mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   FactorDB (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=94)
-   -   Other Factordb Problems (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=16849)

wblipp 2012-05-27 15:11

Other Factordb Problems
 
From time to time things happen in the [URL="http://www.factordb.com"]factordb[/URL] that require manual intervention by the administrator, Syd. Syd's busy. This thread is a parking space to note such problems until Syd gets around to fixing them - the individual posts may then be deleted.

There is already a [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=16842"]thread [/URL]for broken aliquot sequences. This thread is for everything else.

wblipp 2012-05-27 15:13

[URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000212962539"]4*938!+1[/URL] should have a simple N-1 primality proof. It starts up OK but doesn't finish - looks like it might be overflow.

wblipp 2012-06-01 15:13

This is a factorization that won't stick. If I enter the factor, it shows as fully factored. But if I click the the "factorize" button again, the status returns to C

This [URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000185668546"]C149[/URL] is divisible by this [URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000508699341"]P100[/URL]

Ahh - I see that sometimes the status shows as "err" instead of C or FF.

Stargate38 2012-06-02 21:34

That happens to me to, but it also happens to 9539^41-1 itself without the "err" status.

Dubslow 2012-06-02 21:35

[QUOTE=wblipp;300954]This is a factorization that won't stick. If I enter the factor, it shows as fully factored. But if I click the the "factorize" button again, the status returns to C

This [URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000185668546"]C149[/URL] is divisible by this [URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000508699341"]P100[/URL]

Ahh - I see that sometimes the status shows as "err" instead of C or FF.[/QUOTE]

Just appeared as U to me, though a few seconds later it reverted to C.

Stargate38 2012-06-12 13:26

Why is it still doing that? I can't get the P100 to stay. Is there a read-only file in there somewhere that keeps the P100 from staying, thus creating the "err" status, or what else would cause that?

wblipp 2012-06-13 20:48

[QUOTE=wblipp;300954]This is a factorization that won't stick. If I enter the factor, it shows as fully factored. But if I click the the "factorize" button again, the status returns to C

This [URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000185668546"]C149[/URL] is divisible by this [URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000508699341"]P100[/URL]

Ahh - I see that sometimes the status shows as "err" instead of C or FF.[/QUOTE]

New Symptom! I got this error message once:
[B][COLOR="Red"]
insert into U values(1100000000185668546,"(9539^41-1)/431293525901506",149,3149750496) - Duplicate entry '1100000000185668546' for key 'PRIMARY'[/COLOR][/B]

Batalov 2012-06-13 21:43

There are probably a couple of daemons (e.g. a PRP-tester thread and a add-a-factor thread) negating each other's work - in the guts of the database. I've recently observed the "factored"-"oh no, not factored, and of U status"-"oh yes it is composite"-"factored with U-type factors"-and back to the beginning vicious circles; a.f.a.i.r. that was for the [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=302072#post302072"]10^99999+y^3+-1[/URL] PRPs that I've looked at (the PRPs are D.Broadhurst's dated back to ~2003). Maybe it will help debugging.

chalsall 2012-06-13 21:44

[QUOTE=wblipp;302212]New Symptom! I got this error message once:
[B][COLOR="Red"]
insert into U values(1100000000185668546,"(9539^41-1)/431293525901506",149,3149750496) - Duplicate entry '1100000000185668546' for key 'PRIMARY'[/COLOR][/B][/QUOTE]

Is the first field meant to be constrained to being unique? This is what this message is telling you -- you have an unique index on this field.

If this isn't what you want, you can drop the index on the field. Then, if you want that field indexed, add it back without the "unique" option. And/or add a compound unique index including some other fields in addition to this one.

Dubslow 2012-06-13 23:41

Yes, it's supposed to be unique. One ID for each number, and an ID should only point to one number.

How much do you know about FDB? (Not to be rude or anything, it's an honest question.)

chalsall 2012-06-13 23:53

[QUOTE=Dubslow;302217]How much do you know about FDB? (Not to be rude or anything, it's an honest question.)[/QUOTE]

Not a thing.


All times are UTC. The time now is 02:41.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.