mersenneforum.org Polynomial selection stage question
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2010-08-02, 04:25 #1 rawbinary   2·3,373 Posts Polynomial selection stage question Hello. I'm trying to factor 154 digits number using python driver for GGNFS and MSIEVE. I'm also using GPU version of msieve on GeForce 470 GTX. Unfortunately I can run it only 14 hours in a day. But msieve sets time limit of polynomial selection to 287.50 hours. To move to next stage I should get ".fb" file, that msieve generates at end of poly-selection. However I have ran msieve in a while some hours and got "project.dat.p" file with intermediate results. So can I make up own ".fb"-file by hands based on best e-value from "project.dat.p" or this privilege given only to msieve? My project.dat.p file: http://paste2.org/p/935980
 2010-08-02, 06:20 #2 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 2×3×5×313 Posts I had a similar problem. Here's a possible solution - ProcessExplorer It lets you put your process to sleep for the day and then wake it up when you are leaving for the night. You can also suspend that pesky M$oft dialog "You have not rebooted your computer since the last update: reboot now / reboot later" that jumps out every few minutes and sooner a later gets under your mouse click.  2010-08-02, 06:25 #3 Batalov "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 2·3·5·313 Posts You can also find the best poly so far by doing grep -n alp dat.p | sort +6rg | head 261:# norm 5.449549e-015 alpha -6.140948 e 3.020e-012 231:# norm 5.088774e-015 alpha -5.937988 e 2.892e-012 #-> that shows that your best polynomial start at line 261 Then do tail +261 dat.p | head and add it to your .poly file 2010-08-02, 12:10 #4 jasonp Tribal Bullet Oct 2004 33·131 Posts Quote:  Originally Posted by Batalov You can also suspend that pesky M$oft dialog "You have not rebooted your computer since the last update: reboot now / reboot later" that jumps out every few minutes and sooner a later gets under your mouse click.
Slightly off-topic, but this is also controlled by a registry entry that you can edit if you have administrative privileges on the machine. If not, you can always drag the window so that only its title bar is visible on your desktop; the warning is only repeated if you do something to the dialog box, so this will stop it annoying you temporarily.

Last fiddled with by jasonp on 2010-08-02 at 12:11

2010-08-02, 22:12   #5
Random Poster

Dec 2008

179 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by jasonp Slightly off-topic, but this is also controlled by a registry entry that you can edit if you have administrative privileges on the machine. If not, you can always drag the window so that only its title bar is visible on your desktop; the warning is only repeated if you do something to the dialog box, so this will stop it annoying you temporarily.
Or you could just turn off automatic updates. There's not much point of getting updates if you aren't willing to reboot (or shut down) the computer afterwards, and updates are only released once per month so downloading them manually shouldn't be too difficult.

Last fiddled with by jasonp on 2010-08-02 at 22:20 Reason: that requires admin privileges too :)

 2010-08-02, 22:49 #6 frmky     Jul 2003 So Cal 2·3·347 Posts Should I worry about "error: size score computation failed" messages? I got two in the last run. On a 178.6-digit number (i.e., log10(N) = 178.6) I found the following polynomial scores after about 5 days x 4 GPUs = 20 GPU-days using Telsa C1060's: # norm 1.307908e-17 alpha -8.505804 e 7.968e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.182218e-17 alpha -8.638512 e 7.515e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.164100e-17 alpha -8.585526 e 7.442e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.252224e-17 alpha -8.335315 e 7.438e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.076992e-17 alpha -8.016579 e 7.060e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.060567e-17 alpha -7.846450 e 6.966e-14 rroots 5 # norm 1.065377e-17 alpha -7.716075 e 6.936e-14 rroots 5 # norm 1.061400e-17 alpha -8.249336 e 6.926e-14 rroots 5 How do these compare to your expectations?
 2010-08-02, 23:00 #7 jasonp Tribal Bullet     Oct 2004 33×131 Posts I've gone to a lot of trouble to get rid of those errors, but I guess they still crop up very rarely. It just means the code aborted two polynomials because the numerical integrator couldn't converge
 2010-08-02, 23:03 #8 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 2×3×5×313 Posts Ah, the famous "crap" got a new name?
2010-08-02, 23:07   #9
frmky

Jul 2003
So Cal

2·3·347 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by jasonp I've gone to a lot of trouble to get rid of those errors, but I guess they still crop up very rarely. It just means the code aborted two polynomials because the numerical integrator couldn't converge
No worries. If you want to look into it, the number was 2,1195+ and I believe this is the line from the msieve.dat.m file:
17400 16121870647111176931 74778552341263563683890185954076125

The full errors were
integrator failed 2.031708e-21 6.429909e-25
error: size score computation failed
integrator failed 8.527355e-23 6.756194e-25
error: size score computation failed

2010-08-02, 23:09   #10
jasonp
Tribal Bullet

Oct 2004

1101110100012 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Batalov Ah, the famous "crap" got a new name?
This annoyance predates the GPU code; actually I hope one of jrk's patches removed the crap for good.

Greg: thanks, I'll try to find out what exploded here. Actually this is the first report of an integration error in a long time.

2010-08-02, 23:14   #11
jrk

May 2008

100010001112 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by frmky On a 178.6-digit number (i.e., log10(N) = 178.6) I found the following polynomial scores after about 5 days x 4 GPUs = 20 GPU-days using Telsa C1060's: # norm 1.307908e-17 alpha -8.505804 e 7.968e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.182218e-17 alpha -8.638512 e 7.515e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.164100e-17 alpha -8.585526 e 7.442e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.252224e-17 alpha -8.335315 e 7.438e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.076992e-17 alpha -8.016579 e 7.060e-14 rroots 3 # norm 1.060567e-17 alpha -7.846450 e 6.966e-14 rroots 5 # norm 1.065377e-17 alpha -7.716075 e 6.936e-14 rroots 5 # norm 1.061400e-17 alpha -8.249336 e 6.926e-14 rroots 5
I'd say anything above about 7.7e-14 for a number that size is pretty nice.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Max0526 NFS@Home 9 2017-05-20 08:57 mhill12 Factoring 59 2013-09-09 22:40 jasonp Msieve 65 2011-05-01 19:06 fivemack Factoring 47 2009-06-16 00:24 CRGreathouse Factoring 2 2009-05-25 07:55

All times are UTC. The time now is 12:46.

Sat Apr 17 12:46:07 UTC 2021 up 9 days, 7:26, 0 users, load averages: 2.66, 2.42, 2.24