20221113, 08:19  #56 
Jul 2003
So Cal
2^{5}×79 Posts 

20221113, 08:26  #57 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
19·269 Posts 

20221119, 22:25  #58 
Jul 2003
So Cal
2^{5}·79 Posts 
2,1091+ is in LA now.
Code:
linear algebra completed 226672 of 115553837 dimensions (0.2%, ETA 78h56m) 
20221123, 18:25  #59 
Jul 2003
So Cal
2^{5}×79 Posts 

20221123, 20:26  #60 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
1001111110111_{2} Posts 
Congrats! Now to the next...

20221127, 16:03  #61 
Jun 2012
3,767 Posts 
2,1097+ is currently sieving, and assuming nothing goes wrong, Greg has announced plans to tackle 2,2194LM.
Again assuming no problems with 2,2194LM, I presume Greg will consider 2,2206L, a SNFS 332 difficulty composite. By coincidence 2,2206L should be starting ECM in the coming days, so if Yoyo doesn’t find a factor perhaps Greg will take it on. 2,1109+ is now enqueued with Yoyo, follow its progress here. I expect this job to actually start ECM in late January. I am planning to next enqueue 2,2222L with Yoyo@Home. I’ve no notion whether NFS@Home can handle a SNFS 334/GNFS 228 job but at least we can meet our due diligence wrt ECM. Slowly working through the Gang of 31, er 20something. Last fiddled with by swellman on 20221127 at 18:31 Reason: Corrected typo in 2,2222L 
20221127, 17:21  #62 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
7×13×61 Posts 
The one big trick remaining to extend nfs@home's reach is to use 3 large primes on both sides. A 50% yield improvement would add a few digits of range, making high 220s or low 230s in reach. It may even add speed, since such small lims are used for these jobs.

20221127, 17:31  #63 
"99(4^34019)99 palind"
Nov 2016
(P^81993)SZ base 36
7100_{8} Posts 
Do you mean 2,2222L?
Last fiddled with by sweety439 on 20221127 at 17:32 
20221127, 18:13  #64 
Jul 2003
So Cal
9E0_{16} Posts 
Does that work with lasieve5? Last I tried it ran significantly slower and sometimes stalled, but I might have been using lasieve4 at the time. I'll try it again. I also plan to try using 36bit LPs on one side and push msieve filtering to its limit.

20221127, 20:05  #65  
Apr 2020
875_{10} Posts 
Quote:


20221128, 00:27  #66 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
7·13·61 Posts 
I've been testing 3LP with much lower mfb's than usually used say, 90 and 102 for 35/36LP job. I don't see nearly the speed hit that e.g. 103/105 would be, and I get quite a bit better yield. I think I tried this on M1277 first, then on one of the GNFS225 polys from the recent thread; I don't have records handy, and I was testing with CADO rather than ggnfs.
There should be a transition area where mfb 9092 is faster than mfb 70, but mfb 100 is slower. 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Recommended bases and efforts  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  185  20211220 05:51 
Doublecheck efforts; S66/S79 to start with  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  16  20140807 02:11 
Cunningham ECM Now Futile?  R.D. Silverman  GMPECM  4  20120425 02:45 
ECM efforts mistake?  10metreh  mersennewiki  1  20081228 13:31 
ECM Efforts  R.D. Silverman  Factoring  63  20050624 13:41 