mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-09-30, 06:42   #23
ATH
Einyen
 
ATH's Avatar
 
Dec 2003
Denmark

2×3×7×71 Posts
Default

Yeah, it does not sound like they are interested in changing the assignment code, so if we get TF assignments in those categories that are not completed for weeks, we will have to poach them in an organized way.
ATH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-30, 20:35   #24
Ensigm
 
Aug 2020

3·5·7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
Yeah, uhm, sorry for that, but I have checked that exponents which were assigned to me for TF are not assigned for DC yet. Plus expected throughput is about 70 expos per day.

Also a tip that for TF of a certain bit level the larger the exponent the shorter it takes. That's because there are less \(k\)s to try. So it's probably wiser to TF the largest exponent available for a certain bit level in itself, in addition to the argument of not blocking DC progress. Though I don't know much about factor possibility so I'm not really sure about the efficiency.


I once reserved several assignments in the 53M range too, but I noticed that it had higher GHz*d credits per exponent (and did took longer) so I thought about why. As a result now I mostly do 60M's and 59M's, because I care about factors not credits.

Last fiddled with by Ensigm on 2020-09-30 at 20:37
Ensigm is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-30, 21:05   #25
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

3·2,963 Posts
Default

All of the exponents look like they are at 74 bits already (I did a spot check of about a dozen). That is 1 bit above the recommended level as seen in yellow here: https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/4/5300

It looks like everything below 100M is at the goal bit depth or above it. Maybe any TF in the DC should be aimed at those actually at the goal bit depth.
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-01, 02:49   #26
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

22×7×11×29 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
We're all in it for the life-changing prize money. You mean you aren't?
Well... hmm... arrr.. don't tell these guys!
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-01, 09:54   #27
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

30758 Posts
Default manual assignment pages

I went to look at the Manual assignment page the lowest exponent I could get for TF wath in the 200M range : no problem there.

However on the "Manual GPU assignment page, if one select TF for double check the "optional" range starts at the lowest unverified exponent. The same applies for TF for fist time tests...

It would be easy to modify the code to use the current CAT 2 or the CAT 3 threshold instead of the lowest unverified exponent.

Jacob
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-01, 12:12   #28
Aramis Wyler
 
Aramis Wyler's Avatar
 
"Bill Staffen"
Jan 2013
Pittsburgh, PA, USA

3·137 Posts
Default

This still seems like mountains from molehills to me. There are lots of numbers inthat range, and taking 3 days to TF a couple dozen isn't hurting anything or slowing the project.


At worst, set the expiration to 5-7 days for cat 0 numbers and call it good.



It looks like Villiam has pulled a new batch of numbers in that range yesterday (having returned the initial ones when complete) and so it's moving on.

Last fiddled with by Aramis Wyler on 2020-10-01 at 12:12
Aramis Wyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-01, 12:37   #29
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

3·2,963 Posts
Default

But there have been some users holding TF assignments for months in that range. As noted elsewhere, there was a user in the 93M range with assignments many months old, with no progress.
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-01, 13:36   #30
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

110001111012 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramis Wyler View Post
...
At worst, set the expiration to 5-7 days for cat 0 numbers and call it good.
...
Problem is "we" can't do that.
And at the moment those manual TF assignments are not subject to recycling rules, they have no expiry date.
It would be easier not to assign CAT0 and CAT for manual testing as stated by the Assignment rules.
At the moment CAT2 starts at 54571632 in the DC range and at 105751532 for the first time checks.
This means that unverified numbers the ranges 53xxxxxx to 54571632, and untested numbers in the range 91000000 to 105751532 should not be handled out for manual testing, be it ECM or TF.

Jacob

(I'd say it is not as if there were not enough numbers to work on, to absolutely go for those numbers that hold up the milestones, and are more than sufficiently factored as well. Especially it it makes a number of people nervous and worried ;-)

Last fiddled with by S485122 on 2020-10-01 at 13:37 Reason: added bit about "worried" people
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-01, 15:29   #31
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2·4,663 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S485122 View Post
And at the moment those manual TF assignments are not subject to recycling rules, they have no expiry date.
Technically not true. They are recycled after 180 days.
chalsall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-01, 18:01   #32
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

1,597 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
Technically not true. They are recycled after 180 days.
OK.

I thought I had seen exponents more than a year late in being reported about, but a quick search didn't find any in the relevant ranges... It even seems that the "first" rule "Since PrimeNet began, the server has recycled exponents where the client computer is 60 days past due in updating the server." is enforced in those ranges.

Jacob
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-09, 17:59   #33
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

100010101110012 Posts
Default

It is happening again.

https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=559340
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How many bits does/did the server trial factor to? Jayder Information & Answers 6 2015-01-25 03:29
Trial Factor Bit Depth lavalamp Operation Billion Digits 8 2010-08-02 18:49
trial division over a factor base Peter Hackman Factoring 7 2009-10-26 18:27
P95 Trial Factor speeds 40M vs 100M harlee Software 3 2006-10-15 04:38
Shortest time to complete a 2^67 trial factor (no factor) dsouza123 Software 12 2003-08-21 18:38

All times are UTC. The time now is 02:02.

Mon Nov 30 02:02:26 UTC 2020 up 80 days, 23:13, 3 users, load averages: 1.45, 1.26, 1.19

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.