mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-07-12, 12:56   #430
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

2·3·19·53 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi37 View Post
Last night I run Newpgen with same range for SG search and your new sgsieve.
Since I don't know does your sieve include odd k I make two test and found totally different number of candidates in output ( on same sieve depth)
So decoding ABCD was unsuccessful because I have no base point to decode.
Only odd k are included in sgsieve. I can run against newpgen and see what it produces.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-14, 12:38   #431
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

2·3·19·53 Posts
Default

I posted 2.0.5 to sourceforge. The only change is for sgsieve support of newpgen format. Note that the Sophie-Germain primes it searches for are referred to a "CC" by newpgen and twingen. In the future I will add support for p = k*b^n-1. Right now it only supports p = k*2^n+1. The future will also bring support for other bases.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-18, 17:53   #432
Citrix
 
Citrix's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

23·197 Posts
Default

Feature request for srsieve2.exe

In CisOneSubsequenceHelper.cpp can you create an option to bypass the code to calculate the ii_BestQ if the user can use the -Q flag and specify it from the command line.

Generally srsieve2.exe program can calculate the best Q but for some sequences (Q>720) it does not work and it might be better to specify it from the command line.

Thanks.
Citrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-18, 22:05   #433
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

604210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrix View Post
Feature request for srsieve2.exe

In CisOneSubsequenceHelper.cpp can you create an option to bypass the code to calculate the ii_BestQ if the user can use the -Q flag and specify it from the command line.

Generally srsieve2.exe program can calculate the best Q but for some sequences (Q>720) it does not work and it might be better to specify it from the command line.
Seems reasonable enough. Do you know some sequences where Q > 720? It might be possible for srsieve2 to compute it, unless it would be extremely large.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-18, 23:02   #434
Citrix
 
Citrix's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

30508 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue View Post
Seems reasonable enough. Do you know some sequences where Q > 720? It might be possible for srsieve2 to compute it, unless it would be extremely large.
All candidates in post below need Q >720
https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...82&postcount=4

You can read the posts in the above thread (towards the end). We were finding benefit of using Q values greater than 50,000

You can also artificially create a sequence that needs Q>720 for testing

It would be best for a manual option for Q as some sequences require Q to be a multiple of 7,11 etc and it is hard for any algorithm to predict best Q in all possible circumstances.
Citrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-28, 07:43   #435
pepi37
 
pepi37's Avatar
 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)

136210 Posts
Default

Source 2.0.5.7
I cannot get that gfndsievecl. exe working
Ok it doesnot crash, but if use GPU then GPU load should not be zero?
pepi37 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-28, 12:11   #436
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

10111100110102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi37 View Post
Source 2.0.5.7
I cannot get that gfndsievecl. exe working
Ok it doesnot crash, but if use GPU then GPU load should not be zero?
The first chunk that is tested will not use the GPU because of the large number of candidates removed. Beyond that it should use the GPU. Did you specify the -G option? Also note that this code doesn't stress the GPU that much. You could try upping the value for -G to start more GPU workers.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-28, 14:49   #437
pepi37
 
pepi37's Avatar
 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)

2·3·227 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue View Post
The first chunk that is tested will not use the GPU because of the large number of candidates removed. Beyond that it should use the GPU. Did you specify the -G option? Also note that this code doesn't stress the GPU that much. You could try upping the value for -G to start more GPU workers.

Yes it works , with -G2 -g 20 I got same speed as from one cpu worker!
Thanks for answer!


Cosmetic bug: if you use-i gfnd.pfgw -o gfnd.pfgw then output will be named gfnd.pfgw.pfgw, so you must use -o gfnd to get output gfnd.pfgw

Last fiddled with by pepi37 on 2020-08-28 at 14:50
pepi37 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-28, 15:11   #438
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

179A16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi37 View Post
Yes it works , with -G2 -g 20 I got same speed as from one cpu worker!
Thanks for answer!

Cosmetic bug: if you use-i gfnd.pfgw -o gfnd.pfgw then output will be named gfnd.pfgw.pfgw, so you must use -o gfnd to get output gfnd.pfgw
You probably want to bump both -G and -g.

Auto-appending .pfgw to the output file name is intended in this case because of the -T option. I suppose I could change so that .pfgw is only appended if -T is specified thus making -O a prefix for file name instead of a file name.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-28, 15:29   #439
pepi37
 
pepi37's Avatar
 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)

2·3·227 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue View Post
You probably want to bump both -G and -g.

Auto-appending .pfgw to the output file name is intended in this case because of the -T option. I suppose I could change so that .pfgw is only appended if -T is specified thus making -O a prefix for file name instead of a file name.
I try that but got error: my card has only 6 GB of DDR6 , so it broke: it looks like 6 GB is not enough. On current settings it use 4 GB of RAM

By the way how to activate
-x --testterms test remaining terms for GFN divisibility

Can I just input number of candidate and try to test it without sieving or I need to done sieving and in next step application test remain candidates?


Quote:
e:\MTSIEVE\GFDN>gfndsievecl.exe -i gfnd.pfgw -x
gfndsieve v1.8, a program to find factors of k*2^n+1 numbers for variable k and n
Fatal Error: cannot use -i and -x together

e:\MTSIEVE\GFDN>pause

I try other combination but it doesnot work also :(

Last fiddled with by pepi37 on 2020-08-28 at 15:34
pepi37 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-28, 16:15   #440
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

179A16 Posts
Default

The reason is that -x is intended to be used on new sieves. It is also geared towards n < 2000. For larger n using gfndsieve+pfgw would be faster. Also other programs will likely be faster than gfndsieve for such small x.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


All times are UTC. The time now is 23:57.

Thu Dec 3 23:57:04 UTC 2020 up 20:08, 1 user, load averages: 1.78, 1.47, 1.33

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.