mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Aliquot Sequences

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-02-28, 06:23   #23
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

24×172 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Chernykh View Post
Well, that's cheating in my opinion. I'll set expire time for all that tasks to now, so someone else, more honest, will receive credits for them.
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 2017-02-28 at 06:29
pinhodecarlos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 06:30   #24
Sergei Chernykh
 
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden

10100112 Posts
Default

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.
Sergei Chernykh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 06:38   #25
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

24×172 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Chernykh View Post
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.
For challenges yes, crunch, hold and release at the beginning of the challenge. Normal behaviour.
Don't make restrictions yet. Let the challenge end first.
pinhodecarlos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-02-28, 06:45   #26
Sergei Chernykh
 
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden

83 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinhodecarlos View Post
For challenges yes, crunch, hold and release at the beginning of the challenge. Normal behaviour.
Don't make restrictions yet. Let the challenge end first.
I need these restrictions for faster turnaround of tasks. I regret I didn't have GPU restriction before. Some people took more GPU tasks than they can possibly do in 3 days even if they had 4 GTX 1080's.

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 2017-02-28 at 06:59
Sergei Chernykh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-07-05, 07:46   #27
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

24×172 Posts
Default

Sergei interview with Gridcoin.

https://github.com/Erkan-Yilmaz/Grid..._2017_02_18.MD
pinhodecarlos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-08-16, 07:29   #28
Sergei Chernykh
 
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden

1238 Posts
Default

The search is complete! It took 7 months and 250-300 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 2017-08-16 at 07:30
Sergei Chernykh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-08-16, 18:12   #29
R. Gerbicz
 
R. Gerbicz's Avatar
 
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary

23×32×19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Chernykh View Post
The search is complete! It took 7 months and 250-300 computers running on average.

- There are 2,390,655 amicable pairs with smaller member below 2^64 in total
Congratulations! Not many "hard" number theory projects completed to 2^64.
R. Gerbicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-08-17, 13:51   #30
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

3,319 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Chernykh View Post
The search is complete! It took 7 months and 250-300 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
Hmm, what about... <rummage rummage> Aha! You can download all or part of the Amicable pairs list here! From a (>=3) to b digits, also pairs that remain amicable in Gaussian integers. Nice!

Last fiddled with by Dr Sardonicus on 2017-08-17 at 13:53
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-08-22, 09:00   #31
AndrewWalker
 
AndrewWalker's Avatar
 
Mar 2015
Australia

2·41 Posts
Default

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 2017-08-22 at 09:01
AndrewWalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-08-22, 09:03   #32
Sergei Chernykh
 
Jun 2015
Stockholm, Sweden

83 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewWalker View Post
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
It will take at least 4 years: you can check progress here
Sergei Chernykh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-03, 21:45   #33
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

121016 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Chernykh View Post
It will take at least 4 years: you can check progress here
Probably less if we account for the speed increase of GPUs and CPUs.
How many GPUs are deployed on the search?
pinhodecarlos is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
100M-digit n/k pairs __HRB__ Riesel Prime Search 0 2010-05-22 01:17
Rejected k/n pairs em99010pepe No Prime Left Behind 18 2008-12-06 12:50
amicable, perfect, etc. numbers jasong Math 14 2005-06-09 17:41
decimal-binary prime pairs ixfd64 Math 2 2003-10-16 13:40
Double-checks come in pairs? BigRed Software 1 2002-10-20 05:29

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:26.

Mon Aug 3 21:26:12 UTC 2020 up 17 days, 17:12, 0 users, load averages: 1.67, 1.48, 1.42

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.