mersenneforum.org Factoring database
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2020-01-18, 04:56   #1607
richs

"Rich"
Aug 2002
Benicia, California

5×229 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by MisterBitcoin Most of them require SIQS, so i am at ~50 to 60 canidates per hour. Using an offset from 5k, so we shouldn´t get into trouble :) Right after mentioning it. Karma~ Code:  Worker collisions...........: 1
Not me, I'm working 1-1000.....

 2020-01-18, 17:23 #1608 chris2be8     Sep 2009 191110 Posts I've had a couple of systems working on C83s etc for a few months. They check if a number is done immediately before starting work on it so real collisions causing wasted work are rare. Carry on by all means. But right now one is busy trying to clear C70-79. So even less likely to collide. Or you could work on 80-82 digits. Or a higher range such as c90 (someone else is working on C89). Chris
 2020-01-18, 19:17 #1609 MDaniello     May 2019 Rome, Italy 418 Posts I wanted to work on those composites too, but my system is quite slow so i was thinking about looking for factors up to 15-25 digits, depending on the sizes, to get the low-hanging fruits. I've found that about one third of the composites (i tried sampling from 80 to 120 digits, skipping by 10 each time) has a factor up to 25 digits, and around 3% has one up to 15 digits. Is that a sensible approach? Or would i be better off SIQSing them all, even if that would factor less composites per hour?
2020-01-18, 21:59   #1610
richs

"Rich"
Aug 2002
Benicia, California

100011110012 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by MDaniello I wanted to work on those composites too, but my system is quite slow so i was thinking about looking for factors up to 15-25 digits, depending on the sizes, to get the low-hanging fruits. I've found that about one third of the composites (i tried sampling from 80 to 120 digits, skipping by 10 each time) has a factor up to 25 digits, and around 3% has one up to 15 digits. Is that a sensible approach? Or would i be better off SIQSing them all, even if that would factor less composites per hour?
I’d use YAFU which searches for factors before SIQS or NFS.

 2020-01-19, 16:06 #1611 EdH     "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 7×13×37 Posts If someone is interested in doing some light ECM only, I have a Python3 script that does just that. In fact, I have the script running in four threads on an rPi that won't run YAFU. It basically grabs a composite and runs a few curves at some levels. For those composites that fail to produce factors, you are causing extra ECM effort when the composite is run later, but if you leave the level set to 3 or less, that's not too much extra and that extra still might hit a lucky catch. Last time I checked my rPi, it seemed to be running at about a 50% success rate. There is no dupolication checking, so the more you run it in a particular region (offset), the lower the success rate. You may wish to change the values if the success rate is low. Here's the Python code: Code: #!/bin/python3/ compNum = 100 # Number of composites to run compSize = 83 # Size of composites to run ranNum = 100 # Number for random count offset = 15000 # offsets random choice into the chosen size level = 3 # Level to run ( 1 = 11e2, 2 = 11e3, 3 = 11e4, 4 = 43e4, 5+ = 11e5 ) import os import random import subprocess import time import urllib.request #reports factors to factordb def send2db(composite, factors): factorline = str(factors) sendline = 'report=' + str(composite) + '%3D' + factorline dbcall = sendline.encode('utf-8') temp2 = urllib.request.urlopen('http://factordb.com/report.php', dbcall) #processes factorT to see if factors were returned from GMP-ECM def factorStr(factorT): factors = str(factorT) ind = factors.rfind("stdout") ind += 9 factors = factors[ind:] factors = factors[:-4] return factors print("Starting the factoring of", compNum, "composites. . .\n") #main loop foundf = 0 for x in range(compNum): randnum = random.randrange(ranNum) + offset #fetch a number from factordb dbcall = 'http://factordb.com/listtype.php?t=3&mindig=' + str(compSize) + '&perpage=1&start=' + str(randnum) + '&download=1' #some file processing to get the number into a format usable by GMP-ECM temp0 = urllib.request.urlopen(dbcall) temp1 = temp0.read() composite = temp1.decode(encoding='UTF-8') composite = composite.strip("\n") fstart = time.time() #print number being worked on print("Composite", x + 1, "is:", composite) factorT = subprocess.run(['ecm', '-q', '-c', '100', '11e2'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, input=temp1) factors = factorStr(factorT) if (len(factors) == len(composite)) and level > 1: # print("No factors found at 11e2! Trying 11e3. . .") factorT = subprocess.run(['ecm', '-c', '100', '-q', '11e3'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, input=temp1) factors = factorStr(factorT) if (len(factors) == len(composite)) and level > 2: print("No factors found at 11e3! Trying 11e4. . .") factorT = subprocess.run(['ecm', '-c', '200', '-q', '11e4'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, input=temp1) factors = factorStr(factorT) if (len(factors) == len(composite)) and level > 3: print("No factors found at 11e4! Trying 43e4. . .") factorT = subprocess.run(['ecm', '-q', '43e4'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, input=temp1) factors = factorStr(factorT) if (len(factors) == len(composite)) and level > 4: print("No factors found at 43e4! Trying 11e5. . .") factorT = subprocess.run(['ecm', '-q', '11e5'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, input=temp1) factors = factorStr(factorT) if (len(factors) > len(composite)): foundf += 1 factors = factors.replace(' ','*') send2db(composite, factors) print("Factors for", x + 1, ":", factors) else: print("No factors found!") runtime = time.time() - fstart print("Elapsed time was", int(runtime / 60), "minute(s) and", int(runtime % 60), "second(s). So far,", foundf, "of", x + 1, "(", int((foundf * 100) / (x + 1)), "%) have been factored.\n") print("All", compNum, "composites completed.") On a totally different tack, if you have a GMail account and would like to run a Colab session in the cloud, I have some examples of how to do that in my blog area. Do note, that if you overdo the use of the Colab resources by trying to run for long periods, the session will probably become limited for your account.
 2020-01-20, 08:32 #1612 MDaniello     May 2019 Rome, Italy 3·11 Posts Thanks for the suggestions! I'll look into YAFU and Colab.
 2020-01-21, 18:15 #1613 wpolly     Sep 2002 Vienna, Austria 3×73 Posts In the same vein, a simple batch-ECM shell script: Code: # usage: auto_ecm.sh wget -O c.inp "http://factordb.com/listtype.php?t=3&mindig=$1&perpage=$2&start=$3&download=1" sed -i 's/ /\n/g' c.inp ./ecm -q -c$5 -inp c.inp \$4 > c.out paste -d '=' c.inp c.out > c.result sed -i 's/ /\*/g' c.result grep -e "\*" c.result > c.upload rm c.inp rm c.out rm c.result curl -POST -F format=7 -F "report=
2020-01-22, 04:55   #1614
SethTro

"Seth"
Apr 2019

181 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by wpolly Indeed. The last post of Syd on this forum dates back to more than two years ago. The database in its current form really looks like an old and rusty machine without maintenance. Anyway, here are some changes that I would like to see happen (and I'd like to volunteer to implement some of them):
Is Syd responding on other platforms?

I'd love to expand ECM reporting to allow for other sigma/parameterization (which I've already coded up)

 2020-01-23, 08:03 #1615 unconnected     May 2009 Russia, Moscow 22·33·23 Posts FYI: I've factored with ecm ~15000 C83's out of 33000.
2020-01-23, 14:25   #1616
EdH

"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009

7×13×37 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by unconnected FYI: I've factored with ecm ~15000 C83's out of 33000.
I'm running over 50% success (ECM through 11e4) in all the range from higher 83 through 90 dd using the code I posted earlier. Here are the results from an i7 laptop (4 cores) for a run I did yesterday:
Code:
So far, 292 of 500 ( 58 %) have been factored.
So far, 282 of 500 ( 56 %) have been factored.
So far, 285 of 500 ( 57 %) have been factored.
So far, 284 of 500 ( 56 %) have been factored.`

2020-01-23, 22:54   #1617
MisterBitcoin

"Nuri, the dragon :P"
Jul 2016
Good old Germany

2E116 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by unconnected FYI: I've factored with ecm ~15000 C83's out of 33000.

Sweet!
Last 21 hours 841 out of 955 numbers needed SIQS. So, you might still be lucky with ecm while i crack the others with SIQS. :)

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post 3.14159 Miscellaneous Math 325 2016-04-09 17:45 Mini-Geek Factoring 5 2009-07-01 11:51 HiddenWarrior Data 1 2004-03-29 03:53 Prime95 PrimeNet 1 2003-01-18 00:49 Joe O Lounge 35 2002-09-06 20:19

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:29.

Mon Oct 19 21:29:23 UTC 2020 up 39 days, 18:40, 1 user, load averages: 2.06, 2.24, 2.08