mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Riesel Prime Search (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=59)
-   -   5*2^n-1 Reservation Thread (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=9472)

VBCurtis 2007-10-03 07:37

5*2^n-1 Reservation Thread
 
1 Attachment(s)
This is a new thread to coordinate efforts testing k=5.
Please post your reservations below and mail your LLR results to [EMAIL="VBCurtis@gmail.com"]Curtis[/EMAIL] upon complition of your file.

[B]Found Primes[/B] (by this project)
5*2^1194164-1 (359480 digits) by AES, on Jan. 20, 2008.
5*2^3090860-1 (930443 digits) by VBCurtis, on Apr. 11, 2012.
5*2^3264650-1 (982759 digits) by Carlos, on July 8, 2013.
5*2^5429494-1 (1634442 digits) by unconnected, on Jan. 13, 2017. :shock:
5*2^7037188-1 (2118406 digits) by ryanp on Sep. 22, 2021
5*2^7755002-1 (2334489 digits) by ryanp on Sep. 22, 2021
5*2^10349000-1 (3115361 digits) by ryanp on Sep. 29, 2021
5*2^10495620-1 (3159498 digits) by ryanp on Sep. 26, 2021
5*2^11355764-1 (3418427 digits) by ryanp on Oct. 2, 2021

[B]Status[/B]
[CODE]
Range Tested by Status
[URL="http://www.15k.org/k5_done.txt"]470,000-3,499,000[/URL] - RPS - Complete (3 primes)
3,499,000-3,646,000 - pb386 - Complete (Prime: 5*2^3569154-1)
3,646,000-4,000,000 - Carlos - Complete
4,000,000-4,010,000 - Kosmaj - Complete
4,010,000-4,090,000 - Carlos - Complete
4,090,000-4,100,000 - Kosmaj - Complete
4,100,000-4,750,000 - Carlos - Complete
4,750,000-5,040,000 - Carlos - Complete
5,040,000-5,090,000 - kracker - Complete
5,090,000-5,150,000 - Carlos - Complete
5,150,000-5,160,000 - Carlos - Complete
5,160,000-5,175,000 - Carlos - Complete
5,175,000-5,185,000 - Carlos - Complete
5,185,000-5,200,000 - Carlos - Complete
5,200,000-5,250,000 - Carlos - Complete
5,250,000-5,300,000 - Curtis - Complete
5,300,000-5,400,000 - Thomas - Complete
5,400,000-6,000,000 - unconnected - Complete (prime: 5*2^5429494-1)
6,000,000-10,000,000 - ryanp - Complete (2 primes: 5*2^7037188-1, 5*2^7755002-1)
10,000,000-12,000,000 - ryanp - Complete (3 primes: 5*2^10349000-1, 5*2^10495620-1, 5*2^11355764-1)
[/CODE]
Note: Primes found by pb386 were not a part of this project.

[B]The latest test file[/B]
The attached file contains all candidates in the 4-6M range, including already tested ones.
Please help yourself by extracting the range you want to test.
Extensively sieved by Psieve (final sieve file of June 22, 2014).

gd_barnes 2007-10-04 06:18

Reserving up to n=520/530K...
 
[quote=VBCurtis;115599]Sieving is complete to 25T so far.
470-500k has been reserved and sent to Gary for processing.
Since I don't have mod privileges, and don't want to stick Kosmaj or Larry with administering yet another reservation thread, I'll ask anyone interested in work to "reserve" the range in this thread. At the same time, pm me your email, and I'll send the file.

For now, I'll work in 20k or 30k chunks. 500-520/530 will be ready in a few days. Anyone want it? 470-500 contained 1400 candidates.

-Curtis[/quote]

If there are no takers, I'll take up to n=520K/530K; however you divide it up. I'll put 2 cores on it. At an avg. of 400 secs./candidate at n=500K, 2800 candidates from n=470K-530K would take 6.5 days.

Technically it should take even less time. A test around n=470K showed a smaller fftlen and only took about 300 secs. I'm not sure how long the fftlen stays less though.

I wish my BIG k's LLR'd this fast! :rolleyes:


Gary

PatrickSchmeer 2007-10-04 22:36

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;115599]For now, I'll work in 20k or 30k chunks. 500-520/530 will be ready in a few days. Anyone want it? 470-500 contained 1400 candidates.[/QUOTE]

I have just returned from a short trip. Yes, I would like to reserve 500-530.

Patrick

gd_barnes 2007-10-05 06:47

[quote=PatrickSchmeer;115710]I have just returned from a short trip. Yes, I would like to reserve 500-530.

Patrick[/quote]


Curtis, it works for me that Patrick takes 500-530. I'll reserve a different range after 470-500 is done LLRing...probably on Sunday; or just simply wait until you tell us what the next range will be after 530.

The fftlen went up around n=476.1K. It's at about 380 secs/candidate where I'm at now (n=480K) gradually increasing to right around 400 secs. at n=500K on a 3.2 Ghz P4.


Gary

VBCurtis 2007-10-05 09:20

Patrick- glad you're interested. pm me your email address, I'll send the 500-530 file when it's ready, likely Monday evening-overnight.

Since multiple people are interested in supplying LLR work, I set a second core on sieving; I should be able to provide a 25k chunk every 5-6 days this way. I suppose I can also suspend my fanatic over-sieving of ranges; the 500-530 chunk will be sieved to nearly 30T as it is. :flex:

Gary, I'll send you 530-550 roughly next friday, around 33T on the sieve. Since the FFT length just jumped at 480, this range should be pretty close to optimally sieved at that level. I think there will be another jump around 550-575, so I'll run the sieve quite a bit deeper before releasing 550-600.

-Curtis

gd_barnes 2007-10-05 15:26

[quote=VBCurtis;115747]
Since multiple people are interested in supplying LLR work, I set a second core on sieving; I should be able to provide a 25k chunk every 5-6 days this way. I suppose I can also suspend my fanatic over-sieving of ranges; the 500-530 chunk will be sieved to nearly 30T as it is. :flex:
[/quote]

Oh, NOW the truth comes out! I just KNEW you were over-sieving! :lol: (Although for the huge range of n=470K-4M that you're sieving, I can't really tell.) Great work! With your sieving, LLRing on k=470K-500K is just smoking...at n=483K this morning...running on 2 cores after about 30-35 hours. With the fftlen jump at n=476K, it was about half at the faster rate and half at the slower rate at this point.

I'll be out of town from tonight until Sunday and my k=5 machine may just end up sitting idle for a good portion of Sunday :ermm: without a concerted effort to switch LLRing between machines, which I don't want to mess with. Darn the idle CPU cycles! :smile:


[quote]
Gary, I'll send you 530-550 roughly next friday, around 33T on the sieve. Since the FFT length just jumped at 480, this range should be pretty close to optimally sieved at that level. I think there will be another jump around 550-575, so I'll run the sieve quite a bit deeper before releasing 550-600.

-Curtis[/quote]

Great! Works for me on 530-550.

I'll run some quickie tests to see where the fftlen jumps again. No use to over-sieve more than you have to! :grin:

Final note to all...I still plan on splitting any first prime that I find on this with BlisteringSheep, who has contributed a lot of sieving to many efforts at RPS without being able to LLR them.


Gary

gd_barnes 2007-10-08 00:09

k=5
470-500 complete
no primes found

Curtis, I'll take 530-550 when you have it ready.

VBCurtis 2007-10-09 17:39

500 to 525 and 525 to 550 sent to Patrick and Gary, respectively.
550 to 575 and 575 to 600 will be ready roughly 22 Oct, sieved to 35T. To claim either one, post here and PM me your email address if I don't already have it.

-Curtis

PatrickSchmeer 2007-10-09 18:12

I'll take 550-575.

Kosmaj 2007-10-09 21:34

I'd like to reserve the next file, 575-600, for B'maxx, he has only 2 cpu's now, and will appreciate such fast testing numbers.
[QUOTE]I suppose I can also suspend my fanatic over-sieving of ranges; the 500-530 chunk will be sieved to nearly 30T as it is.
[/QUOTE]

I agree. :smile: IMO you can release files all the way to 633k right now.

gd_barnes 2007-10-10 04:32

I probably started a trend here that was not a good idea so I'll take the blame for it. Since there's no formal posted sieved files like on the various RPS drives...beginning with n=600K, it would be a good idea to wait until we're done LLRing any one 25K range (or whatever range Curtis decides to release larger ones in the future) before reserving the next range.

If not, then I reserve n=600K-625K, 625K-650K, 650K-675K, on up to 4M. :lol:

Seriously...on another note...I don't know if everyone may be aware of it, but I think Curtis will want to take the range of n=600K-632K for himself for a specific goal that he has. I just wanted to make sure there are no stepped-on toes, Curtis, if someone wants to reserve above n=600K in the near future.


Gary

VBCurtis 2007-10-10 05:00

I put one of my Core2 cores on sieving this, since there is such demand. In about a week, I'll be done to 38T, and will release 550-575 for Patrick and 575-600 for Battlemaxx (via kosmaj); as Gary pointed out, I'll take 600-630 myself, and continue sieving before I release 630+.

Gary, I'll just assume you want 630-660 by the time it's ready. Consider the gap a chance to push your own searches quickly. :) You did not start a bad trend- my sieving is slow enough that you and patrick (and anyone else) are welcome to plan ahead, decide you'll be ready to process the next range by the time it's ready, and reserve it ahead of time. In principle, reserving any range-file you are ready to work on upon release makes sense to me.

-Curtis

gd_barnes 2007-10-11 05:54

[quote=VBCurtis;116033]I put one of my Core2 cores on sieving this, since there is such demand. In about a week, I'll be done to 38T, and will release 550-575 for Patrick and 575-600 for Battlemaxx (via kosmaj); as Gary pointed out, I'll take 600-630 myself, and continue sieving before I release 630+.

Gary, I'll just assume you want 630-660 by the time it's ready. Consider the gap a chance to push your own searches quickly. :) You did not start a bad trend- my sieving is slow enough that you and patrick (and anyone else) are welcome to plan ahead, decide you'll be ready to process the next range by the time it's ready, and reserve it ahead of time. In principle, reserving any range-file you are ready to work on upon release makes sense to me.

-Curtis[/quote]

Curtis,

OK, works for me. I'll reserve 630-660 now. IMHO, this k is high priority until we get close to n=1M so I'm right on it with two 3.2 Ghz P4 cores within a day of you sending me the sieve files. Later on, I may temporarily stop part of my twin prime search to put a 3rd core on some of the higher ranges if we maintain the n=25K-30K pieces.

n=525K-550K is now already up to n=534K. No primes yet. ETA is early-evening Friday. So if you want to send me 630-660 this coming Saturday regardless of how far sieved, that works for me.


Gary

VBCurtis 2007-10-11 20:21

I am sieving 3 different places at the moment, and only bother to combine them weekly. I'll combine ~Tuesday at 38T, sending everything up to 660 out at that point. That should keep everyone working a couple weeks, allowing me to get up to 50T before the next batch is ready. "proper" depth at 660k is around 55T, but we all know sieving within 1 bit of proper depth is good enough- the difference between 40T and 55T is perhaps 2 tests' worth of "free" sieving in that 630-660 range.

I plan to LLR 660-700 myself, with no further reservation for me until >850k.

-Curtis

gd_barnes 2007-10-12 23:09

k=5
525-550 complete
no primes found

Next week works on 630-660.


Gary

Kosmaj 2007-10-14 07:53

This is a new thread to coordinate efforts testing k=5. Please post your reservations here.
Previous posts related to k=5 can be found [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=9136"]here[/URL].

Curtis, if you want to add something to the first post in the thread please let me know and I'll do it.

Thanks.

gd_barnes 2007-10-15 16:48

[quote=Kosmaj;116312]This is a new thread to coordinate efforts testing k=5. Please post your reservations here.
Previous posts related to k=5 can be found [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=9136"]here[/URL].

Curtis, if you want to add something to the first post in the thread please let me know and I'll do it.

Thanks.[/quote]

Kosmaj,

Thanks for separating this! It looks much better now.

One more thing to add...I think Curtis reserved n=660K-700K per his last message here.


Gary

Kosmaj 2007-10-15 17:24

I just added 660-700.

BTW, I'd like to suggest that we collect results (LLR residues) of tested k=5 numbers, and I'd like to suggest that Curtis collects them, so that people mail their results to him. I hope Curtis agrees?

em99010pepe 2007-10-15 17:54

Can I help? I have a spare machine...

gd_barnes 2007-10-15 20:03

results files and freeing up sieving resources...
 
[quote=Kosmaj;116401]I just added 660-700.

BTW, I'd like to suggest that we collect results (LLR residues) of tested k=5 numbers, and I'd like to suggest that Curtis collects them, so that people mail their results to him. I hope Curtis agrees?[/quote]

Kosmaj,

I completely agree. It's funny that you mention that. Curtis is already collecting them. I've sent him both of mine. He's requesting them from us as he sends us new sieved ranges.

This brings up one question...should we report the ranges LLR'd to Prof. Caldwell's site as we do them or is it better to wait until later when we have one very large range done?


Curtis,

With 5 of us (I think) now ready to do or already doing LLR work on k=5, I'll suspend another sieving effort that I'm working on and free up my dual-core Athlon for sieving on both cores. Send me whatever P-ranges you think are best and if you have time, the latest sieved files with as many factors removed as possible for maximum sieving speed.

At the rate we're going, we may push n=1M by the end of 2007. :surprised That would be cool! :cool:


Gary

VBCurtis 2007-10-16 05:20

Thanks, Gary. I'll send everything tomorrow- new sieve file, suggested p-ranges, and the range you reserved. Thanks for the sieve offer- it'll really help. Get sr1 v. 1.1.12 if you haven't- I think it's faster on some architectures.

Carlos- I'll have work available for you in 10-12 days. We're a little behind on sieving, but with Gary's help we'll catch up enough to have work available near 30 Oct. It will be 700-720k (or a larger block, if you want it).

With so much interest, we'll definitely be at 1M by the end of the year.

Kosmaj is quite correct- Gary suggested to me via PM to collect ranges, and I am doing so. When a range is complete, please email me the results file to the email address you receive the work file from (this name at gmail).

-Curtis

VBCurtis 2007-10-17 06:51

ranges have been sent out:
550-575 Patrick
575-600 Battlemaxx
630-665 Gary (edited from 660, so that he has more work)

665k-4m still sieving, at 38T currently, on 5 cores thanks to Gary offering two Athlon64 cores to get us caught up with demand.
Sieve speed on my Conroe is ~11Mp/sec, 625 sec/factor at 38T. The new motherboard allows a healthy overclock. :grin:

The next batch from 665-800 should be ready at the end of the month, sieved to 58T or so. I have reserved 665-700, but 700-800 will be available in 20k chunks.
Happy Hunting!
-Curtis

PatrickSchmeer 2007-10-17 11:06

500-525 complete - no primes found.
Results file sent to Curtis.
Just started at n=550000.
Reserving the next available range.

Patrick

gd_barnes 2007-10-18 20:20

LLRing and sieving ETA's
 
Curtis,

I started LLRing 630-665 and sieving 665-4M for 53T-58T late last night. ETA on the LLR is about 6 days (10/24) on 2 cores. BIG BIG jump in the timings after the fftlen increase at n=633.3K...from 500 secs. to 700 secs.! :sad: Ouch! (now at n=634K)

I think somebody has it in for me to give me the ranges where the timings make a big jump. :smile:

ETA on the P=53T-58T sieve range is 10/28 per sr1sieve on 2 cores on my 1.6Ghz Athlon. Tonight I'll remove the ranges you suggested in your PM.

Since we're reserving right after starting a new range, I'll reserve the next available range after Carlos' and Patrick's recent requests. I'm thinking 700K-720K to Carlos, 720K-740K to Patrick, and 740K-760K for me. Timings are getting pretty intense at this level. I'm not used to this! :smile:


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-10-18 20:39

Gary,

I suppose the goal here is to reach 1M until the end of the year.....
Those 700 sec per test are for which core speed? Here's an example of the current time I get with one of the cores of the 2.4 GHz quad-core for the 5th RPS Drive at n=778k: 57*2^778993-1 689.756 sec.

Carlos

VBCurtis 2007-10-19 01:24

Gary- thanks for the timing report. I extrapolated from my 600k timing sample (550 sec on a P4-2750), which explains why I suddenly thought we were not under-sieving. If there really is a 30-40% jump in execution times at 633, the original sieve-depth estimates are still accurate (I wondered how I was so far off!). Nonetheless, removing the lower candidates is still likely wise.

If you were at 500 sec before the jump, I'm guessing you have a P4-3.2. Core2's LLR at roughly a P4 of 50-60% higher clock speed, so Carlos' 2.4 would get timings equivalent to P4-3.6 to 3.8, or 15-20% faster than Gary. That leaves some error in my estimates, since Carlos is under 700 sec at 775k on 57.... but I'm in the ballpark.

Gary and I are looking to sieve to 58T in the next 10 days, then release files from 700 to 840 or so. 700 to 760 are spoken for... get 'em while they're hot! One reservation at a time, from each batch, please. When we get sieving ahead of LLR reservations, we'll revert to the RPS-drive style of reserving the next range when the current range is about to finish.

Finally, there will be a large break at n=1.2M. Sheep's sieving farm is on hiatus at the moment, and we'll hit a wall at that point until he comes back online. In a perfect world, we'll hit 1M by 1/1/2008, 1.2M by 1 Mar, and Sheep will be back sieving before then. I'll hope.
-Curtis

gd_barnes 2007-10-19 05:25

More exact CPU specs and speeds
 
[quote=VBCurtis;116664]Gary- thanks for the timing report. I extrapolated from my 600k timing sample (550 sec on a P4-2750), which explains why I suddenly thought we were not under-sieving. If there really is a 30-40% jump in execution times at 633, the original sieve-depth estimates are still accurate (I wondered how I was so far off!). Nonetheless, removing the lower candidates is still likely wise.

If you were at 500 sec before the jump, I'm guessing you have a P4-3.2. Core2's LLR at roughly a P4 of 50-60% higher clock speed, so Carlos' 2.4 would get timings equivalent to P4-3.6 to 3.8, or 15-20% faster than Gary. That leaves some error in my estimates, since Carlos is under 700 sec at 775k on 57.... but I'm in the ballpark.

Gary and I are looking to sieve to 58T in the next 10 days, then release files from 700 to 840 or so. 700 to 760 are spoken for... get 'em while they're hot! One reservation at a time, from each batch, please. When we get sieving ahead of LLR reservations, we'll revert to the RPS-drive style of reserving the next range when the current range is about to finish.

Finally, there will be a large break at n=1.2M. Sheep's sieving farm is on hiatus at the moment, and we'll hit a wall at that point until he comes back online. In a perfect world, we'll hit 1M by 1/1/2008, 1.2M by 1 Mar, and Sheep will be back sieving before then. I'll hope.
-Curtis[/quote]


Thanks for that explanation Curtis. I'm really a little confused about computer types and speeds. (It used to be so easy to go by Mhz/Ghz CPU speed but things have changed a lot in the last 2-3 years.) You were close on the machine type. I'm using one of my three Dell core-2 duos and it is only slightly slower than my single-core 3.2-Ghz P4 desktop that I use as my main personal machine. So I assumed it was a 3.0 Ghz or the equivalent. But it's actually 1.66 Ghz, which I could never quite understand until your explanation here. Even though half the Ghz speed, each core is only about 10% slower than my main desktop running one core. Carlos, your 2.4-Ghz quad machine must be like if I had a 2.4-Ghz Dell core-2 duo (vs. my 1.6 Ghz), i.e. 50% Ghz-speed faster than what I'm running. Although I'm not sure if that translates to 50% faster LLR time, i.e. 1/3rd less or 600 vs. 400 secs as an example.

Curtis, the 500 to 700-second jump was a slight exaggeration but not much. It actually went from about 520 to 690. About a 33% jump. How does that make the sieving look now? So you'll know exactly what I'm running and will have a better estimate for sieving, here is a cut-and-paste right out of LLR for my Dell core-2 duo as well as exact timings before and after the fftlen increase:

(Dell core-duo CPU specs):
Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 CPU T5500 @ 1.666Ghz
CPU speed: 1662.38 MHz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2
L1 cache size: 32 KB
L2 cache size: 2048 KB

Timings:
5*2^633108-1 519.754 secs.
5*2^633140-1 519.544 secs.
*****
5*2^634922-1 691.318 secs.
5*2^635020-1 692.568 secs.


Here's something confusing...My main sieving machine is an Athlon dual-core laptop that also runs at 1.66 Ghz. But it LLR's at half of the speed of the Dell core-duos although it sieves at > 75% of the speed of them. So I always only use it for sieving. By the way, I'm only 'assuming' it is an Athlon based on the CPU specs for it from LLR as follows:

(Assumed Athlon CPU specs):
AMD Turion(tm) 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-50
CPU speed: 1607.28 Mhz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2
L1 cache size: 64 KB
L2 cache size: 256 KB


Curtis, I will probably stop my LLR effort somewhere in the n=800's. There will be plenty of people to continue from there. This is mostly why I don't pick up ranges from the team efforts much. I have nothing against them at all but there's almost always plenty of people on them and the tests take too long for my tastes and I prefer to LLR large n-ranges at once. As you know, I try to find dormant k's that need to be worked and k's with gaps that need to be filled and k's that are 'behind the curve' in how far they should have been tested. k=5 certainly filled the 'behing the curve' case.

It will be a stretch for us to get LLR to n=1M by year-end with or without me after n=800's, but it can be done. If Carlos can keep throwing 2 or 3 cores of that new very speedy quad-core of his at the effort, we may just get there. Kosmaj or Karsten may even want to throw in a CPU or two at it. Mostly, I'm confident that all ranges up to n=1M will have LLRing 'in the works' by year end. It would be a very significant accomplishment if all LLR tests were done to n=1M because of the amount of time each candidate will take to LLR at that point.


Gary

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-19 07:55

Curtis - If you can carve out a non-essential sieve range (ie. something that's not in anyone's critical path if it takes a week to finish), I believe I can start scheduling some time on the farm now. It'll be a while before everything is back to full speed (a large chunk of it is still in boxes), but it should help some.
Sheep :alex:

em99010pepe 2007-10-19 08:19

Gary,

One core of the 2.4 GHz quad-core is 45% faster than one of your 1.66GHz core. I also have a T5500 and that's the difference I get. The T5500 is as fast as my work machine, a P4 631 3.0GHz.
So for LLRing I have for sure at least 5 cores and the possibility to fire up more 2 at home and 3 at work.

Carlos

VBCurtis 2007-10-19 08:41

Sheep- I plan to be at 75T by 15 Nov. Start at 75T, and any work you get done will be a bonus. I know sr1 isn't the easiest for you to run, so perhaps just run on a small handful of cores? I'll send the appropriate sieve file for sr1 presently.

After 15 Nov, I'll sieve at about 6T/week until catching the big sieve at 150T.

Gary- I have the identical Athlon laptop CPU, except for 64bit linux instead of windows (it also has Vista, which motivated me to adjust to linux on laptop). Your Core2s also appear to be laptop chips, so the LLR timings you get are surprisingly quick (due to memory speeds and other power-related issues, a laptop and desktop chip of same speed and type are not equal). I'll run some k=5 on the Core2-2850 and see how fast the timings are (I predict 350 seconds at 610k, but that would not be a scaling of your speed).
-Curtis

gd_barnes 2007-10-19 17:37

[quote=VBCurtis;116684]Sheep- I plan to be at 75T by 15 Nov. Start at 75T, and any work you get done will be a bonus. I know sr1 isn't the easiest for you to run, so perhaps just run on a small handful of cores? I'll send the appropriate sieve file for sr1 presently.

After 15 Nov, I'll sieve at about 6T/week until catching the big sieve at 150T.

Gary- I have the identical Athlon laptop CPU, except for 64bit linux instead of windows (it also has Vista, which motivated me to adjust to linux on laptop). Your Core2s also appear to be laptop chips, so the LLR timings you get are surprisingly quick (due to memory speeds and other power-related issues, a laptop and desktop chip of same speed and type are not equal). I'll run some k=5 on the Core2-2850 and see how fast the timings are (I predict 350 seconds at 610k, but that would not be a scaling of your speed).
-Curtis[/quote]

You are correct. The machine that I'm running k=5 on is my Dell core-2 duo work laptop that I'm typing from right now. It's the only machine that I can see throughout the day and I like seeing up-to-the-minute progress of 'important' efforts like this. :smile: The other two Dell duos are my own laptops that I bought about 2 months after discovering these prime searching efforts because I liked my work laptop so much. (I think I'm going to wish I had waited and bought a super-speed quad like Carlos.) All the rest of my machines are my own except for one very older slow laptop (0.8 Ghz I think) that I borrowed from a friend that I only use for sieving in my all-twin effort.

Question...what about the CPU specs told you that it was a laptop?


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-10-19 17:46

Gary,

My super-speed quad, which is not, was cheaper than your T5500 laptop.

Carlos

VBCurtis 2007-10-20 00:27

Two things told me it was laptop:
First, model number is 5500. The desktop chips are 6xxx or 4xxx.
Second, 1.66Ghz is slower than any desktop part released except the 4300, a 1.6Ghz price leader. 1.66 was never released as a desktop speed. The 4xxx series are 800 bus speed, multiples of 200 for CPU speed. 6xxx are 1066 bus (6x50 is 1333 bus, recently released), so some odd speeds happen ending in 66.

Mine is a 6300 model, stock speed 1866/1066 bus. It's currently at 2840/1624 bus, and survived an expected 92F day today without AC or any errors. I love overclocking. Cruelty would be so proud.
-Curtis

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-20 08:29

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;116684]Sheep- I plan to be at 75T by 15 Nov. Start at 75T, and any work you get done will be a bonus. I know sr1 isn't the easiest for you to run, so perhaps just run on a small handful of cores? I'll send the appropriate sieve file for sr1 presently.

After 15 Nov, I'll sieve at about 6T/week until catching the big sieve at 150T.
-Curtis[/QUOTE]

I should be able to get something started today. Initial testing with sr1sieve-1.1.12 is reporting about 4.3-4.4 Mp/s per core. I'll be able to start with 12 cores, but should increase that number to around 60 cores before the weekend is over. Will that help any? :cool: (I'd start them now, but it's 0430 and past my bedtime :sleep:)

em99010pepe 2007-10-20 08:34

BlisteringSheep,

Try the latest version of sr1sieve (1.2.0).

Carlos

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-20 20:55

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;116748]BlisteringSheep,

Try the latest version of sr1sieve (1.2.0).

Carlos[/QUOTE]

I didn't use it originally because it was notated as "experimental" on Geoff's page. I have tried it now; there's at most a 0.4% increase in performance.

Also, I have started the first 12 cores now. I'm going to have to write some support scripts to generate work files before I can do the larger roll-out, though. I'm open to suggestions, but my initial plan is to give each core their own copy of the dat file with a localized start pmin value, using the same dat file for input and output so the pmin value gets updated, and pass the pmax value via sr1sieve-command-line.txt.

VBCurtis 2007-10-20 22:07

Oh, boy.. Sheep is here to save the day!
Since your farm is back up earlier than expected, it's prudent to start at 60T instead of 75T. Gary and I will achieve 60T roughly 1 Nov. With 60 cores, you'll reach 1T/hr throughput, finishing 60-120T in roughly 3 days. Yeesh.

My Athlon needs something to do, so once you reach 100 or 120T, it's better to return to sr2 and the big sieve. I'll fill in the gap this fall to 150T while you reach unprecedented (for RPS) depths for n>1.2M.
-Curtis

edit: Sheep, I'd just give each core 1T to do. When it's done, move it on to something else. Alternately, just use 12 cores with wider ranges- sr1 just doesn't lend itself as well to a wide rollout like you have. 4T each on 12 cores is ~50T and 12-14 days.

gd_barnes 2007-10-21 05:20

Off-the-wall thought...
 
[quote=VBCurtis;116771]Oh, boy.. Sheep is here to save the day!
Since your farm is back up earlier than expected, it's prudent to start at 60T instead of 75T. Gary and I will achieve 60T roughly 1 Nov. With 60 cores, you'll reach 1T/hr throughput, finishing 60-120T in roughly 3 days. Yeesh.

My Athlon needs something to do, so once you reach 100 or 120T, it's better to return to sr2 and the big sieve. I'll fill in the gap this fall to 150T while you reach unprecedented (for RPS) depths for n>1.2M.
-Curtis

edit: Sheep, I'd just give each core 1T to do. When it's done, move it on to something else. Alternately, just use 12 cores with wider ranges- sr1 just doesn't lend itself as well to a wide rollout like you have. 4T each on 12 cores is ~50T and 12-14 days.[/quote]


Holy cow. Both Sheep and Curtis, IMHO dedicating any more than 12 cores to one k for sieving is overkill. If you look back at previous team drives, I don't recall seeing one where we sieved so deeply for n<1M. So Sheep, can none of your machines do LLRing? Even if it's half the speed or less than the usual for the rest of us, having 48 cores doing LLRing...whew! Regardless, Kosmaj or Curtis, I'd suggest seeing what other 3-4 k's you think is better for him to work on that he could put about 12 cores each on.

Here's an off-the-wall thought...If Sheep can't LLR, if we want to do this optimally, we should see how many people we can get to drop their reservations for k < 300 and have Sheep sieve the entire ~145 k's at once. (Knocking out the few that are being done by other major projects.) That would be the ULTIMATE team drive! Then Kosmaj, Lousle, Curtis or whomever could start posting ranges for people to LLR, perhaps just 200-500 n at a time, which would contain plenty of work at any level of n for 145 k's! The thinking being that we're all reserving ranges of n instead of specific k's.

The 5th drive now is pretty cool with the 14 k's divisible by 3. Imagine expanding it to ~145 k's! As crazy as it sounds, in theory it's the most efficient way to do things, kind of like they do for RieselSieve and Seventeen-or-Bust. Sure, there would be logistical issues like starting the sieves and then removing ranges already searched but that would only take a small amount of time compared to the long-term benefit.

I know getting around the political issue of reservations would be a problem but even if we could have him sieving 50 k's at once would be outstanding! :smile:

With Carlos having several new cores and with newer folks on board like Anon and Patrick, I think we've got a good motivated group to do a new large team drive like this.

(At least my wild ideas aren't outside the scope of the project this time!) :rolleyes:


Gary

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-21 06:19

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;116781]So Sheep, can none of your machines do LLRing?

Gary[/QUOTE]

The only point that I'm really qualified to answer :smile: :down:: No, they can't LLR at all; there is no client available for them.

I have two concerns about your suggestion that I take the entire range to sieve:
1. I think that some people genuinely prefer to sieve.
2. I can't guarantee machine time, especially right now. Most of my machines are currently down, and they've been heavily utilized recently. I'm anxious about committing to something I'm not sure I can fulfill.

That said, I do want to help out however and whenever I can.

Sheep :alex:

VBCurtis 2007-10-21 07:33

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;116781]Holy cow. Both Sheep and Curtis, IMHO dedicating any more than 12 cores to one k for sieving is overkill. If you look back at previous team drives, I don't recall seeing one where we sieved so deeply for n<1M.
Gary[/QUOTE]

There is no other k sieved so deeply below 1M, because no other k had a single sieve done to 4M. Efficiency increases greatly with a larger n-range; combined with empirical evidence that removing the small n's provide very little speed benefit to the overall sieve, it makes sense to sieve extremely deeply for large sieves. Sheep's farm(s) have sieved k=15, my group of k's (11,13,31,45,99,127, and now 5), rieselsieve, and some other stuff I'm forgetting. PowerPCs have no LLR client, alas.

The 14 k's drive has quite a lot of life left for LLR before we need a new team drive; quite a few users prefer to do everything themselves (me included). I think building a new team drive with a dozen or so k's is a great idea, using Sheep to sieve; however, moving 100+ k's to a group effort puts global efficiency above individualism. A possible compromise is to build such a global sieve, but continue to allow users to reserve entire k's out of the sieve, rather than team LLR everything. Those who like to sieve (or have athlons or laptops that aren't well suited to LLR) can reserve ranges from this massive sieve. If we ever do this, we should still leave some k's untouched for those interested to process entirely on their own. Perhaps put 30 k's of various weights into a mass sieve... eventually.

Another way to look at this is max efficiency comes from the largest n-range, but we do not usually sieve very-large n-ranges. Why not? The same long-run "greater good" is achieved by sieving a range twice as high as sieving twice as many k-values. One chooses limits on both for practical, project-completion reasons. Only for very large n-ranges does one not need to finish sieving for max efficiency before starting LLR; if sieving 100 k's, that sieving step would be many CPU-years. And what about file size? The sieve needs to be practically emailed, which puts a 10MB or 20MB limit.

I tried 33 k's from 260k to 300k, in the 900-1000 range (see primesearch), as an experiment. It was NOT efficient. Many k's with a narrow n range is bad bad bad for sr1/sr2. Big fat n ranges are incredibly efficient. Thus, my decision to run this k=5 sieve to 4M, and the resulting ~100T sieve depth for n<1M.
-Curtis

em99010pepe 2007-10-21 09:52

You guys are forgetting amphoria, he has a bunch of machines.

Can I have my K=5 files by the end of this week (25-26 Oct)?

VBCurtis 2007-10-21 16:45

Yes- sr1 1.2.0 has given us enough speed boost that I can get you the files Friday.
-Curtis

gd_barnes 2007-10-22 02:09

Great thoughts Curtis!
 
[quote=VBCurtis;116783]There is no other k sieved so deeply below 1M, because no other k had a single sieve done to 4M. Efficiency increases greatly with a larger n-range; combined with empirical evidence that removing the small n's provide very little speed benefit to the overall sieve, it makes sense to sieve extremely deeply for large sieves. Sheep's farm(s) have sieved k=15, my group of k's (11,13,31,45,99,127, and now 5), rieselsieve, and some other stuff I'm forgetting. PowerPCs have no LLR client, alas.

The 14 k's drive has quite a lot of life left for LLR before we need a new team drive; quite a few users prefer to do everything themselves (me included). I think building a new team drive with a dozen or so k's is a great idea, using Sheep to sieve; however, moving 100+ k's to a group effort puts global efficiency above individualism. A possible compromise is to build such a global sieve, but continue to allow users to reserve entire k's out of the sieve, rather than team LLR everything. Those who like to sieve (or have athlons or laptops that aren't well suited to LLR) can reserve ranges from this massive sieve. If we ever do this, we should still leave some k's untouched for those interested to process entirely on their own. Perhaps put 30 k's of various weights into a mass sieve... eventually.

Another way to look at this is max efficiency comes from the largest n-range, but we do not usually sieve very-large n-ranges. Why not? The same long-run "greater good" is achieved by sieving a range twice as high as sieving twice as many k-values. One chooses limits on both for practical, project-completion reasons. Only for very large n-ranges does one not need to finish sieving for max efficiency before starting LLR; if sieving 100 k's, that sieving step would be many CPU-years. And what about file size? The sieve needs to be practically emailed, which puts a 10MB or 20MB limit.

I tried 33 k's from 260k to 300k, in the 900-1000 range (see primesearch), as an experiment. It was NOT efficient. Many k's with a narrow n range is bad bad bad for sr1/sr2. Big fat n ranges are incredibly efficient. Thus, my decision to run this k=5 sieve to 4M, and the resulting ~100T sieve depth for n<1M.
-Curtis[/quote]

A lot of great points, Curtis. I agree somewhere closer to along the lines of what you suggested more than my own :rolleyes: about the 'huge' sieve or 'team drive'...put 30 k's into some big mass sieve and sieve all of them up to about n=3M-4M or so. It could be called a 'drive' or whatever we want. The main point that is good about what you mentioned is to have some massive sieved files out there for a whole bunch of different k's and just let people reserve the k's and grab the ranges of the sieved files that they want. That would be cool! And if people only wanted to (or only could) sieve instead, they could just sieve on this massive file if they wanted to or add additional ranges of n at the high-end of the sieve file or something of that nature. Or if they wanted to do a k all by themselves, then leaving a number of them untouched and not sieved at all would fill the bill there.

Obviously the more k's sieved at once, the more efficient for the 'long-term good'. There's certainly nothing wrong with sieving 100's of k's at once but you're right, removing individualism would remove some of the fun, myself included. As I mentioned, you'd definitely want to sieve up to n=2M-3M. As you said, sieving a small range of n is highly inefficent and not worth doing.

Back on sieving k=5...I'm not debating your mathematics about when to split off the ranges to LLR. But I'm not so sure I agree with continuing to sieve so long on an effort like this for k=5 even though we've included the huge range of n=470K-4M in the sieve. The point here is about economics, that is good old supply and demand. We have a really big supply of LLRers ready to go.

My opinion...release every range that everyone has already reserved by 10/31. (Obviously earlier for Carlos.) (Also, my 630-660 will be done Wednesday and I could start on 740-760 Thursday if you release it.) It doesn't matter whether it's sieved to 58M or 60M or 120M or whatever, I'd still say just release the reserved ranges and keep sieving the rest. As people are ready for their next range, just send it to them regardless of how far sieved up to at least n=1M at this point. 60M is very sufficient for this effort to n=1M. That gives us the greatest chance to have everything LLR'd to n=1M by the end of 2007.

My reasoning has to do with 'elastic supply' in this case. That is, if you release things as fast as people are ready for them, other people may come into the picture. For instance, Kosmaj, Karsten, Lsoule, Amphoria, etc. may pick up a couple of ranges to LLR also. People love this fast LLRing low k.


Gary

VBCurtis 2007-10-22 05:45

Gary- send me whatever you have sieved on Wednesday night. I'll remove the factors and release up to 780k then, then whatever range necessary (900k?) to satisfy demand on 11/1. We're now in a range where sieving is in the ballpark of enough, so I'm fine with your suggestion. When we were at 20T and "proper" depth was 50T+, I wasn't so keen on that when a week's delay meant 50% more sieving.

At this pace, 900k-1M will be released on 11/15.

Mass sieve: We already have masser's files, 8 k's from 700k-1M. I plan to perhaps extend these to 2M and sieve them a while. Cruelty has 12 k's to 2M also, and he plans to LLR each until he finds a prime, then release the file for public consumption. So perhaps such a plan as we seem to want already exists-- we should encourage people to submit untested sieves when they release numbers.
-Curtis

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-22 14:20

I have completed 60-66T. Do you want those now, also? I have 75-88T on 12 cores, part-time. It will take a few days to complete (I lazily assigned 1T/core, before I had my new support scripts written).
With the new scripts, I can much more easily distribute work, which also means that I can make faster progress. The machines aren't available all the time, but when I can pull in all of my fast cores that are currently available they can complete 5T in just over 3 hours, so it shouldn't take too long to get everything done.

VBCurtis 2007-10-22 16:45

Sheep, send what you have done on the 29th or 30th, so I can apply the factors-found before releasing that large block of files. Don't worry about having continuous blocks- gaps don't really matter at this depth.

With Sheep on the job, we'll likely release everything to 900k on 1 Nov. He'll get us to 80T+ by then easily. We might finally have enough work for all the cores we can throw at this project.
-curtis

gd_barnes 2007-10-22 22:43

[quote=VBCurtis;116821]Gary- send me whatever you have sieved on Wednesday night. I'll remove the factors and release up to 780k then, then whatever range necessary (900k?) to satisfy demand on 11/1. We're now in a range where sieving is in the ballpark of enough, so I'm fine with your suggestion. When we were at 20T and "proper" depth was 50T+, I wasn't so keen on that when a week's delay meant 50% more sieving.

At this pace, 900k-1M will be released on 11/15.

Mass sieve: We already have masser's files, 8 k's from 700k-1M. I plan to perhaps extend these to 2M and sieve them a while. Cruelty has 12 k's to 2M also, and he plans to LLR each until he finds a prime, then release the file for public consumption. So perhaps such a plan as we seem to want already exists-- we should encourage people to submit untested sieves when they release numbers.
-Curtis[/quote]


Wow, cool! Sounds good to me on both fronts. Factors coming your way Wednesday. I doubt you'll need any more of my 'piddly' sieving now.

Sounds awesome on those big sieve files. It'd be cool to bring all of those various sieved files together and include them in one big huge massive sieve for you, Sheep, and perhaps Amphoria to hack away at.

Let me know if you want me to follow up with anybody on getting them or anything else related to such an effort. I think I read that Kosmaj has Masser's files.


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-10-23 22:11

Sheep should be called as Sir Sheep....great effort...

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-24 05:15

I'm about an hour away from having 60-87T sieved. 1564 factors so far. Do you want me to just keep going? If so, how far?

gd_barnes 2007-10-24 21:59

k=5
630-665 complete
no primes found
results file to be sent tonight

Ready for 740-760 whenever. I will reserve one more range after I get started on that one and that will be all for k=5 unless some sieving help is needed.

Curtis, I'll send you the factors found so far for the sieve range of P=53T-58T later tonight.

Kosmaj, the following ranges have been reserved:
700K-720K Carlos
720K-740K Patrick
740K-760K me


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-10-24 22:06

Reserving 760k-800k. I need this range one day after getting the 700k-720k range...:grin:

Carlos

gd_barnes 2007-10-25 05:38

I'll go ahead and reserve 800-820 now. That'll give me one range searched in each grouping of n=100K for n=400-900K, i.e. one in 400-500K, 500-600K, etc. I'll make that my last range for this effort for now. Let's make it a goal to have everything LLR'd through n=1M by the end of 2007. If we're close by early Dec. but it doesn't quite look like we'll make it, I will pick up another range or two as needed, suspend part of another effort, and throw 4 cores on 2 machines at it.

Edit: Curtis, if the 800-820 interferes with the ranges you need to get a prime for your goal, I'm fine with any range to LLR in the 800's.


Gary

VBCurtis 2007-10-25 07:44

The following ranges have been sent out:
665-700 me
700-720 and 760-800 carlos
720-740 patrick
740-760 and 800-820 Gary

600 to 630 complete, no primes.

reserving 820 to 850.

Future reservations can be 10k or 20k blocks, as testing time is quite a bit higher than when we were at 500k. At 1M, we'll convert to all 10k-wide reservations. For now, choose whatever is best for your situation. Carlos, you're running 3 cores, so 30k or more is fine, so you can keep all of them running. Sheep has us sieved sufficiently deep for n<1M, so future reservations will be emailed within a day or two.
-Curtis

em99010pepe 2007-10-25 08:23

Curtis,

Thanks for the ranges...who said I was only adding 3 cores?!?!?! :wink:
I said previously at least 5....

Carlos

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-25 08:30

Factors for 60-100T have been sent. The next stage will begin tomorrow.

gd_barnes 2007-10-25 15:20

Kosmaj,

My reservation should be 800-820 vs. 820-850.


Thanks,
Gary

lsoule 2007-10-25 18:20

Gary - I removed 820-850 and added 800-820.

gd_barnes 2007-10-25 22:21

800-820 Gary...820-850 VBCurtis
 
[quote=lsoule;117052]Gary - I removed 820-850 and added 800-820.[/quote]

Well, I appreciate you doing that but...now they're now reversed. :smile: It should show 800-820 for me and 820-850 for Curtis.

Feel free to delete all applicable posts after it's corrected if you want.


Thanks,
Gary

em99010pepe 2007-10-26 20:22

Curtis,

4 cores are already running and the fifth one will be added soon so I need a 10k block for it. Reserving 850k-860k. Could you please send it to me within two days? Thanks.

Carlos

gd_barnes 2007-10-26 20:44

I started on 740-760 and 800-820 late last night; one core each. Estimate is about 7-8 days on the former and 10-11 days on the latter. fftlen jump must be somewhere between 760 and 800. Carlos gets the jump this time! :wink:

About 800 secs. and 1050 secs. respectively on the timings on a 1.66 Ghz core-2 duo laptop. Sheesh! This isn't your daddy's search! :lol:


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-10-26 21:07

Hey Gary,

I'm getting ~510 sec with the quad-core on the 700-720k range.

700k-705k will be done in a couple of hours, the core 0 is crunching it since 26 hours ago, the rest will be done in less than two days. I suppose the 760-800k range will be completed in 8-9 days, already counting with the FFT jump but because I'll stay next week at home I might bring another core or two to the fun....

Carlos

gd_barnes 2007-10-27 01:58

[quote=em99010pepe;117158]Hey Gary,

I'm getting ~510 sec with the quad-core on the 700-720k range.

700k-705k will be done in a couple of hours, the core 0 is crunching it since 26 hours ago, the rest will be done in less than two days. I suppose the 760-800k range will be completed in 8-9 days, already counting with the FFT jump but because I'll stay next week at home I might bring another core or two to the fun....

Carlos[/quote]

Now, just stop that! :smile: Speedy, speedy machine!

Oh yeah, well...I bet I have more cores than you! :grin: (12)


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-10-27 03:50

[quote=gd_barnes;117175]Now, just stop that! :smile: Speedy, speedy machine!

Oh yeah, well...I bet I have more cores than you! :grin: (12)


Gary[/quote]

At work 5, at home 9, and I always have a friend's help ~70GHz...maybe I'll talk to him..humm....for now only 7 cores running for RPS....:whistle:

VBCurtis 2007-10-27 06:44

You guys both have more firepower than I...

Carlos, I'll send you 820-830 sat night US Pacific time. I'm not ready for another range yet, and it's the first portion still in the sieve, so I'd rather break just it off than 820-860 when I'm not ready yet.

I'll run 830-850 next instead for myself. All gaps in the sieve should be filled to 100T by 1 Nov; reservations after that date will be super-sieved, thanks to Sheep.
-Curtis

em99010pepe 2007-10-27 07:09

[quote=VBCurtis;117180]

Carlos, I'll send you 820-830 sat night US Pacific time. I'm not ready for another range yet, and it's the first portion still in the sieve, so I'd rather break just it off than 820-860 when I'm not ready yet.
[/quote]

Ok, that's good for me. Thank you.

gd_barnes 2007-10-27 19:17

[quote=em99010pepe;117177]At work 5, at home 9, and I always have a friend's help ~70GHz...maybe I'll talk to him..humm....for now only 7 cores running for RPS....:whistle:[/quote]


Looks like I'm going to have to sneak LLR on to 3 at work! :grin:


G

em99010pepe 2007-10-27 22:09

[quote=gd_barnes;117197]Looks like I'm going to have to sneak LLR on to 3 at work! :grin:
[/quote]

Bring everything.:wink:

700k-720k complete, no primes.
760k-780k already underway, ETA 2 days, I really need more work....

Hey Sheep, how's the sieve going?

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-27 22:34

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;117203]Hey Sheep, how's the sieve going?[/QUOTE]

Complete from 60-100T, complete from 104-115T, 100-104T is in progress.

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-28 03:14

Update: all of 60-120T will be complete by the morning. I've already sent Curtis 60-100T; I'll send 100-120T tomorrow.

VBCurtis 2007-10-28 06:40

reservation updates:
Carlos has been sent 820-830 and 860-900. He has 5 (or more!?) cores on this project, so even that range will be done in a week or so.

I have kept 830-860 for myself. ETA on 665-700 Thursday or so, with 830-860 split on two machines starting then.

Next reservation is 900-910 or 900-920 (your choice).
Looks like we'll complete to 1M by 20 Nov, with a chance at 1.2M by 1 Jan!
-Curtis

em99010pepe 2007-10-28 10:47

Kosmaj,

Please update the first page.

700,000-720,000 - Carlos - Complete

Curtis,

Got your email and the ranges are already in place to be tested. Meanwhile, 760k-765k is completed and a few hours to complete 765k-770k, the results will be sent today. Thanks.

Carlos

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-28 13:59

[QUOTE=BlisteringSheep;117215]Update: all of 60-120T will be complete by the morning. I've already sent Curtis 60-100T; I'll send 100-120T tomorrow.[/QUOTE]

Update part 2: Now done to 120, factors have been sent. 120-125T will be done today.

gd_barnes 2007-10-28 16:55

Holy friggin cow! I love it! We got some fired-up passionate folks going on this one.

I suppose I could shut down all of my other efforts and put 12 cores on this...naw it wouldn't be as fun for me. 2 on this effort works for me.

Keep up the great work Carlos and Sheep!

This is quite a few ranges completed now without a prime. I'm beginning to wonder if someone DID at some point search it up to n=1M without finding a prime and just told no one. Oh well, we'll find out soon enough. As I recall Kosmaj saying on some of the team efforts..."The next prime is right around the corner!" :smile:


Gary

VBCurtis 2007-10-28 20:19

Not that it matters, but I'm missing some logic here. How does us not finding a prime make you think someone else didn't find a prime before us?

There's so many ways to make that sound confusing... :)

Gary, I think you should continue the fun and take 900-910 when your current ranges are done. One range per 100k is active without unduly slowing your other searches. Yea, that's it.. :cool:
-Curtis

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-29 03:35

Update again: k=5 is done for 60-125T. 125-138T will be done tomorrow. 138-150T will be done this week. Then I will switch to the combined dat (Curtis will have to explain further, I'm a really simple sheep).

I do expect lots of fame, glory and shiny trinkets. :crank: :banana: :fusion:

:alex:

VBCurtis 2007-10-29 05:30

Just to repeat: Sheep will have all files above 900k sieved to 150T this week, and will continue to sieve deeper for files above 1.2M.

If I find a prime for k=5, I will be sharing credit with sheep as thanks for the sieve. 90T of sieving is around 14 CPU-weeks on a Core2-2800; about as much time as it would take to LLR from 470k to 775k.

-Curtis

em99010pepe 2007-10-29 09:30

[quote=gd_barnes;117236]

I suppose I could shut down all of my other efforts and put 12 cores on this...naw it wouldn't be as fun for me. 2 on this effort works for me.
[/quote]

And if I add for now 12 cores to the fun, will you reconsider? :grin:
[quote=BlisteringSheep;117264]I do expect lots of fame, glory and shiny trinkets. :crank: :banana: :fusion:
[/quote]

At least what I can do is to share with you a little k=5 prime....:tu:

[quote=VBCurtis;117244]

Gary, I think you should continue the fun and take 900-910 when your current ranges are done. One range per 100k is active without unduly slowing your other searches. Yea, that's it.. :cool:
[/quote]

760k-780k complete, no primes, lresults already sent to you. 780k-800k and 820k-830k (fifth machine added here) in progress.
Rollin, rollin, rollin......:cool:

gd_barnes 2007-10-29 17:20

[quote=VBCurtis;117244]Not that it matters, but I'm missing some logic here. How does us not finding a prime make you think someone else didn't find a prime before us?

There's so many ways to make that sound confusing... :)

Gary, I think you should continue the fun and take 900-910 when your current ranges are done. One range per 100k is active without unduly slowing your other searches. Yea, that's it.. :cool:
-Curtis[/quote]

I can make it more confusing...The fact that there were no searches for about 3 years plus the fact that people like to go after low k's combined with what has happened in the past on k=243 and k=289 makes the possibility highly likely that someone attempted a search on k=5 above n=470K with no success simply because the search status sat at n=470K for so long. This leads to the good possibility that someone just so happened to find primes on k=243 and k=289 but failed to find one on k=5.

Is that confusing enough? :grin:

I didn't mean this to rain on the parade of k=5. This is an awesome effort! It was just an analogy of what 'might' have happened.

I have ADHD fits having even only 2 of my cores searching at this high of n for very long. :smile: It just gets too boring! 800-820 is close to my limit. Once it goes past about 15-20 mins./search candidate, it's just too long for my tastes.

If I can get my nerve up to discretly load LLR on 2-3 machines here at work that seem to always be left on 24 hrs. in a training room and where they would be out of my site for a day or days at a time, I could more easily tolerate higher n searches. I probably won't advertise that in the forum here if I do it but I'll let someone know in a PM. I'm really more in this for large amounts of data gathering so that perhaps some future generations of mathematicians can finally 'break' the random nature of primes. You guys have this one well covered.

One more thought...Let's not do sieving overkill by Sheep on this one. I would suggest putting him on another effort at this time. Maybe some new '30 k' team drive or something. When we pass about n=1.2M in LLRing on k=5, maybe he can come back to sieving this one as needed. He has just too much firepower to put on only one k for very long.


Gary

BlisteringSheep 2007-10-30 07:41

Last update on k=5 :smile: The sieve will be complete to 150T in an hour or two. Later today I will switch to sr2sieve and the multi-k dat (5, 11, 13, 31, 45, 99, 127).

And thank you all for your prime offers. They are greatly appreciated! But I'd do the sieving even without them; it's fun. :geek: So please don't feel pressured; I was really just joking around.

:sleep::alex:

em99010pepe 2007-10-30 10:10

Are we going to start a 6th RPS Drive? If so we should push hard to finish the 5th one.

mdettweiler 2007-10-30 15:08

[quote=em99010pepe;117343]Are we going to start a 6th RPS Drive? If so we should push hard to finish the 5th one.[/quote]
And what about the 3rd drive? It's been sitting around for quite a while now, with about 5 reservation files left.

em99010pepe 2007-10-30 15:35

[quote=Anonymous;117352]And what about the 3rd drive? It's been sitting around for quite a while now, with about 5 reservation files left.[/quote]

Care to help us there?

760-790 complete, no primes. Rest in progress....

mdettweiler 2007-10-30 16:35

[quote=em99010pepe;117354]Care to help us there?

760-790 complete, no primes. Rest in progress....[/quote]
I would gladly do so, but right now I'm kinda waiting for some possible doublecheck LLR work from gd_barnes. If that turns out to be a no-go, though, then yes, I already was considering doing something on the 3rd drive in that case. :smile:

BTW Gary, do you have any doublecheck LLR work for me, either in the range that I sieved or elsewhere? If so, an estimated availablility date would be helpful for planning reasons--if not, then I'll grab a file from the 3rd drive. The reason why I'm holding off on grabbing a 3rd drive file is because that would tie up my resources for a couple weeks or so, and I'd kind of like to be ready for doublechecking work if it's coming. (Right now I'm just doing SR5 LLRNet work, since LLRNet deals in smaller units of one k/n pair at a time.)

gd_barnes 2007-10-30 17:04

[quote=Anonymous;117359]I would gladly do so, but right now I'm kinda waiting for some possible doublecheck LLR work from gd_barnes. If that turns out to be a no-go, though, then yes, I already was considering doing something on the 3rd drive in that case. :smile:

BTW Gary, do you have any doublecheck LLR work for me, either in the range that I sieved or elsewhere? If so, an estimated availablility date would be helpful for planning reasons--if not, then I'll grab a file from the 3rd drive. The reason why I'm holding off on grabbing a 3rd drive file is because that would tie up my resources for a couple weeks or so, and I'd kind of like to be ready for doublechecking work if it's coming. (Right now I'm just doing SR5 LLRNet work, since LLRNet deals in smaller units of one k/n pair at a time.)[/quote]

I'm sorry about that Anon. I completely forgot to respond to you. Thank you very much for your offer. I've got two dedicated cores LLRing it right now. Since it is such a large LLR effort and your machine is only on for part of the day, it would probably be more total effort for me to split off small 20K candidate pieces for you to LLR and 'combine them back in' with the mass of primes found then to LLR it all myself. But if you think you could LLR an entire set of 100 k's (115,000-120,000 candidates), then I think it would be worth it but I'd hate to take up that much of your machine for that long. If your machine is on 8-10 hrs/day, then I'm thinking about a month or so to do that many candidates.

I'm shooting to finish the effort in about 3 months. So if you'd be interested in doing 115K-120K candidates for 100 k's and could finish them over a 3-month span, then I'll send you a range. I sieved it further on up to P=30G because I was getting a 7 sec. removal rate at P=19.8G.

Whatever you decide is fine with me and I appreciate you doing the sieving.


Gary

gd_barnes 2007-10-30 17:12

[quote=BlisteringSheep;117335]Last update on k=5 :smile: The sieve will be complete to 150T in an hour or two. Later today I will switch to sr2sieve and the multi-k dat (5, 11, 13, 31, 45, 99, 127).

:sleep::alex:[/quote]

Awesome on the multi-k sieve! You rock Sheep! :smile:

mdettweiler 2007-10-30 17:47

[quote=gd_barnes;117363]I'm sorry about that Anon. I completely forgot to respond to you. Thank you very much for your offer. I've got two dedicated cores LLRing it right now. Since it is such a large LLR effort and your machine is only on for part of the day, it would probably be more total effort for me to split off small 20K candidate pieces for you to LLR and 'combine them back in' with the mass of primes found then to LLR it all myself. But if you think you could LLR an entire set of 100 k's (115,000-120,000 candidates), then I think it would be worth it but I'd hate to take up that much of your machine for that long. If your machine is on 8-10 hrs/day, then I'm thinking about a month or so to do that many candidates.

I'm shooting to finish the effort in about 3 months. So if you'd be interested in doing 115K-120K candidates for 100 k's and could finish them over a 3-month span, then I'll send you a range. I sieved it further on up to P=30G because I was getting a 7 sec. removal rate at P=19.8G.

Whatever you decide is fine with me and I appreciate you doing the sieving.


Gary[/quote]
Okay, thanks. I think I'll pass on the 115-120K candidates--that would probably be a bit too much for me to handle with my current amount of computing power--but if you've got any more doublecheck efforts in the future that you could use some help on, please let me know, I'll be glad to help, either for sieving or LLR. :smile:

em99010pepe 2007-10-31 01:01

790-800 complete, no primes.
760-800 complete, no primes.:smile:

em99010pepe 2007-11-01 17:18

Update: 860-880 complete, 880-900 in progress...:grin:

gd_barnes 2007-11-03 02:15

k=5
740-760 complete
no primes found
results file to be sent

n=800-820 is at n=811.3. I now have 2 cores on it. It will be done Monday afternoon.

Has nobody reserved any n>=900K? Come on Carlos, get with the program! Don't TEMPT me to take another range! :grin:


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-11-03 10:00

[quote=gd_barnes;117699]
Has nobody reserved any n>=900K? Come on Carlos, get with the program! Don't TEMPT me to take another range! :grin:
[/quote]

I think we are by far on schedule, 1M until the end of the year. I'm waiting for your position...you're my leader...
Meanwhile, 890-900 will be done in 12 hours or so.

Carlos

PS(Thanks Kosmaj)

em99010pepe 2007-11-03 18:48

860-900 complete, no primes.

em99010pepe 2007-11-05 12:12

820-830 complete, no primes.

Kosmaj 2007-11-05 15:39

Bmaxx completed 575-600, no primes.

gd_barnes 2007-11-05 16:22

[quote=em99010pepe;117710]I think we are by far on schedule, 1M until the end of the year. I'm waiting for your position...you're my leader...
Meanwhile, 890-900 will be done in 12 hours or so.

Carlos

PS(Thanks Kosmaj)[/quote]

Ahead of schedule we are thanks to your supreme machines! :grin: I'm your leader? Well, then bow at my feet and say "I Worship thy great Prime Searching God!". :lol:

800-820 will be done in about 6 hours. No primes yet. I'm beginning to think there are no more primes for n<1M. :ermm:

Carlos, had you tried to reserve another range yet? I just didn't see any more 'next available range' or n>=900K reservations in this thread.

Curtis, are ranges for n>=900K available? If so, you guys talked me into it. I'll reserve the next available range, whatever that is. A 20K-range is fine. I'll put 2 cores on it so I'm thinking a 9-12 day estimate as a wild guess.

Edit: I just now saw where you said that ranges from 900K<=n<=1M would be available 11/15. I'll be ready for one today but 11/15 works fine too.


Gary

em99010pepe 2007-11-05 16:35

[quote=gd_barnes;117812]
Carlos, had you tried to reserve another range yet? I just didn't see any more 'next available range' or n>=900K reservations in this thread.
[/quote]


Not yet...I'm running k=105 and 5th Drive for Kosmaj, k=923 for Curtis.

em99010pepe 2007-11-05 18:44

[quote=em99010pepe;117813]Not yet...I'm running k=105 and 5th Drive for Kosmaj, k=923 for Curtis.[/quote]

I need at least one week to free up all my cores so by then I expect to reserve a 100k chunk....

Carlos

gd_barnes 2007-11-05 20:58

k=5
800-820 complete
no primes found
results file to be sent tonight

Carlos, if Curtis sends you the range of n=900K-1M on 11/15 for k=5, can you finish LLRing it by year end? If so, I'll drop my reservation request and you can take the rest of k=5 up to 1M. I'll then be able to put the 2 cores that I've used for this effort back on my two large high-weight k searches. LLR complete to 1M by 12/31 is the goal that we 'kind of' established for k=5.

Has anyone heard from Patrick? I haven't seen him on here in nearly 3 weeks.


Gary


All times are UTC. The time now is 17:04.

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