOTE]

Do upgrade to build 3.

The error message is poor. The problem really is that prime95 is unable to get the starting value because the assignment is invalid. I've fixed the error message in build 4.

In build 2, this error will continue forever. In build 3, this error will happen 8 or 10 times and then the assignment will be removed from worktodo.txt.

I don't know why the assignment didn't "stick". It apparently was later assigned to me and I've already finished it.

Chuck 2020-08-22 03:59

Got good CERT result but Prime95 keeps trying...
 
1 Attachment(s)
I got a good result from this CERT and the result was successfully uploaded; Ben's original PRP now is highlighted in green.

But on my screen it says MD5 starting value does not match and keeps retrying the same CERT.

pinhodecarlos 2020-08-22 09:25

Hi Chuck, yesterday I got the same issue but on my side the client managed to abort the task on first attempt and now I’m doing CERT work. Haven’t done anything, just let the client manage by itself. The only tweaks I have on my setup is 100% request time for CERT, unlimited bandwidth.
A side note, what CPU are you using, my old machine takes 7 days to LL DC at 50M exponents and 2 hours for CERT at 98M.

retina 2020-08-22 09:31

Can I ask why CERT work is considered enough of a priority to interrupt the usual PRP? It makes the estimated completion times completely useless, and introduces extra overhead in saving and reloading so often.

Is this a server resource limitation? Or are we just trying to give the original tester a warm fuzzy when the CERT is validated quickly?

We used to leave confirmation of LL tests for many years. Why the sudden haste now?

Batalov 2020-08-22 09:53

Perhaps they purge the savefile from the server once the verification is complete?
It is a big chunk of disk to keep for many years.

retina 2020-08-22 10:31

[QUOTE=Batalov;554574]Perhaps they purge the savefile from the server once the verification is complete?
It is a big chunk of disk to keep for many years.[/QUOTE]Sure, many years is difficult to manage. But can it wait until the current PRP is completed and [i]then[/i] work on any pending CERTs?

Chuck 2020-08-22 12:39

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;554572]Hi Chuck, yesterday I got the same issue but on my side the client managed to abort the task on first attempt and now I’m doing CERT work. Haven’t done anything, just let the client manage by itself. The only tweaks I have on my setup is 100% request time for CERT, unlimited bandwidth.
A side note, what CPU are you using, my old machine takes 7 days to LL DC at 50M exponents and 2 hours for CERT at 98M.[/QUOTE]

I just deleted the CERT from my worktodo file since it had already completed successfully.

Using an Intel I7-7800x; takes about 30 hours to do a DC and 30 minutes for a CERT.

storm5510 2020-08-22 13:57

If we retired LL and LL-DC now, the amount of work needing done would remain large. LL-DC's would need to pass through PRP as a first-time test to get to a certification. Any way you want to slice it, the time required could be years. However, it would all eventually catch up as PRP-DC no longer exists.

S485122 2020-08-22 16:36

[QUOTE=retina;554573]Can I ask why CERT work is considered enough of a priority to interrupt the usual PRP? It makes the estimated completion times completely useless, and introduces extra overhead in saving and reloading so often.

Is this a server resource limitation? Or are we just trying to give the original tester a warm fuzzy when the CERT is validated quickly?

We used to leave confirmation of LL tests for many years. Why the sudden haste now?[/QUOTE]Good posting IMHO.

Jacob

Prime95 2020-08-22 17:57

[QUOTE=retina;554573]Can I ask why CERT work is considered enough of a priority to interrupt the usual PRP? It makes the estimated completion times completely useless, and introduces extra overhead in saving and reloading so often.

Is this a server resource limitation? Or are we just trying to give the original tester a warm fuzzy when the CERT is validated quickly?[/QUOTE]

Yes, it is a server resource issue. I don't want to be in the position of having tens of thousands of large CERT files on the server.

If the interruptions are annoying, set the daily download limit to 12MB and you'll get one Ben Delo cert per day (or several PRP-CF certs). You can also set options to only get wavefront CERTs (see undoc.txt: exponent range of 80M and up should do) if you find the PRP-CF interruptions particularly annoying.

Not coded yet on the server, but I'm thinking of a 5-day expiration for CERTs.

S485122 2020-08-22 20:33

[QUOTE=Prime95;554608]...
(or several PRP-CF certs)
...[/QUOTE]Why should people get involved in CF work ?
When looking at what is done, it seems not very well organised : people certifying many times that a CF is not prime.
CF has little to do with GIMPS. I do understand that some want to find factors (even if one project is setting aims that are not rational.) No problem with that (their kit, their power, their strife...) But why should "ordinary" users of PrimeNet be forced, by default, to participate in that work ?

Jacob

Prime95 2020-08-22 20:53

[QUOTE=S485122;554616]Why should people get involved in CF work ?
When looking at what is done, it seems not very well organised : people certifying many times that a CF is not prime.
CF has little to do with GIMPS. I do understand that some want to find factors (even if one project is setting aims that are not rational.) No problem with that (their kit, their power, their strife...) But why should "ordinary" users of PrimeNet be forced, by default, to participate in that work ?[/QUOTE]

Fair question. GIMPS main goal is finding new Mersenne primes, but it also is a learn all we can about Mersenne numbers. In that regard, PRP-CF is GIMPS related, but I agree its a niche project.

What do others think? I could easily change the default to only cert exponents over 50M unless you've signed up for PRP-CF work. It would be more work, but I could also try handing out PRP-CF certs in batches of 5 or 10 for less interruptions.

chalsall 2020-08-22 20:56

[QUOTE=S485122;554616]But why should "ordinary" users of PrimeNet be forced, by default, to participate in that work ?[/QUOTE]

A valid observation and argument.

Please keep in mind this is now in beta testing. This is where all the early adopters help "shake-out" the code, and find "edge-cases".

George has already said that there won't be enough CERT work to give to those who only want that kind of work.

This kind of work would actually be of interest to people like me, who run GIMPS on the kit we're responsible for to do ongoing sanity checking. CERT runs are shorter than DCs, so would point out suspect kit more quickly.

Batalov 2020-08-22 21:44

Would it make sense to [I]fund[/I] and build a specialized on-premises server (or a small AWS farm) which will _only_ run "CERTs"?
That would help to avoid very large data traffic back and forth. (Just process it where data resides.)

Could some back of the envelope estimates be run? How many cores would simply take care of the time averaged queue of CERT verifications, nearly real-time.

chalsall 2020-08-22 22:13

[QUOTE=Batalov;554631]Could some back of the envelope estimates be run?[/QUOTE]

You're entering what's known as "Analysis Paralysis".

We have code. We have compute.

Run with it, and see what happens.

ATH 2020-08-22 22:19

There are many options: When people choose their primary work type they could be presented with options for secondary work type PRP CERT and/or PRPCF CERT or NONE.

It could also be a primary work type: PRP CERT or PRP+PRPCF CERT and then as a secondary option you choose what work type to run when no CERTs are available.



I agree that the "normal" / "average" GIMPS user should not be forced to do PRP CF work even just short CERT work.

Xyzzy 2020-08-23 00:03

[QUOTE=Prime95;554618]What do others think? I could easily change the default to only cert exponents over 50M unless you've signed up for PRP-CF work. It would be more work, but I could also try handing out PRP-CF certs in batches of 5 or 10 for less interruptions.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Xyzzy;553593]If there was a cert worktype option we are certain enough people would opt-in to take care of them.[/QUOTE]:mike:

Viliam Furik 2020-08-23 00:25

I am not sure if somebody didn't already mention it, but if there was a checkbox (disabled by default) whether the user minds to also run CERTs on the machine, I think that there would be enough people to do CERTs, and it would not be an only-cert work type, so no issue with a no-work-to-do problem.

Batalov 2020-08-23 00:59

[QUOTE=chalsall;554636]We have code. We have compute.

Run with it, and see what happens.[/QUOTE]
Sheesh! That's what already happened - it [I]had been run[/I] and you got 20+ complaint messages. :-)

Time to think? Or to continue sawing off the branch that you sit on?

Also, a month has not finished yet, and people didn't receive their internet summaries/bills yet.
One or two people might hit their limits after which internet bandwidth is throttled by the provider. If one downloads 100Mb every 30 minutes, how soon will they hit this limit? What if they also have a habit of watching some netflix or whatnot?

I have once downloaded a Tb worth of public genomes so I know - this limit does exist (and it is indeed spelled out in the AT&T's Uverse contract), test it yourself, if you want. (and I am talking about an expensive plan, other people's limits might be less that 1Tb / month

chalsall 2020-08-23 01:06

[QUOTE=Batalov;554667]Sheesh! That's what already happened - it [I]had been run[/I] and you got 20+ complaint messages. :-)[/QUOTE]

George is getting empirical data, and listening to the various perspectives of those running his ***beta*** code.

Doing a cost/benefit analysis of running a dedicated CERT farm makes absolutely no sense (IMO). :smile:

pinhodecarlos 2020-08-23 06:46

I don’t mind doing only CERT work, if you can force my machine to do it on the back please do it so.

jwnutter 2020-08-23 23:09

[QUOTE=chalsall;554668]
Doing a cost/benefit analysis of running a dedicated CERT farm makes absolutely no sense (IMO). :smile:[/QUOTE]

Assuming I'm following this post correctly, wouldn't it make more sense to use a dedicate server farm to complete the remaining DC work? This would at least allow someone to calculate a potential end-point for such a cost/benefit analysis. And, it would give the project time to determine new workflow patterns once this version is released to the public.

preda 2020-08-23 23:23

[QUOTE=Batalov;554631]
Could some back of the envelope estimates be run? How many cores would simply take care of the time averaged queue of CERT verifications, nearly real-time.[/QUOTE]

First, about the size of CERT: a cert assignment is *one residue* in size (download), thus much smaller than a Proof file (which is 10x residue in size, upload). At the wavefront one residue is 12MB.

Assuming 1000 PRPs completed daily, and the CERT requiring 1/200 the work of the PRP, we come with needing capacity equivalent for running 5 PRPs per day.

DrobinsonPE 2020-08-23 23:25

I am not concerned with how much CERT work my computers get so this is just an observation on the behavior of Prime95 30.3 b3.

I noticed under Options/Resource Limits/Advanced, there is a setting called:

Certification work limit (% of CPU time): 10

It looks like the default setting is 10% of CPU time.

This setting does not appear to be working correctly as my slow computer (Celeron J4105) that does about 7.6 GHD/day received 5 CERT assignments today 08-23-2020 for a total of about 6.1 GHD of CERT work.

I am glad I can contribute that much CERT work as I still have plenty of time to get my regular assignment done before it expires.

Prime95 2020-08-24 01:52

[QUOTE=DrobinsonPE;554761] there is a setting called:

Certification work limit (% of CPU time): 10

It looks like the default setting is 10% of CPU time.

This setting does not appear to be working correctly as my slow computer (Celeron J4105) .[/QUOTE]


If you look at the fine print in readme.txt, the setting is 10% of a circa 2015 quad-core computer. Yours is somewhat slower than that, so that 10% setting is a much higher percentage of your computer's CPU.

It is hard for me to make that 10% setting an actual 10% [b]of your computer's CPU[/b]. I'm not happy with that part of the UI, but I've yet to come up with anything better

LaurV 2020-08-24 07:54

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;553593]If there was a cert worktype option we are certain enough people would opt-in to take care of them.
:mike:[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Viliam Furik;554664]I am not sure if somebody didn't already mention it, but if there was a checkbox (disabled by default) whether the user minds to also run CERTs on the machine, I think that there would be enough people to do CERTs, and it would not be an only-cert work type, so no issue with a no-work-to-do problem.[/QUOTE]


I'm with these guys...

storm5510 2020-08-24 14:16

[QUOTE=Prime95;554777]...I'm not happy with that part of the UI, but I've yet to come up with anything better[/QUOTE]

I sometimes have problems with the advanced resources and limits dialog. I can make a change, like emergency RAM for example, then click "OK" and a warning appears saying that an integer value between 1 and 100 should be entered. The only way out of the dialog is to click "Cancel." Another pain-in-the-rear gift from Windows 10 it would seem. I have not had this happen with Windows 7 on my HP workstation. Every time MS does a big update, those requiring a reboot, something changes its behavior. This is a conversation for another place and time.

M0CZY 2020-08-25 13:05

I normally do ECM work, but I'm trying out v30.3, and it has assigned me CERT work, on a 98 million exponent.
On my old, slow laptop this will take about 12 hours.

Will this involve a large upload at the end, and if so, how large?
I can see that it has generated a checkpoint file, but so far there is no indication of any progress in my terminal.

Is it safe to transfer this work onto a faster computer in order to get the job done quicker, by moving the worktodo.txt and the checkpoint file?

Uncwilly 2020-08-25 13:46

[QUOTE=M0CZY;554904]On my old, slow laptop this will take about 12 hours.

Will this involve a large upload at the end, and if so, how large?

Is it safe to transfer this work onto a faster computer in order to get the job done quicker, by moving the worktodo.txt and the checkpoint file?[/QUOTE]
12 hours on an old computer is fine. It can contribute to the project.
The upload is not too big. You received a large download, but the upload is small.
You don't need to transfer the exponent. But if you wish to do so, you have to transfer all of the files associated with the exponent.

P-A 2020-08-25 14:01

error getting version number
 
[CODE][Main thread Aug 25 09:00] Mersenne number primality test program version 30.3
[Main thread Aug 25 09:00] Optimizing for CPU architecture: Core i3/i5/i7, L2 cache size: 4x256 KB, L3 cache size: 8 MB
[Main thread Aug 25 09:00] Starting worker.
[Main thread Aug 25 09:00] Waiting 36 seconds for boot to complete.
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Getting assignment from server
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Server assigned PRP work.
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Got assignment 7F32203DE40E47BA8A85A6F6F19E633B: PRP M10495217
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Sending expected completion date for M10495217: Aug 29 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Sending expected completion date for M10494101: Aug 25 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Sending expected completion date for M10494343: Aug 26 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Sending expected completion date for M10494511: Aug 27 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Sending expected completion date for M10494983: Aug 28 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Sending expected completion date for M10495217: Aug 29 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:00] Done communicating with server.
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] MD5 of pA492159.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] MD5 of pA492211.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] MD5 of pA492343.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] MD5 of pA492379.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] MD5 of pA493251.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] MD5 of pA493317.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 09:05] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03] Sending result to server: UID: PA-DK/particle1, M10494101/468150810510602281 is not prime. Type-5 RES64: 115B4E37CE2A8CDB. Wh4: 7E344F77,3724386,00000000, AID: 1BDB2E53ED4
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03]
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03] CPU credit is 3.5505 GHz-days.
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03] Server assigned CERT work.
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03] Got assignment 029CFC4F1A38F422AE87F5870D2DD5F0: CERT M98764319
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:03] Done communicating with server.
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] MD5 of pA492159.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] MD5 of pA492211.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] MD5 of pA492343.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] MD5 of pA492379.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] MD5 of pA493251.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] MD5 of pA493317.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] MD5 of pA494101.proof is 15b514050ea1d340e1326b62338a5894
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Proof file exponent is 10494101
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Filesize of pA494101.proof is 11805943
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Proof file successfully uploaded
[Comm thread Aug 25 10:10] Error copy proof file to archive c:\p95\pA494101.proof
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] MD5 of pA492159.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] MD5 of pA492211.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] MD5 of pA492343.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] MD5 of pA492379.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] MD5 of pA493251.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] MD5 of pA493317.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] MD5 of pA494101.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 11:15] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] Sending result to server: UID: PA-DK/particle1, M98764319 certification hash value AB334C5D7D161928473272D1FAA29B6A03ADBDFE900804844616118DE0BA39AE. Wh4: 2A62B3E9,79714377,
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09]
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] Certification successfully completes double-check of M98764319 --
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] CPU credit is 1.4714 GHz-days.
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] Server assigned CERT work.
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] Got assignment B998CC047E4538F5887F6824353BABF1: CERT M107907077
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:09] Done communicating with server.
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] MD5 of pA492159.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] MD5 of pA492211.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] MD5 of pA492343.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] MD5 of pA492379.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] MD5 of pA493251.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] MD5 of pA493317.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] MD5 of pA494101.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 12:20] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] MD5 of pA492159.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] MD5 of pA492211.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] MD5 of pA492343.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] MD5 of pA492379.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] MD5 of pA493251.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] MD5 of pA493317.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] MD5 of pA494101.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:25] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Sending result to server: UID: PA-DK/particle1, M107907077 certification hash value 184E426DEAEC6124B6A3BB04A5E50CC8C7D009C98FEECC55E8F972DA82E37C10. Wh4: F4CD754B,70397306
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48]
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Certification successfully completes double-check of M107907077 --
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] CPU credit is 0.8644 GHz-days.
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Getting assignment from server
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Server assigned PRP work.
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Got assignment 9A4AA6D195040BD0E8F8DD0DC33D21A4: PRP M3643613
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Sending expected completion date for M3643613: Aug 28 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Getting assignment from server
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Server assigned PRP work.
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Got assignment 03A87549A8087A17556A606F43CD4DCC: PRP M4326757
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Sending expected completion date for M4326757: Aug 28 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 13:48] Done communicating with server.
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] MD5 of pA492159.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] MD5 of pA492211.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] MD5 of pA492343.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] MD5 of pA492379.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] MD5 of pA493251.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] MD5 of pA493317.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] MD5 of pA494101.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:30] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:51] Sending result to server: UID: PA-DK/particle1, M10494343/17825033150342061257 is not prime. Type-5 RES64: 6E647B48745DF63F. Wh4: 8018515B,3988251,00000000, AID: 711382433
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:51]
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:51] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:51] CPU credit is 3.5506 GHz-days.
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Getting assignment from server
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Server assigned PRP work.
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Got assignment FA2A63B52B005F7475C21DF6787707F5: PRP M4996279
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Sending expected completion date for M4996279: Aug 28 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Getting assignment from server
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Server assigned PRP work.
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Got assignment 374C3C69257B77FDAB482CC17B354E7A: PRP M5053039
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Sending expected completion date for M5053039: Aug 28 2020
[Comm thread Aug 25 14:52] Done communicating with server.
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA492159.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA492211.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA492343.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA492379.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA493251.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA493317.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA494101.proof is d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Error getting version number from proof header
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] MD5 of pA494343.proof is 7b6d0570643a44fafba9339e41d28298
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Proof file exponent is 10494343
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:35] Filesize of pA494343.proof is 11806215
[Comm thread Aug 25 15:39] CURL library error: Operation timed out after 180002 milliseconds with 0 bytes received[/CODE]

Prime95 2020-08-25 15:02

You have several corrupt proof files that you will need to delete. Are the zero sized? They all have the same MD5 hash.

Prime95 2020-08-25 15:04

[QUOTE=M0CZY;554904]I normally do ECM work, but I'm trying out v30.3, and it has assigned me CERT work, on a 98 million exponent.
On my old, slow laptop this will take about 12 hours.

Will this involve a large upload at the end, and if so, how large?
I can see that it has generated a checkpoint file, but so far there is no indication of any progress in my terminal.

Is it safe to transfer this work onto a faster computer in order to get the job done quicker, by moving the worktodo.txt and the checkpoint file?[/QUOTE]

The upload is tiny. You should definitely go to the Worker Windows dialog box and de-select getting cert work.

P-A 2020-08-25 15:09

yes they were 0. Deleted and now now problem. Thanks

M0CZY 2020-08-25 17:29

[QUOTE]You should definitely go to the Worker Windows dialog box and de-select getting cert work.[/QUOTE]

Now that I have determined that it won't overload my Internet connection, I am happy to test your new software by doing CERT assignments.

In addition, I doubt that you have many other users testing it using 32-bit Linux like me.

Which work type should I select in order to get only CERT assignments?

chalsall 2020-08-25 19:58

[QUOTE=DrobinsonPE;554761]I noticed under Options/Resource Limits/Advanced, there is a setting called:[/QUOTE]

George: Quick Winblows GUI feedback (just upgraded to 30.3b3)...

I tried entering eight (8#) GB in the "Max. emergency memory" field in this panel, and when I clicked "OK" notice popped up saying "Enter a number between 0 and 3.96777".

I don't know how difficult it is to have the panel display an error message (without a popup, please) saying the setting is out-of-bounds while typing within the field? Also, perhaps allow 4? :wink:

Thanks for the great work again George. Humans can be such a pain sometimes... :smile:

M0CZY 2020-08-25 20:02

[QUOTE]Which work type should I select in order to get only CERT assignments?[/QUOTE]
I seem to have found out the answer to this. I have set "Days of Work=0", and now I only receive CERT work. I don't know if it is supposed to do that.

kriesel 2020-08-25 21:29

[QUOTE=chalsall;554934]I tried entering eight (8#) GB in the "Max. emergency memory" field in this panel, and when I clicked "OK" notice popped up saying "Enter a number between 0 and 3.96777".

I don't know how difficult it is to have the panel display an error message (without a popup, please) saying the setting is out-of-bounds while typing within the field? Also, perhaps allow 4?[/QUOTE]Mine accepted 31.9 after stating a max of 31.988. (On a 4-worker, 128GB system). The program and OS need some space.

DrobinsonPE 2020-08-25 21:40

[QUOTE=kriesel;554947]Mine accepted 31.9 after stating a max of 31.988. (On a 4-worker, 128GB system). The program and OS need some space.[/QUOTE]

On a 4GB system I went to increase it from 1 to 2 and it stated a max of 0.998. I had to cancel out of the popup just to keep the 1GB value.

and yes, thanks for the great new upgrade.

P-A 2020-08-26 12:52

[QUOTE=Prime95;554909]You have several corrupt proof files that you will need to delete. Are the zero sized? They all have the same MD5 hash.[/QUOTE]


Problem is back. I again have two proof files of 0 KB.
Error message is on two files Error getting version number from proof reader

retina 2020-08-26 12:59

[QUOTE=P-A;554992]Problem is back. I again have two proof files of 0 KB.[/QUOTE]Are you running low on disk space?

storm5510 2020-08-26 14:23

[QUOTE=P-A;554992]Problem is back. I again have two proof files of 0 KB.
Error message is on two files Error getting version number from proof reader[/QUOTE]

Low disc space like [B]retina[/B] says, or not enough RAM available to process the proofs correctly. Proof reader: There is nothing to see in a zero-length file.

P-A 2020-08-27 07:02

[QUOTE=storm5510;555004]Low disc space like [B]retina[/B] says, or not enough RAM available to process the proofs correctly. Proof reader: There is nothing to see in a zero-length file.[/QUOTE]

Plenty of space left (149GB), 16GB ram.

kriesel 2020-08-27 15:49

[QUOTE=P-A;555085]Plenty of space left (149GB), 16GB ram.[/QUOTE]File or folder permissions issues? Path problems?

storm5510 2020-08-27 16:20

[QUOTE=kriesel;555115]File or folder permissions issues? Path problems?[/QUOTE]

Looking back through his posts, this appears to be a Windows based system. If this is the case, then what he is experiencing should not be happening, if the hardware is functioning properly. There could also be something strange, and unseen, going on with his OS. Something is preventing [I]Prime95[/I] from writing a proof file. What could do that?

P-A 2020-08-27 16:42

[QUOTE=storm5510;555118]Looking back through his posts, this appears to be a Windows based system. If this is the case, then what he is experiencing should not be happening, if the hardware is functioning properly. There could also be something strange, and unseen, going on with his OS. Something is preventing [I]Prime95[/I] from writing a proof file. What could do that?[/QUOTE]

Sorry for not giving the info, but yes, it is win 10 and do have permissions etc. Seems to be able to upload but hen gives problems later. Not for every cert but sometimes. by the way, I also have a number of old p9xxx files. Should they not automatically be deleted or should this be done manually?

storm5510 2020-08-27 18:41

[QUOTE=P-A;555119]Sorry for not giving the info, but yes, it is win 10 and do have permissions etc. Seems to be able to upload but hen gives problems later. Not for every cert but sometimes. by the way, [B]I also have a number of old p9xxx files[/B]. Should they not automatically be deleted or should this be done manually?[/QUOTE]

[U]Somebody correct me, if needed[/U]: Those are temporary files from a previous run. I don't believe there is any need to keep them. Actually, they may be part of your problems. A guess: If they exist and [I]Prime95[/I] sees them, it will try to find a matching item in your [I]worktodo.txt[/I] file. If it can't, well, I am not sure what happens. They should have been deleted automatically.

Ensigm 2020-08-27 19:52

[QUOTE=P-A;555119]Sorry for not giving the info, but yes, it is win 10 and do have permissions etc. Seems to be able to upload but hen gives problems later. Not for every cert but sometimes. by the way, I also have a number of old p9xxx files. Should they not automatically be deleted or should this be done manually?[/QUOTE]


From undoc.txt:
[QUOTE]By default P-1 work does not delete the save files when the work unit completes.
This lets you run P-1 to a higher bound at a later date. You can force
the program to delete save files by adding this line to prime.txt:
KeepPminus1SaveFiles=0[/QUOTE]

keisentraut 2020-08-27 20:19

I just got a CERT assignment which was assigned while I had left mprime unattended for a few hours. This is not good, because I have one machine which runs mprime only sometimes and takes around 2 years to finish a PRP test. For instance, I'm still busy with [url=https://mersenne.org/M112233977]M112233977[/url] (which I self assigned far from the current wavefront).

If this machine would get a CERT assignment (still runs the old version), I cannot guarantee that it will finish in a timely matter and the server will have to store the large proof file. Therefore, [B]I would suggest disabling CERT verifications by default for machines which are configured to run only a few hours per day[/B].

Prime95 2020-08-27 21:01

[QUOTE=keisentraut;555151] [B]I would suggest disabling CERT verifications by default for machines which are configured to run only a few hours per day[/B].[/QUOTE]

Good idea.

Ensigm 2020-08-27 21:41

[QUOTE=Prime95;555158]Good idea.[/QUOTE]


I would suggest disable CERT by default, and let users opt in on a per machine basis when they run prime95 on that machine for the first time. If the user agrees, then immediately lead them to configure Resource Limits.


If I remember correctly, CERT only takes 0.2% time of a PRP, which means if >2% PRP users do CERT with 10% time we will not backlog in the long run, and if 10% users do CERT then almost all certifications can be done in a fairly timely manner.

Ensigm 2020-08-27 21:46

Going a bit further, the flow when prime95 is run on a machine for the first time IMHO should be

Join GIMPS? (Yes) -> configure Worker Threads (choose worktype, etc.) -> agrees to do CERT? -[
-> No -> assign work
-> Yes -> configure Resource Limits -> assign work

If the flow can be redesigned like this, then maybe we can make the default answer to "agree to do CERT?" as yes, since users get to know and decide what resources will be used. With the current decision flow, however, I insist that certification should be opt-in.

LaurV 2020-08-29 01:37

One thing that troubled me like forever, beside of the fact that I always need to arrange the windows by hand in P95[COLOR=Silver] (luckily, I don't restart often, but when it happens, is a pain in the butt, if you have many workers, the cascade/tile options aren't good, you see nothing on screen, and there is no "remember windows position", or "save windows config" possible, to restore the status at next P95 restart; so. you spent a loooong time to arrange all your worker windows in 2, 3, 4 columns, or rows, nice, aligned -- parenthesis in parenthesis, also, snap to grid is missing, you need to align at pixel level, which is another pain in the but, unless your mouse has variable CPI - at job I don't have that! - end of parenthesis -- then the computer crash or electricity is gone due to daily thunderstorms here in this period, and you have to do it again... life's a bitch :rant:) [/COLOR]is the fact that you need to be connected to the server when you change the number of workers. If you are not connected to the server (which is in another sub-menu!) then the worker's submenu is gray and can't be clicked. But if you go in the other submenu and connect to server, then, when you close that other submenu, nine thousand seven hundred and thirty one unwanted assignments are coming**, before you have time to open the other menu to change the number of workers. Editing local ini files by hand is not always the best solution because first, you need to stop P95 to do that (wasting time) and then, well.. text editing is not for the faint of heart (read as: we are stupid and don't always know what exactly to edit...). It could be nice to make the two in a single dialog, or make them independent (i.e. ungray the options related to the number of workers, work type etc, the user should be able to change them as he wishes, and then, when he connects to the server, cordialities are exchanged... Alternative, make a checkbox to say "don't bring any assignments, I am in the process of creation" (changing options). Shhh... genius at work... Before Saturday morning coffee...


---------
edit: ** assuming you run ECM or other short-lived assignments, through you loop at a rate of tens or hundreds per day, because otherwise, for LL/PRP you don't run a lot of workers, so you won't need arranging lots of windows on screen. Then, be my guest to spend even more time to unreserve all those...

Prime95 2020-08-29 02:13

[QUOTE=LaurV;555331]beside of the fact that I always need to arrange the windows by hand in P95[COLOR=Silver] (luckily, I don't restart often, but when it happens, is a pain in the butt, if you have many workers, the cascade/tile options aren't good, you see nothing on screen, and there is no "remember windows position", or "save windows config" possible, to restore the status at next P95 restart; so. you spent a loooong time to arrange all your worker windows in 2, 3, 4 columns, or rows, nice, aligned -- parenthesis in parenthesis, also, snap to grid is missing, you need to align at pixel level, which is another pain in the but, unless your mouse has variable CPI - at job I don't have that! - end of parenthesis -- then the computer crash or electricity is gone due to daily thunderstorms here in this period, and you have to do it again... life's a bitch :rant:) [/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Prime95 does remember window positions--sort of. Try running prime95, setting your window positions, then exit prime95 gracefully. On restart, the windows should be restored. The key is that window positions are only written to prime.txt on a graceful shutdown.

Oh, and if it does not work, then I only told you this so that you'd go through the tedium of arranging windows one more time...:razz:

LaurV 2020-08-29 03:55

[QUOTE=Prime95;555334]Oh, and if it does not work, then I only told you this so that you'd go through the tedium of arranging windows one more time...:razz:[/QUOTE]
Haha, you got me, I would have done it mindlessly, without your remark. But reading it, I tried on minion's computers first (wife laptop 2 cores, running win 7, and old desktop 4 cores running XP), where the "tile" was the norm, no arrangement needed - moved the workers a bit, exit, back, nope, it doesn't work. Luckily I didn't try it on the big wheelbarrow, otherwise I would have put you on the list, to catch you next time when you visit Thailand... (by the way, when? Not that I am eager for the beer, but I know people only find prime numbers when you are in vacations).
Edit: BTW, is there a link to the last sources available to the large public? I could put my nose a bit into the graphic interface (i.e. arranging the windows in 2-3-4 columns and/or rows by single click in the menu). This should be easy. And I can share it.
Edit 2: also a sample of the init file with arrangement would be nice, maybe we have a "saving" issue, but loading back works, so we would be comfortable editing the text once, and loading it every time.

Prime95 2020-08-29 05:04

Works here just fine (windows 10). Code was developed under Win95 -- so it ought to work on every Windows version in between.

Latest uploaded official source -- you'll need MSVC 2005:
[url]http://www.mersenne.org/ftp_root/gimps/p95v298b7.source.zip[/url]

I have upgraded to VS2019. Go to post #1 in this thread for the 30.3 source. There's a bunch of dependencies though: hwloc, libgmp, libcurl. Makes compiling from source code a pain.

Prime95 2020-08-29 05:14

Relevant shutdown code:

[CODE] CWinApp* pApp = AfxGetApp();
WINDOWPLACEMENT wp;
if (pApp->m_pMainWnd && INI_FILE[0]) {
pApp->m_pMainWnd->GetWindowPlacement (&wp);
IniWriteInt (INI_FILE, "Left", wp.rcNormalPosition.left);
IniWriteInt (INI_FILE, "Top", wp.rcNormalPosition.top);
IniWriteInt (INI_FILE, "Right", wp.rcNormalPosition.right);
IniWriteInt (INI_FILE, "Bottom", wp.rcNormalPosition.bottom);
}
[/CODE]


[CODE]BOOL setSubWindowPlacement(
CWnd *pwnd,
int vnum)
{
BOOL handled = FALSE;
char name[16];
char rgch[80];
WINDOWPLACEMENT wp = {0};

wp.length = sizeof(wp);
if (0 != pwnd->GetWindowPlacement(&wp))
{
RECT r = {0};
RECT *prc = &wp.rcNormalPosition;
POINT *pptMin= &wp.ptMinPosition;
POINT *pptMax= &wp.ptMaxPosition;
int state = 0;

handled = TRUE;

if (wp.showCmd == SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED)
{
state = P95_WP_MAXIMIZED;
}
else if (wp.showCmd == SW_SHOWMINIMIZED)
{
state = P95_WP_MINIMIZED;
}

wsprintf(rgch, "%d %ld %ld %ld %ld %ld %ld %ld %ld", state,
prc->top, prc->right, prc->bottom, prc->left,
pptMin->x, pptMin->y, pptMax->x, pptMax->y
);

wsprintf(name, "W%d", vnum);
IniWriteString(INI_FILE, name, rgch);
}

return handled;
}
[/CODE]

Produced this in prime.txt:

[CODE]Left=926
Top=32
Right=2336
Bottom=880
W0=0 0 1386 224 80 -1 -1 -1 -1
W2=0 448 1386 673 206 -1 -1 -11 -45
W3=0 336 1386 673 0 -1 -1 -1 -1
W1=0 224 1386 448 0 -1 -1 -11 -45
W4=0 376 940 502 0 -1 -1 -1 -1
W5=0 502 940 628 0 -1 -1 -1 -1
[/CODE]

kruoli 2020-08-29 09:15

On a lot of machines and fore some versions now (I cannot recall if it ever was different), Prime95 never was able to restore the maximized status of it's (only) subwindow.

Prime95 2020-08-30 19:49

Build 4
 
Build 4 is available. Go to the first post in this thread to download.

This version features an overhaul of the CERT assignment strategy. Looking at the (Ben Delo) data it seems the default settings did not assign CERTs in roughly the same proportion as results. produced. Ben was doing about 2 CERTs for every 3 results.

This was due to prime95 requesting making the same number of get cert assignment calls each day regardless of CPU power. That is, a slow dual core CPU would get, on average, the same number of CERT assignments each day as a 24-core AWS server.

Build 3 would check for an assignment at startup, every 6 hours, after each result reported, and when sending new expected completion dates.

Build 4 will check for an assignment at startup and every N hours where N depends on the number of CPU cores:
[CODE]
20+, N=3
12-19, N=4
7-11, N=6
3-6, N=8
2 N=12
1 N=24[/CODE]
This should lead to a more equitable distribution.

Other changes:
1) Getting PRP-CF CERTs is disabled by default. To turn it on, put CertMinExponent=0 in local.txt. The default is 50 million. I've set my computers to accept PRP-CF CERT assignments which should easily handle the load.
2) If you are assigned a PRP-CF CERT, prime95 will get up to 5 at a time. They are quick and this might minimize interruptions.
3) If you set CERT CPU percentage to 50 or more in the advanced resources dialog, then you will be considered a "CERT volunteer". Prime95 will check for CERT assignments every half hour even if you already have a CERT assignment, and will get multiple CERT assignments at a time.
4) You will not get CERT assignments on exponents over 200 million unless you have configured prime95 with an average of 4 or more threads per worker.

There are local.txt options to override the get assignment frequency and the quantity that can be queued up at one time. If there is a good reason to make these options public, I'll add them to undoc.txt.

keisentraut 2020-08-31 10:25

I think the server upload is congested. I run into timeouts, using an ISP in Germany. Speed of downloading the new mprime build was very slow, too.


Please note that you easily might create an unintended DDoS: if everyone's download fails, and all retry, it will only get worse and worse.

[QUOTE]
[Work thread Aug 31 12:13] Starting certification of M99838889 using FMA3 FFT length 5376K, Pass1=896, Pass2=6K, clm=1, 2 threads
[Comm thread Aug 31 12:13] URL: [URL]http://www.mersenne.org/proof_get_data/?aid=3801F2593E3F12E600344F1124AE8E94[/URL]
[Comm thread Aug 31 12:16] CURL library error: Operation timed out after 180000 milliseconds with 9185022 out of 12479894 bytes received
[Comm thread Aug 31 12:16] CURL library error: Operation timed out after 180000 milliseconds with 9185022 out of 12479894 bytes received
[Work thread Aug 31 12:16] Error getting CERT starting value.
[Work thread Aug 31 12:16] Will retry certification later.
[Work thread Aug 31 12:16] Aborting processing of this work unit -- will try again later.

[/QUOTE]

keisentraut 2020-08-31 10:56

Another issue: Here is an example of Ben Delo having certified his own result: [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=99841073&full=1"]M99841073[/URL]. I do not understand the math enough, but would this enable Ben Delo to "cheat"? Maybe the server should not assign CERT jobs to the user did the PRP (or "Anonymous").
[COLOR=DimGray](PS: Of course I trust Ben Delo not to "cheat". But someone else might.)[/COLOR]

moebius 2020-08-31 11:23

[QUOTE=keisentraut;555510]Another issue: Here is an example of Ben Delo having certified his own result[/QUOTE]

[I]yes, we will soon be obsolete for Delo[/I]

LaurV 2020-08-31 11:53

[QUOTE=keisentraut;555510]... having certified his own result[COLOR=DimGray]...[/COLOR][/QUOTE]
There is no problem with people certifying their own results. You can't "cheat". Well, not in an easy/reasonable/efficient way, at least. Trying to falsify a cert, you will need to invest much more resources than running the cert, and your chances of success are extremely slim.

jwnutter 2020-08-31 13:16

1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=Prime95;554383]Set MaxProofgenWaits=1 in prime.txt

The default is to try proof generation for 2 days before giving up (in case the file is on an NFS mount that is offline).
It is on my to-do list to tailor the wait time to the error. A file open error might wait two days, while your MD5 error is
unlikely to get better - maybe try just twice.[/QUOTE]

I also received the error: "MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file." I shut down P95, set MaxProofgenWaits=1 in Prime.txt, restarted, and all seems to be well now. I'm not 100% certain, but it appears P95 is working on the proof file now. Interestingly, I have two files titled prime.txt in the same P95 folder - I'm not sure how or why. It appears that both files are being updated with different information.

Currently running v30.3, build 3.


[CODE][Aug 31 06:32] Iteration: 83780000 / 83813888 [99.95%], ms/iter: 3.790, ETA: 00:02:08
[Aug 31 06:33] Iteration: 83790000 / 83813888 [99.97%], ms/iter: 3.792, ETA: 00:01:30
[Aug 31 06:34] Iteration: 83800000 / 83813888 [99.98%], ms/iter: 3.805, ETA: 00:00:52
[Aug 31 06:34] Iteration: 83810000 / 83813888 [99.99%], ms/iter: 3.790, ETA: 00:00:14
[Aug 31 06:34] Gerbicz error check passed at iteration 83813604.
[Aug 31 06:35] Gerbicz error check passed at iteration 83813860.
[Aug 31 06:35] Generating proof for M83813623. Proof power = 9, Hash length = 64
[Aug 31 06:35] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 06:35] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 06:35] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 06:35] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 06:35] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 06:35] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 06:36] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 06:37] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 06:38] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 06:38] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 06:38] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 06:38] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 06:44] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 06:44] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 06:44] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 06:44] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 06:44] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 06:44] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 06:45] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 06:46] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 06:48] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 06:48] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 06:48] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 06:48] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 06:53] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 06:53] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 06:53] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 06:53] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 06:53] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 06:54] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 06:54] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 06:55] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 06:57] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 06:57] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 06:57] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 06:57] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 07:02] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 07:02] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 07:02] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 07:02] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 07:02] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 07:03] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 07:03] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 07:04] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 07:06] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 07:06] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 07:06] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 07:06] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 07:11] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 07:11] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 07:11] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 07:12] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 07:12] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 07:12] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 07:12] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 07:13] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 07:15] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 07:15] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 07:15] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 07:15] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 07:21] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 07:21] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 07:21] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 07:21] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 07:21] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 07:21] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 07:22] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 07:23] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 07:24] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 07:24] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 07:24] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 07:24] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 07:30] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 07:30] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 07:30] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 07:30] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 07:30] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 07:30] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 07:31] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 07:32] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 07:34] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 07:34] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 07:34] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 07:34] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 07:39] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 07:39] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 07:39] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 07:39] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 07:39] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 07:39] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 07:40] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 07:41] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 07:43] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 07:43] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 07:43] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 07:43] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 07:48] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 07:48] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 07:48] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 07:48] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 07:48] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 07:49] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 07:49] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 07:50] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 07:52] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 07:52] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 07:52] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 07:52] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 07:57] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 07:57] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 07:57] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 07:58] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 07:58] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 07:58] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 07:58] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 07:59] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 08:01] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 08:01] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 08:01] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 08:01] Waiting five minutes before restarting.
[Aug 31 08:01] Worker stopped.
[Aug 31 08:04] Worker starting
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run worker on CPU core #1
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on CPU core #2
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run helper thread 4 on CPU core #5
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run helper thread 2 on CPU core #3
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run helper thread 5 on CPU core #6
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run helper thread 6 on CPU core #7
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run helper thread 3 on CPU core #4
[Aug 31 08:04] Setting affinity to run helper thread 7 on CPU core #8
[Aug 31 08:04] Resuming Gerbicz error-checking PRP test of M83813623 using FMA3 FFT length 4480K, Pass1=896, Pass2=5K, clm=1, 8 threads
[Aug 31 08:04] PRP proof using power=9 and 64-bit hash size.
[Aug 31 08:04] Proof requires 5.4GB of temporary disk space and uploading a 105MB proof file.
[Aug 31 08:04] Iteration: 83389522 / 83813888 [99.49%].
[Aug 31 08:04] Iteration: 83390000 / 83813888 [99.49%], ms/iter: 3.796, ETA: 00:26:49
[Aug 31 08:04] Iteration: 83400000 / 83813888 [99.50%], ms/iter: 3.798, ETA: 00:26:12
[/CODE]

retina 2020-08-31 13:22

[QUOTE=jwnutter;555524]Interestingly, I have two files titled prime.txt in the same P95 folder ...[/QUOTE]They have different icons, so one of them is probably a word file *.doc or something.

Great to see MS are still insisting upon hiding extensions and confusing everybody with crap like that! I would suggest that for everyone to untick that option and show the full file names.

Viliam Furik 2020-08-31 13:26

[QUOTE=retina;555526]They have different icons, so one of them is probably a word file *.doc or something.

Great to see MS are still insisting upon hiding extensions and confusing everybody with crap like that! I would suggest that for everyone to untick that option and show the full file names.[/QUOTE]

One of them is prime.log, the other is prime.txt. I think the one with a blue square in the icon is the .log

jwnutter 2020-08-31 13:37

Received another MD5 Error. Maybe I should upgrade to build 4 and try again.

[CODE][Aug 31 08:30] Iteration: 83800000 / 83813888 [99.98%], ms/iter: 3.741, ETA: 00:00:51
[Aug 31 08:30] Iteration: 83810000 / 83813888 [99.99%], ms/iter: 3.727, ETA: 00:00:14
[Aug 31 08:31] Gerbicz error check passed at iteration 83813604.
[Aug 31 08:31] Gerbicz error check passed at iteration 83813860.
[Aug 31 08:31] Generating proof for M83813623. Proof power = 9, Hash length = 64
[Aug 31 08:31] Root hash = 0D5CCB0B72A6FEB1AF3678FE396B0B3F9CA1DC9B05AF3A7A74D720E2A768F976
[Aug 31 08:31] hash0 = 6EB4CA99EB29F88D
[Aug 31 08:31] hash1 = FEF3ECA63085725C
[Aug 31 08:31] hash2 = 94413FE21F1716F1
[Aug 31 08:31] hash3 = F9034C494D5A28C8
[Aug 31 08:31] hash4 = 75DBBC01ED030E0E
[Aug 31 08:32] hash5 = F585034046BE90F7
[Aug 31 08:33] hash6 = 3EBCB6D5E1805F1C
[Aug 31 08:34] hash7 = 7E571EC7FA97D885
[Aug 31 08:34] MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file.
[Aug 31 08:34] Waiting 5 minutes to try proof generation again.
[Aug 31 08:34] Waiting five minutes before restarting.[/CODE]

jwnutter 2020-08-31 13:43

[QUOTE=Viliam Furik;555527]One of them is prime.log, the other is prime.txt. I think the one with a blue square in the icon is the .log[/QUOTE]

I checked again, and you are correct. Thanks!

Uncwilly 2020-08-31 14:19

This is why file extensions should always be shown.

storm5510 2020-08-31 14:47

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;555534]This is why file extensions should always be shown.[/QUOTE]

Another option: Change the file association. I set mine to "open with" Wordpad. This changes the icon making the distinction clearer.

Chuck 2020-08-31 15:30

I like the way build 4 is managing CERT assignments.

jwnutter 2020-08-31 15:32

Another MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file. I'm now running v30.3, build 4. The assignment (PRPDC=###,1,2,83813623,-1,76,0,3,1) is complete, so would it be best to delete this assignment from worktodo.txt to end this 5 minute proof generation loop?

I should also point out that the temporary residue files are being written to a different disk drive than the one used for P95.exe and associated files.

I may have found at least part of the problem. While typing this message a Norton message came up and said it had blocked a suspicious action by prime95.exe. I think I've fixed this problem, but we shall see.

Prime95 2020-08-31 16:15

[QUOTE=jwnutter;555524]I also received the error: "MD5 error reading PRP proof interim residues file." I shut down P95, set MaxProofgenWaits=1 in Prime.txt, restarted, and all seems to be well now. I'm not 100% certain, but it appears P95 is working on the proof file now. Interestingly, I have two files titled prime.txt in the same P95 folder - I'm not sure how or why. It appears that both files are being updated with different information.

Currently running v30.3, build 3.[/QUOTE]

It resumed from the last save file. Presumably prime95 will fail again creating the proof file. Your result will become a standard PRP without a proof.

BTW, in build 4 prime95 will try twice and give up -- no need to do the MaxProofgenWaits hack.

Xyzzy 2020-08-31 16:34

[QUOTE=Chuck;555547]I like the way build 4 is managing CERT assignments.[/QUOTE]We set up build 4 following George's instructions and we haven't seen a cert job yet.

:sad:

prime.txt[CODE]V24OptionsConverted=1
V30OptionsConverted=1
WGUID_version=2
StressTester=0
UsePrimenet=1
DialUp=0
V5UserID=Xyzzy
MergeWindows=7
DaysOfWork=1
OutputIterations=100000
Left=437
Top=244
Right=1205
Bottom=769
W2=0 0 136 39 0 -1 -1 -1 -1
DaysBetweenCheckins=0.125
Priority=1
RunOnBattery=0
WorkPreference=4

[PrimeNet]
Debug=0
ProxyHost=
ProxyUser=
UploadRateLimit=1
UploadStartTime=00:00
UploadEndTime=24:00
DownloadDailyLimit=65536

[Worker #1]
[/CODE]locat.txt[CODE]CertMinExponent=0
OldCpuSpeed=4289
NewCpuSpeedCount=0
NewCpuSpeed=0
RollingAverage=1000
RollingAverageIsFromV27=1
WorkerThreads=1
CoresPerTest=16
ComputerGUID=********************************
ComputerID=3950X
Memory=65536
MaxEmergencyMemory=1024
CertDailyCPULimit=100
WorkerDiskSpace=16
CertWork=1
SrvrUID=468814631
SrvrComputerName=1438331749
SrvrPO2=1
SrvrPO3=1
SrvrPO4=65536
SrvrPO5=65536
SrvrPO6=450
SrvrPO7=1410
SrvrPO8=1
SrvrPO9=1
SrvrP00=4
LastEndDatesSent=1598890007
CertDailyRemainingLastUpdate=1598890009
CertDailyMBRemaining=33809.9
CertDailyCPURemaining=100
SrvrPO1=4
ProofResiduesDir=
ProofArchiveDir=
RollingHash=1386335570
RollingCompleteTime=35586
RollingStartTime=1598869606

[Worker #1][/CODE]

pinhodecarlos 2020-08-31 16:37

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;555561]We set up build 4 following George's instructions and we haven't seen a cert job yet.

:sad:[/QUOTE]

I don’t think it is working...I only receive cert work when I cancel any other work. I’ve set 100% for CERT plus unlimited bandwidths and some more settings in the background.

Was wondering if it is possible to know how many CERT wus are available. Maybe they all have been cleaned up by others.


All times are UTC. The time now is 03:49.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.