mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > PrimeNet > GPU to 72

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2019-06-06, 06:21   #1
dcheuk
 
dcheuk's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
Iowa, US

D416 Posts
Default Results not needed?

I have been getting warnings from MISFIT with messages similar to the following:

Code:
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93701833 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M93701833 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93701837 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93701869 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
Code:
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93443533 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M93443533 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93443663 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93443677 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.
It seems like sometimes part or all of the result submitted are return as "not needed." All of the assignments I've been getting lately are fetched by MISFIT. When I re-submit these manually, it seems like GIMPS still gives me the "not needed" message but the result was accepted.

This issue happened at least twice on 2 of the 3 computers running MISFIT w/ MFAKTC.

Anyone familiar with what the problem is, am I missing something? My best theory would be either someone else already submitted it, or MISFIT actually tried to submit the same result twice over a very short amount of time.

Thanks!

Last fiddled with by dcheuk on 2019-06-06 at 06:23 Reason: link added for convenience.
dcheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-06, 06:29   #2
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

22×7×277 Posts
Default

It looks like you already turned in 93443533 on May 23. So if you resubmitted it, today, it was not needed.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-06, 06:35   #3
dcheuk
 
dcheuk's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
Iowa, US

110101002 Posts
Default 5/19 6/5

The first 3 were logged 6/5, in which I discovered today, hence GIMPS shows 6/6.
Code:
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93701833 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M93701833 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93701837 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93701869 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
These 3 were logged 5/19, I'm assuming I discovered it on 5/25 and submitted manually.
Code:
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93443533 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M93443533 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93443663 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M93443677 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.
Sorry for the confusion there was just wondering if this is a common problem.
dcheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-06, 12:15   #4
Chuck
 
Chuck's Avatar
 
May 2011
Orange Park, FL

81610 Posts
Default

This has happened to me also a couple of times. Even though MISFIT reports a "not needed" result, it still is recorded in the exponent status results same as the previous poster.

In addition, when I look at my PrimeNet work results details, the assigned credit for the factoring work is ZERO GHz-Days.

The two exponents were 55542469 and 55560221
Chuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-08, 06:43   #5
dcheuk
 
dcheuk's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
Iowa, US

22·53 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck View Post
This has happened to me also a couple of times. Even though MISFIT reports a "not needed" result, it still is recorded in the exponent status results same as the previous poster.

In addition, when I look at my PrimeNet work results details, the assigned credit for the factoring work is ZERO GHz-Days.

The two exponents were 55542469 and 55560221
Wonder why this happens. I guess just have to manually upload the ones that was rejected by the server every once in a while
dcheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-08, 18:32   #6
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

23×1,103 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcheuk View Post
Wonder why this happens.
I'm not sure why this is happening. But just to put on the table, GPU72 will never assign a duplicate candidate. The only exception to this is if someone un-reserves an assignment, but then submits the results afterwards.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-09, 17:29   #7
dcheuk
 
dcheuk's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
Iowa, US

21210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
I'm not sure why this is happening. But just to put on the table, GPU72 will never assign a duplicate candidate. The only exception to this is if someone un-reserves an assignment, but then submits the results afterwards.
Next time when I encounter this I'm going to check the exponent status before manually resubmitting it.

Thanks guys.
dcheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-04, 02:48   #8
dcheuk
 
dcheuk's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
Iowa, US

110101002 Posts
Default

Apparently over the spread of last 24-48 hours, almost if not all the results submitted by one of my computers (thru MISFIT) was rejected by the server deemed 'result not necessary.' I put it in on manual result page manually and then realized someone has already submitted these results so I didn't submit it twice.

The assignments were obtained thru MISFIT/GPU72 so I was assuming it was 'assigned to me.' Upon checking all these assignments were completed yesterday by a user named 'Nesowa.'

I don't mind poaching (even though it is kind of rude to some degree if this is what it is) but it also seem like a waste of computing time.

So did the server double assigned these assignments or is it just this guy working on his own agenda?

Code:
NO FACTOR FOR M69300089 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300193 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300349 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300853 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300811 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300967 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300437 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300631 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69301201 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69301247 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69301301 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
dcheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-04, 02:58   #9
dcheuk
 
dcheuk's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
Iowa, US

22·53 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcheuk View Post
Apparently over the spread of last 24-48 hours, almost if not all the results submitted by one of my computers (thru MISFIT) was rejected by the server deemed 'result not necessary.' I put it in on manual result page manually and then realized someone has already submitted these results so I didn't submit it twice.

The assignments were obtained thru MISFIT/GPU72 so I was assuming it was 'assigned to me.' Upon checking all these assignments were completed yesterday by a user named 'Nesowa.'

I don't mind poaching (even though it is kind of rude to some degree if this is what it is) but it also seem like a waste of computing time.

So did the server double assigned these assignments or is it just this guy working on his own agenda?

Code:
NO FACTOR FOR M69300089 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300193 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300349 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300853 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300811 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300967 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300437 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69300631 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69301201 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69301247 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M69301301 FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
Out of curiousity I pulled the worktodo file in the MISFIT folder from the same computer, and to my (not) surprise, the work that was fetched on 9-1-2019 from GPU72 has already been completed by the same user named 'Nesowa':

Code:
Factor=2019-9-1,69301549,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69301627,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69301697,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69301733,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69301789,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69301927,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69301937,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69301951,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69302027,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69302033,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69302117,74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,69302327,74,75
I have erased the worktodo file since these assignments has been completed. For now I will have MISFIT fetch work from GIMPS instead.
dcheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-04, 03:30   #10
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

100010011110002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcheuk View Post
I don't mind poaching (even though it is kind of rude to some degree if this is what it is) but it also seem like a waste of computing time. So did the server double assigned these assignments or is it just this guy working on his own agenda?
The latter.

Once the DCTF work to 74 bits in 53M was fully assigned, I brought in candidates in 69M to take up to 75. These were properly registered with Primenet, and at the time no TF'ing work was being done in the 6xM ranges by anyone except Wayne.

You were assigned a batch at 2019-09-01 15:22:13 UTC. And then the next day Nesowa completed a bunch. The good news is it appears this was a one-off; he's not completed any additional work there.

Sorry about that, although there's not much I can do when people work "off-the-books". Again, these were reserved from Primenet before being given to you, so even getting the work from Primenet would not have prevented this.

Lastly, if it's any consolation, you did get the credit on GPU72 for the work wasted.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-04, 03:53   #11
dcheuk
 
dcheuk's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
Iowa, US

110101002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
The latter.

Once the DCTF work to 74 bits in 53M was fully assigned, I brought in candidates in 69M to take up to 75. These were properly registered with Primenet, and at the time no TF'ing work was being done in the 6xM ranges by anyone except Wayne.

You were assigned a batch at 2019-09-01 15:22:13 UTC. And then the next day Nesowa completed a bunch. The good news is it appears this was a one-off; he's not completed any additional work there.

Sorry about that, although there's not much I can do when people work "off-the-books". Again, these were reserved from Primenet before being given to you, so even getting the work from Primenet would not have prevented this.

Lastly, if it's any consolation, you did get the credit on GPU72 for the work wasted.
Thanks for clearing that up.

Yep I see it on GPU72 I got the credit for the work for both lists above. Lol
dcheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Statistical properties of categories of GIMPS results and interim results kriesel Probability & Probabilistic Number Theory 1 2019-05-22 22:59
results not needed Mini-Geek GPU to 72 80 2018-12-17 15:49
tf results not needed MatWur-S530113 GPU to 72 10 2017-12-09 15:36
Results not Needed RMAC9.5 PrimeNet 3 2013-06-26 13:16
Help needed AntonVrba Math 3 2007-03-06 10:55

All times are UTC. The time now is 02:09.

Tue Mar 31 02:09:12 UTC 2020 up 5 days, 23:42, 0 users, load averages: 1.35, 1.66, 1.63

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

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.