mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Cunningham Tables

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2019-04-20, 16:19   #56
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2×472 Posts
Default

I'm not so sure about that- for one, it appears Vebis did a *lot* of work to find this poly; second, when we tested polys for XYYX 138_123 C206, the deg 5 sieved about 20% faster than deg 6 of the same score. That is, a rough conversion last time around was to add 20% to the score of deg 5 when comparing to deg 6.
That means a 1.60 in deg 5 should be as strong a candidate as Max's spun-up version of Vebis' stellar poly. We expect to be able to find 1.6's if we put in the time Vebis did.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-20, 16:27   #57
vebis
 
vebis's Avatar
 
Oct 2015

22·17 Posts
Default

I started the search for a 5th degree poly. It will be done tomorrow evening.
vebis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-20, 19:00   #58
RichD
 
RichD's Avatar
 
Sep 2008
Kansas

32·349 Posts
Default

I'll start back up at 32M to try to get a lower skew. (deg-5)
RichD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-21, 01:38   #59
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2×472 Posts
Default

I've fired up CADO to test the deg 6 poly from Vebis as spun by Max. After an hour or so, I have sieved 2 Q=1k workunits on 4 hyperthreads of a busy Ivy Bridge. Stats:
Yield is 6.4 at Q=200M
ETA suggests 55 core-years of sieving (I chose Q=200M because it's close to the midpoint of expected Q-range of 20M to 450M, so the time estimate is the best a single-point test-sieve can be).
Initial LP and MFB are 34/35 and 66/99; I can change these by exiting CADO and editing the snapshot file, which I plan to do daily while trying to minimize ETA. I chose 2.6G raw relations as target; this should be ample over-sieving to build a reasonable matrix.
I left lim's and ncurves at default for c210; 260M/550M and 26/21. I am pleased to report memory use from "top" as 13.3GB virtual, 12GB resident. So, these tasks should fit into Carlos' planned virtual-linux-on-windows on his 16GB machine.
I test-sieved a bit on 16f GGNFS siever too; with lim's at 250/500M, sec/rel was around 0.350 with the same LP/MFB listed above, while sec/rel was slower with MFBR 67 or MFBA 98 or 100. Yield on 16f was a bit higher, though I only tested Q-range of 500.
55 core-years happens to match our present pledge level nicely, so we have a legit hope to get this sieved in 6 months! I hope that some quiet observers of this thread will contribute a few workunits too, leading us to less than 6 wall-clock months to sieve. :)

Last fiddled with by VBCurtis on 2019-04-21 at 01:40 Reason: changed thread to core for ETA estimate
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-21, 08:12   #60
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

474810 Posts
Default

Any experience on CADO server side in terms of how many client connections it can handle. Was wondering what would happen if you start being hit by more than 300-400 cores.
pinhodecarlos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-21, 15:06   #61
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

161008 Posts
Default Other "small" composites

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichD View Post
I'll start back up at 32M to try to get a lower skew. (deg-5)
Perhaps the forum might want to do a poly search for the C210, C211, and C217?
If the forum provides polynomials perhaps Greg might queue them for lasievef?
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-21, 15:57   #62
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·472 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinhodecarlos View Post
Any experience on CADO server side in terms of how many client connections it can handle. Was wondering what would happen if you start being hit by more than 300-400 cores.
No experience, of course; that's not something a normal person could/would test. However, I can do some estimating: A single 4-threaded workunit is producing ~5000 relations in half an hour of wall-clock time at Q=200M. So, 400 cores would produce 100 such workunits in 30 minutes, or 3 per minute; 500k relations would be produced per 30 minutes. That's substantially slower than running a typical C110 locally, so the server would keep up without any issue.

I'm shopping for a 1TB SSD presently to handle the job data. I am CADOing a C186 right now that should head into filtering in 3 weeks. Once I see what memory use is for postprocessing that number, I can decide whether to upgrade to 96GB or 128GB memory (64GB now) and have a more-educated guess for how much swap to allocate on the SSD.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-21, 18:08   #63
vebis
 
vebis's Avatar
 
Oct 2015

6810 Posts
Default

Code:
n: 334377437706404684733884220732190564550147039308686365251932207592010868660163280944362994773042289837865752943086095333357861608005044927356022538834108845220872215597190097852981295940487497385774178731621
skew: 146825723.142
c0: 8927615796337795909706360434154979487944027812870
c1: 249426878913680820299934039511380732178383
c2: -1269993042201960025915734295984162
c3: -44702903780233907372762163
c4: 43380588291919832
c5: 199837440
Y0: -6688519829695165238165832445322722085046
Y1: 3276459567865397949373
# MurphyE (Bf=3.436e+10,Bg=1.718e+10,area=5.469e+16) = 1.58e-08
# found by revision 9436c2ff8
# f(x) = 199837440*x^5+43380588291919832*x^4-44702903780233907372762163*x^3-1269993042201960025915734295984162*x^2+249426878913680820299934039511380732178383*x+8927615796337
795909706360434154979487944027812870
# g(x) = 3276459567865397949373*x-6688519829695165238165832445322722085046
My best 5th degree poly. Default c210.poly of cado-nfs, but with degree 5 as parameters for the search. You can find the other polys in the attachment.
Attached Files
File Type: tgz c207-deg5.tgz (563.6 KB, 27 views)

Last fiddled with by VBCurtis on 2019-04-21 at 19:33 Reason: VBCurtis: Changed quote tages to code tags again
vebis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-21, 19:31   #64
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2×472 Posts
Default

The cownoise.com skew-maker evaluates this poly:
skew: 86201388.01399
E-score: 1.35974390e-13

I'll test this poly on 16f today, but I'll wait for possible spin from Max before I turn CADO to it.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-22, 03:02   #65
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

4,723 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
The cownoise.com skew-maker evaluates this poly:
skew: 86201388.01399
E-score: 1.35974390e-13
Which poly? The degree-5 gets evaluated as
skew: 175281707.18300
E: 1.51187373e-15

1.36e-13 couldn't possibly be a legit value - it is about two orders of magnitude better than anything posted here.
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-22, 04:43   #66
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·472 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
Which poly? The degree-5 gets evaluated as
skew: 175281707.18300
E: 1.51187373e-15

1.36e-13 couldn't possibly be a legit value - it is about two orders of magnitude better than anything posted here.
Strange that I got such a different value from cownoise for the deg 5; I'll try it again. {time passes}

My result now matches yours. I cannot figure out what I miscopied to generate the other value; I'm not even sure that the -13 was a typo versus the result of some copy/paste getting truncated.

I test-sieved, but with the skew from CADO rather than from my post (error #2 today!); I'll do some more tests presently.

Last fiddled with by VBCurtis on 2019-04-22 at 04:44
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Coordination thread for redoing P-1 factoring ixfd64 Lone Mersenne Hunters 53 2020-10-30 19:39
big job planning henryzz Cunningham Tables 16 2010-08-07 05:08
Sieving reservations and coordination gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 2 2008-02-16 03:28
Sieved files/sieving coordination gd_barnes Conjectures 'R Us 32 2008-01-22 03:09
Special Project Planning wblipp ElevenSmooth 2 2004-02-19 05:25

All times are UTC. The time now is 08:42.

Sat Oct 31 08:42:09 UTC 2020 up 51 days, 5:53, 2 users, load averages: 2.15, 1.85, 1.70

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.