mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-09-23, 17:05   #1
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

875110 Posts
Default Trial Factor assignments squatting in Cat 0 and Cat 1 DC range

As of this moment there are 68 TF assignments in the DC Cat 0 and 1 range below 54M. All were assigned in the last month.
And they have not been showing progress like they should if they were using a GPU.
https://www.mersenne.org/assignments...first=1&exp1=1

Why is this allowed? These are keeping other users from completing the DC on them. The assignments were (I am guessing) gotten from the manual GPU assignment page. It lists the bottom of the available DC-TF range as the lowest exponent yet to get a DC. That should be moved up into Cat 3. The issue is the same with the FTC-TF range.

It is getting sorely tempting to just do the DC to kill them off. They are not even slow, they are stopped And with this many exponents not real likely to find a single factor.

Last fiddled with by Uncwilly on 2020-09-23 at 17:05
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 17:28   #2
De Wandelaar
 
De Wandelaar's Avatar
 
"Yves"
Jul 2017
Belgium

628 Posts
Default

A majority of those TF's were assigned between 2020-09-14 and 2020-09-22.
Poaching those assigments after a couple of days or weeks (while the participants are not at fault) could imho discourage them definitively from contrinuting especially if they are relatively new participants.
De Wandelaar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 17:59   #3
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
U.S.A.

65616 Posts
Default

Curious: Why TF's on exponents which have a LL test needing verified? I looked at the detail for the first three.
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 18:08   #4
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

3×2,917 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by De Wandelaar View Post
A majority of those TF's were assigned between 2020-09-14 and 2020-09-22.
Poaching those assigments after a couple of days or weeks (while the participants are not at fault) could imho discourage them definitively from contrinuting especially if they are relatively new participants.
They should not be open to TF assignments. It should be DC only. If these are newbies (all of them are ranked less than 100 on the TF top producers list), they may not understand that they should not be working down there and holding on to the exponents. All the more reason to not allow them to take the exponents. They have moved up a bunch in the 90 day range. The highest, assuming a dead start 90 days ago is producing 708 GHz-days/day (which is less than a single GeForce GTX 1070).
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 18:14   #5
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

100010001011112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storm5510 View Post
Curious: Why TF's on exponents which have a LL test needing verified? I looked at the detail for the first three.
If they had too little TF already That is not the case. Or they hope to find a factor and eliminate the need for a DC. Current DC TF range according to GPU72 should be in the 67M range. If someone wanted to hammer away at the 58M range, fine, that is way out in the Cat 3 area. Just take 2 weeks worth of work at a time and turn it in.
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 18:25   #6
ATH
Einyen
 
ATH's Avatar
 
Dec 2003
Denmark

B9916 Posts
Default

I sent a PM to Madpoo about this thread, lets see if he can fix it.

It is curious these cat0 and cat1 TF assignments are stuck so often with no progress. It might be deliberate attempts to stall / sabotage.

Last fiddled with by ATH on 2020-09-23 at 18:31
ATH is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 18:30   #7
De Wandelaar
 
De Wandelaar's Avatar
 
"Yves"
Jul 2017
Belgium

2·52 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
They should not be open to TF assignments. It should be DC only. If these are newbies (all of them are ranked less than 100 on the TF top producers list), they may not understand that they should not be working down there and holding on to the exponents. All the more reason to not allow them to take the exponents. They have moved up a bunch in the 90 day range. The highest, assuming a dead start 90 days ago is producing 708 GHz-days/day (which is less than a single GeForce GTX 1070).
Completely agree with your statement, those exponents should not be open to TF assignments.
Assignment algorithmm is not 100 % waterproof but again, participants are absolutely not at fault.

Do you think it's better to poach those exponents or to wait (worst case) for the 60 days expiry date ?

Edit : @ATH, I'm not convinced of deliberate attempts to stall but it's not impossible (??)

Last fiddled with by De Wandelaar on 2020-09-23 at 18:39
De Wandelaar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 19:14   #8
firejuggler
 
firejuggler's Avatar
 
Apr 2010
Over the rainbow

2×3×11×37 Posts
Default

Or maybe do a short PM1 on those and hope for the best.
firejuggler is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 19:46   #9
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

30608 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by De Wandelaar View Post
...
Do you think it's better to poach those exponents or to wait (worst case) for the 60 days expiry date ?
...
Those TF assignments have no expiry date. But poaching is a lack of respect of the other users. In the past that kind of TF assignments were completed ... after a time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by firejuggler View Post
Or maybe do a short PM1 on those and hope for the best.
Once again this would be poaching.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATH View Post
I sent a PM to Madpoo about this thread, lets see if he can fix it.
...
I did the same yesterday : PM to Aaron, James. James forwarded to George.

Jacob

It is curious these cat0 and cat1 TF assignments are stuck so often with no progress. It might be deliberate attempts to stall / sabotage.
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 20:40   #10
kruoli
 
kruoli's Avatar
 
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE

2·167 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S485122 View Post
[...] poaching is a lack of respect of the other users. [...]
Yes, that's especially true if the assignees did not do this on purpose, which I cannot determine.

On the other hand, if someone is trying to hinder progress knowingly, I do not think we need to respect them doing this.
kruoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-23, 23:03   #11
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
U.S.A.

110010101102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATH View Post
I sent a PM to Madpoo about this thread, lets see if he can fix it.

It is curious these cat0 and cat1 TF assignments are stuck so often with no progress. It might be deliberate attempts to stall / sabotage.
It seems to me that if anyone were going to stall / sabotage, they would do it with a lot more than 68. If Madpoo cannot do a fix, he may be able to give a clearer reason as to how this happened.
storm5510 is offline   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 20:32.

Fri Oct 30 20:32:46 UTC 2020 up 50 days, 17:43, 1 user, load averages: 1.58, 1.63, 1.80

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.