20170228, 06:23  #23 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
2^{4}×17^{2} Posts 
It is not. You will lose the clients if you do that and you will be the cheater by changing the rules at the middle of a challenge when people already wasted energy by crunching your project.
Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 20170228 at 06:29 
20170228, 06:30  #24 
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden
1010011_{2} Posts 
And this is considered normal strategy? I'll not touch WUs which were already sent, but I've restricted the number of WUs in progress even more: 1 WU per CPU core + 10 WUs per GPU. I don't want it to be worse  server might not sustain this wave of submissions once the challenge starts.

20170228, 06:38  #25  
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
2^{4}×17^{2} Posts 
Quote:
Don't make restrictions yet. Let the challenge end first. 

20170228, 06:45  #26  
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden
83 Posts 
Quote:
P.S. CPU restriction (2 tasks per CPU core) has always been there, and I only added GPU restriction yesterday (10 tasks per GPU). I guess everyone concerned took their tasks before that. P.P.S. I thought again and increased limits for now: 4 tasks per CPU core and 100 tasks per GPU. Since this tactics is already used, these limits will be fair for late joiners. 4 tasks per CPU core is ~24 hours of work for average CPU and 100 tasks per GPU is ~8 hours of work even for GTX 1080. Last fiddled with by Sergei Chernykh on 20170228 at 06:59 

20170705, 07:46  #27 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
2^{4}×17^{2} Posts 

20170816, 07:29  #28 
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden
123_{8} Posts 
The search is complete! It took 7 months and 250300 computers running on average.
 There are 2,390,655 amicable pairs with smaller member below 2^64 in total  BOINC volunteers found 552,874 new amicable pairs below 2^64 Last fiddled with by Sergei Chernykh on 20170816 at 07:30 
20170816, 18:12  #29  
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2^{3}×3^{2}×19 Posts 
Quote:


20170817, 13:51  #30  
Feb 2017
Nowhere
3,319 Posts 
Quote:
Last fiddled with by Dr Sardonicus on 20170817 at 13:53 

20170822, 09:00  #31 
Mar 2015
Australia
2·41 Posts 
Big congratulations on reaching this limit, doesn't seem that long ago we were finding 14 and 15 digit pairs! Do you have any estimates on how long getting to 20d will take? That will be a big milestone. Over the last few week my gaussian
amicable seach has been a lot more fruitful, I'll post an update soon and hopefully it will reach 400 pairs or close to this! Andrew Last fiddled with by AndrewWalker on 20170822 at 09:01 
20170822, 09:03  #32  
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden
83 Posts 
Quote:


Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
100Mdigit n/k pairs  __HRB__  Riesel Prime Search  0  20100522 01:17 
Rejected k/n pairs  em99010pepe  No Prime Left Behind  18  20081206 12:50 
amicable, perfect, etc. numbers  jasong  Math  14  20050609 17:41 
decimalbinary prime pairs  ixfd64  Math  2  20031016 13:40 
Doublechecks come in pairs?  BigRed  Software  1  20021020 05:29 