mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > YAFU

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-02-08, 20:28   #331
10metreh
 
10metreh's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

2·33·43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
The version of factMsieve.pl I have is probably old. It doesn't know about msieve degree 4 poly selection or gnfs-lasieve4I11e. Is there such a version of factMsieve.pl?
There is no version of factMsieve.pl which has msieve poly selection, but SVN 374 and onwards are compatible with 11e.
10metreh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-08, 20:44   #332
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"π’‰Ίπ’ŒŒπ’‡·π’†·π’€­"
May 2003
Down not across

3·3,529 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10metreh View Post
There is no version of factMsieve.pl which has msieve poly selection, but SVN 374 and onwards are compatible with 11e.
Sounds like there is a demand for the Perl script to be maintained and, where possible, kept in sync with Brian's Python code.

I don't promise anything, but I've already made a few changes to the Perl script on my machine...


Paul
xilman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-08, 20:58   #333
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

3,371 Posts
Default

Well, most of the NFS I do is done "by hand" on larger numbers and I have my own scripts for that work.

When I do find myself wanting some automation for smaller jobs I'm restricted by the fact that 99% of my compute power is based on RHEL 5, or similar systems with no recent version of python. A sync'ed version of the perl script or a down-version ported python script would be ideal for those of us in this admittedly rather niche use case.
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-09, 22:50   #334
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

337110 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10metreh View Post
Get GGNFS. It's faster at 94 digits.
This is very dependent on your OS, and CPU architecture. For example, I've measured YAFU to be faster up to 95 digits and maybe beyond on core2 64 bit windows, compared to msieve degree 4 poly selection (CPU version) and 64 bit core2 ggnfs 11e (version 374). I suspect the same is probably true on opterons and athlon64s and with 32 bit and 64 bit windows OS's since that is where YAFU is fast. YAFU isn't really fast on P4's and P3's and older stuff and so msieve + ggnfs probably wins out there, but I'm unable to make the measurements.

64 bit linux is a different story, since there ggnfs gains from the assembly improvements. I've measured the crossover to be about 88 digits in that case. Maybe 1 digit lower if you're using msieve GPU poly selection.

Last fiddled with by bsquared on 2010-02-09 at 22:51
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-09, 23:19   #335
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3×2,083 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
This is very dependent on your OS, and CPU architecture. For example, I've measured YAFU to be faster up to 95 digits and maybe beyond on core2 64 bit windows, compared to msieve degree 4 poly selection (CPU version) and 64 bit core2 ggnfs 11e (version 374). I suspect the same is probably true on opterons and athlon64s and with 32 bit and 64 bit windows OS's since that is where YAFU is fast. YAFU isn't really fast on P4's and P3's and older stuff and so msieve + ggnfs probably wins out there, but I'm unable to make the measurements.

64 bit linux is a different story, since there ggnfs gains from the assembly improvements. I've measured the crossover to be about 88 digits in that case. Maybe 1 digit lower if you're using msieve GPU poly selection.
Hmm, interesting. I have a Core 2 on 32-bit Windows, and I've been using GGNFS/msieve for anything bigger than 85 digits since the initial 11e crossover figures came out; I'll have to run some benchmarks sometime to refine that further, in light of this.

Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2010-02-09 at 23:20
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-10, 01:01   #336
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

485610 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
64 bit linux is a different story, since there ggnfs gains from the assembly improvements. I've measured the crossover to be about 88 digits in that case.
I can second this. This is the setting that I am using.

However, for vista 32 bit, my crossover is 90/91 digits (tho with yafu version 1.08 -- has there been any speed improvements since then?)

EDIT:- Both on Core 2 Duo, 2GHz processor.

Last fiddled with by axn on 2010-02-10 at 01:05
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-10, 02:16   #337
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

64538 Posts
Default

@max:
I would be interested in the results of any benchmarking you do, which is up to you, of course. I don't have any 32 bit systems with core2 based CPUs, so while I expect the crossover for those systems (and 32bit with opteron or phenom or athlon64) to be somewhere north of 90 digits, I haven't been able to test it myself. My comparison results for a windows 64 bit core 2 system are below. YAFU's speed is close to that achieved by the linux code, while the ggnfs siever's performance is 2x slower, which is what makes for quite a bit higher crossover point.

The 90 digit case is more than 2x slower, but this is because the slower poly selection didn't find as good of a polynomial to sieve with.

@axn:
1.16 should be noticeably faster, but I don't know exactly how much.

Code:
C85	1877138824359859508015524119652506869600959721781289179190693027302028679377371001561					
C90	750886878970491134480401867359489550454660065542753704510469658022612272495194857035724837					
C95	48404068520546498995797968938385187958997290617596242601254422967869040251141325866025672337021					
						
	64 bit linux (msieve, ggnfs, and yafu)					
		gnfs+msieve	11e			
	test num	poly	sieve	postproc	total(ggnfs+msieve)	yafu
	85	459	850	91	                1400	                        545
	90	468	1310	173	                1951	                        2460
	95	969	2849	380	                4198	                        6330

	64 bit windows (msieve, ggnfs, and yafu)					
		gnfs+msieve	11e			
	test num	poly	sieve	postproc	total(ggnfs+msieve)	yafu
	85	476	1407	57	                1940	                        666
	90	482	4234	139	                4855	                        2809
	95	983	6592	285	                7860	                        6842

Last fiddled with by bsquared on 2010-02-10 at 02:20
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-10, 02:59   #338
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

12F816 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
1.16 should be noticeably faster, but I don't know exactly how much.
I see only 1.15 on your site (http://sites.google.com/site/bbuhrow/home).
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-10, 03:20   #339
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

337110 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
I see only 1.15 on your site (http://sites.google.com/site/bbuhrow/home).
Ah, yes, sorry. 1.16 is my development version, but is the same, speedwise, as 1.15.
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-20, 17:24   #340
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

2×3×5×112 Posts
Default

Hi Ben,

This is from the machine I had the compilation trouble with. I don't recall if I've seen it on the others, but will try to catch it, if possible. Any ideas? (Or, is this just saying that the whole composite isn't factored?)

Code:
02/20/10 11:58:10 v1.14 @ localhost.localdomain, 
Initializing with Tom's Fast Math (x86-32 asm)...
cached 78504 primes. pmax = 1000099
detected cpu 8, with L1 = 65536 bytes, L2 = 65536 bytes

Processing expression: siqs(8009613806701035313358482906995630036368158402281908921632362193599907567635443487257)



***factors found***

P2 = 19
PRP6 = 223253
PRP10 = 1784059351

ans = 1

WARNING: couldn't find factor in factor.log

sieving in progress (press Ctrl-C to pause)
Is this within yafu, or is it during handoff?

Edit to add factor.log:
Code:
02/20/10 11:58:11 v1.14 @ localhost.localdomain, Starting SQUFOF on 398296602288803
02/20/10 11:58:11 v1.14 @ localhost.localdomain, prp6 = 223253
02/20/10 11:58:11 v1.14 @ localhost.localdomain, prp10 = 1784059351
Take Care,
Ed

Last fiddled with by EdH on 2010-02-20 at 17:26 Reason: added factor.log
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-21, 19:04   #341
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

D2B16 Posts
Default

That warning message isn't part of YAFU, is it aliquiet? But that factorization is also not right... it looks like the input was not parsed correctly. That's something I've not seen in years, so I'm guessing it's a build issue on your older pc. Having you been using YAFU for a while on this pc and this is the first time you've seen this problem, or are you just now trying it out again?
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Running YAFU via Aliqueit doesn't find yafu.ini EdH YAFU 8 2018-03-14 17:22
YAFU-1.34 bsquared YAFU 119 2015-11-05 16:24
Yafu bug. storflyt32 YAFU 2 2015-06-29 05:19
yafu-1.33 bsquared YAFU 12 2012-11-08 04:12
yafu-1.32.1 bsquared YAFU 21 2012-09-04 19:44

All times are UTC. The time now is 08:46.

Wed Mar 3 08:46:17 UTC 2021 up 90 days, 4:57, 0 users, load averages: 1.37, 1.22, 1.33

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.