![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3×2,083 Posts |
![]()
Just curious...how does the whole "assign number to workers" thing work? Is it some kind of system that automatically runs x amount of ECM curves on a given number (the specific amounts being as you described earlier in this thread)?
I noticed that when I tried taking an arbitrary C176 from the homogeneous Cunningham list and submitted it for ECM to low limits, it returned a message that says "Waiting for worker...". What exactly does this mean? Also, is it dynamic in some way? If I sit there and stare at the "Waiting for worker..." message will it eventually change to something else to show some sort of progress? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | |
Sep 2008
Krefeld, Germany
2·5·23 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Last fiddled with by Syd on 2008-12-16 at 22:08 Reason: spelling |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 | |
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3×2,083 Posts |
![]() Quote:
![]() Edit: I just tried this again with the same C176, then immediately re-searched it after assigning it to a worker. It then reported back as "Assigned to Worker #2". ![]() Edit2: And...presto! It's found a P22 factor! ![]() Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2008-12-16 at 23:02 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
3×3,109 Posts |
![]() Quote:
It is probably worth mentioning that the table homog.cunnighams are ECMed very hard already - nothing will most likely be found by ECM what is not already known from Paul's tables. Check the progression of the ECM factor sizes in the update and older sections, and you will see that at least 35-40-digit factors may be now expected. Syd, you may want to put a flag field in the database of how much ECM is known to have been done (by your workers or external efforts) on specific composites and skip the ECM to low/medium/high limits, if requested by a button press (or even grey-out/inactivate those buttons on such flagged numbers). (So that the workers would not be run uselessly again and again.) P.S. It would be nice if we could add algebraic factors at least manually. Example 12^190+11^190 Report factor(s): ...and we enter... 12^38+11^38 (which is itself composite, but please evaluate it behind the scenes, look it up in the database and apply all found factors recursively, right? Just my 2 cents) P.P.S. Added the p38 factor manually to the same 12+11.200... Last fiddled with by Batalov on 2008-12-16 at 23:48 Reason: (homog.cunnighams are ECMed very hard) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 |
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
143568 Posts |
![]()
Can we have fibonacci() and lucas() numbers? They have the same sort of divisor patterns as Cunningham numbers, and there are big tables of factors available for inhalation at http://home.att.net/~blair.kelly/mat.../fibonacci.txt and http://home.att.net/~blair.kelly/mat...acci/lucas.txt.
Would it be possible to have a notation - ## or something - for 'product of the first N primes' rather than 'product of the primes less than N'; otherwise x#+1,100,130 gets rather repetitive. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 |
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
221578 Posts |
![]()
Syd, you may want to parse some algebraic forms.
Well, http://factorization.ath.cx/search.p...1670676383%5E2 Maybe, for starters, it would be nice to parse a^n a^n-b^n a^odd+b^odd and then progress to Aurife... ...ehh... Aurifeuillian! yes, I can. (I though I could. Chug, chug, chug...) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 |
Oct 2006
vomit_frame_pointer
23×32×5 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 |
Nov 2008
232210 Posts |
![]()
I'm working on the numbers just above a googol. There are quite a few easy QS/SNFS numbers in the range from 10^100 to 10^100+100. I couldn't find a factor table for these, so I'm doing them.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 | |
Aug 2006
22×1,493 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 |
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada
7·167 Posts |
![]()
Nice database. I did a search for 3^437-2^437 and then entered the remaining factors which I found. I did one at a time, but when I click on "Report" it just brings me back to the same page with no message about if the factor was successfully save or not. If I try to search again the new factors are not showing up.
So did this fail, or do you have some sort of process to verify the factors and they will appear at some later date? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Database for k-b-b's: | 3.14159 | Miscellaneous Math | 325 | 2016-04-09 17:45 |
Factoring database issues | Mini-Geek | Factoring | 5 | 2009-07-01 11:51 |
database.zip | HiddenWarrior | Data | 1 | 2004-03-29 03:53 |
Database layout | Prime95 | PrimeNet | 1 | 2003-01-18 00:49 |
Is there a performance database? | Joe O | Lounge | 35 | 2002-09-06 20:19 |