mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Software

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 2005-05-22, 20:38   #23
Peter Nelson
 
Peter Nelson's Avatar
 
Oct 2004

232 Posts
Default

Allocating only half the RAM maximum on a dualcore appears wrong to me.

During usual test sequence TF , p-1, LL test, only the p-1 test (and only one stage of it) uses the lots of memory and this only runs for very small % of whole time (inc LL).

Therefore provided you have dualcore running 2 instances, it is very likely that both cores are not simultaneously doing P-1 stage.

Therefore the one doing the memory heavy work should be allowed to use more than half. When it completes and probably does LL then it will not use most of the memory therefore the other instance could then take it.

I therefore suggest that the maximum be not limited to half max mem but be configurable up to say 90% of total ram.
Peter Nelson is offline  
Old 2005-05-23, 00:16   #24
Joshua2
 
Joshua2's Avatar
 
Sep 2004

13×41 Posts
Default

But, in the times when both are doing P-1 at once, there would be severe thrashing. Maybe the software could be made smart enough to "know" to make an exception in this case?
Also, if the two instances are staggered, about a month apart, maybe this would never happen since both cores are the same speed? However, when the computer is used for other tasks, it will probably always excute on core 1 first, and then if another high priority task is going on 1, then it would run on core 2. This would cause the p95 running on core 1 to gradually lose ground, and eventually, (maybe it would take years?) they would be having to do p-1 at the same time.
This problem should probably be solved, or efficiency will drop, especially in a couple years when more and more people get dual cores and processors.

Last fiddled with by Joshua2 on 2005-05-23 at 00:18
Joshua2 is offline  
Old 2005-05-23, 13:19   #25
dsouza123
 
dsouza123's Avatar
 
Sep 2002

66210 Posts
Default

The solution is getting more RAM.

At 1GB of RAM the desirable 185 MB for 33M
for each CPU/copy of Prime95 would take 370 MB
leaving 654 for the OS and all the other programs.

The idea is at least 512 MB per CPU core.
Which is in agreement with current single core recommendations
for a mid level PC.

It is a good idea to have plenty of RAM (not minimums),
it is an easy way to speed up your PC.
Virtual memory stays in RAM mostly, no thrashing due to paging swapping
memory onto the disk, RAM can cache repeatedly used files/programs
increasing speed.
With enough RAM the hard drive can power down,
saving power, reducing heat, reducing ware on the drive.

Remember even if 185 MB is allowed for Prime95, most of the time
(when not running P-1 stage 2 factoring) only about 12MB is used,
Prime95 doesn't allocate the RAM unless it needs it.
dsouza123 is offline  
Old 2005-05-25, 20:44   #26
jasong
 
jasong's Avatar
 
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005

350510 Posts
Default

From looking at the replies, I'd say people understand the problem and simply have different takes on it.

My main reason for concern, and this is the result of a thought experiment as opposed to an actual occurrence, is there are people who take Distributed Computing very seriously but have limited resources, so they don't necessarily want to supply the minimum amount of memory necessary for ALL the possible, but decide having enough for 95-99% is satisfactory.

It would be nice, but maybe too difficult for the programmers, to have a process that, instead of totally skipping p-1 when the other processor is running it, can "discover" the possibility that it can be run later, starts the other process, and goes back to p-1 when it's convenient. Also, what about the possibility that p-1 could stop BOTH processors in order to have the necessary memory for one p-1 instance I haven't analyzed this from a statistical standpoint, but it may be worthwhile to consider.

As I said, it may be too difficult for the programmers, but I thought it was at least worthy of discussion and appreciate people considering it.
jasong is offline  
Old 2005-06-11, 01:42   #27
Ding_Cong
 
Oct 2004
Shanghai,China

22 Posts
Default What meanings are these two speeches?

What meanings are these two Sentences?

"lgnoring suggested B1 value, using B1=385000 from the save file
lgnoring suggested B2 value, using B2=7988750 from the save file"

These two Sentences appear when I run zhe Prime95.exe .

please look at the picture:
http://www.equn.com/forum/attachment...ime95_KE27.gif

Last fiddled with by Ding_Cong on 2005-06-11 at 01:46
Ding_Cong is offline  
Old 2005-06-11, 05:32   #28
geoff
 
geoff's Avatar
 
Mar 2003
New Zealand

13×89 Posts
Default

When Prime95 begins a P-1 test it chooses the B1 and B2 parameters based on the memory available, and how long it expects an LL test to take (so it knows how much time would be saved if the P-1 test finds a factor).

If you are part way through a P-1 test and then change the memory settings, or install a new version of Prime95 (which might change the expected LL test time, or might have a different procedure for choosing parameters), it has to decide whether to start the test again with new parameters or to continue the current test with the old parameters.

The messages you see above are normal, they just say that Prime95 decided to continue with the old parameters instead of restarting the P-1 test.
geoff is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Coordination thread for redoing P-1 factoring ixfd64 Lone Mersenne Hunters 80 2021-01-19 17:17
NOT the official forum factoring project thread jyb Factoring 2 2013-09-03 16:11
Yet another basic-factoring-questions thread davar55 Factoring 24 2011-01-23 23:57
Perpetual ECM factoring challenge thread... Xyzzy Factoring 65 2005-09-05 08:16
Deutscher Thread (german thread) TauCeti NFSNET Discussion 0 2003-12-11 22:12

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:01.

Tue Mar 2 21:01:10 UTC 2021 up 89 days, 17:12, 0 users, load averages: 2.02, 1.94, 1.90

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.