20221208, 22:41  #166 
May 2009
Moscow, Russia
3·5·197 Posts 
QUEUED see post 173 below
C173 from 785232:i11580 is ready for 15e_small queue: Code:
n: 13412430154895484141862818606541773755250877526911498036451802532740000933585379389777742933827265930661389244830186926816851949173431811572533147379816321246734456628640519 # norm 9.395772e17 alpha 6.459608 e 2.436e13 rroots 5 skew: 11021533.76 c0: 29566114166770514028944559431151323845968 c1: 35325849076340889040277016898908978 c2: 8735032240722787163675795955 c3: 251146757830927681580 c4: 55178061598008 c5: 1876392 Y0: 1481961035514585249264277307725565 Y1: 2873252762515349443 rlim: 134000000 alim: 134000000 lpbr: 31 lpba: 31 mfbr: 62 mfba: 62 rlambda: 2.6 alambda: 2.6 type: gnfs lss: 0 Last fiddled with by swellman on 20221212 at 12:56 
20221209, 01:54  #167  
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
13266_{8} Posts 
Quote:
Qrange isn't a precise measure of speed (3LP takes longer per Q than 2LP, for one thing), but please consider testing my params against yours on your next job around 170174 digits. 

20221209, 03:04  #168  
Jun 2012
13·307 Posts 
Quote:
Though it did take until the 7th dependency before a factor popped up. Just bad luck I suppose. 

20221209, 07:45  #169  
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
13266_{8} Posts 
Quote:
I truly don't think the LP size of a job has much to do with matrix size the difficulty of the job is what it is, whether we use 31 or 32 or 33 bit LPs, provided a small amount of "extra" sieving beyond the bare minimum that makes a matrix. For instance, if you testsieve a 31LP job, establish the Qrange, and then change only LP to 32 without changing any MFBs; then sieve the Qrange you planned to sieve at 31LP, I wager the resulting matrix would be *smaller* using 32LP. Try it some time! Submit an esmall job and just increase the LP by 1 and see what happens. A 2LP job of the same size would likely make a matrix around 89M, so that's a fair argument for unconnected's params. 

20221210, 13:51  #170 
May 2009
Moscow, Russia
3×5×197 Posts 
Thanks for your suggestions, guys. Unfortunately I've no time to test params till Monday.

20221210, 15:05  #171 
Jun 2012
7627_{8} Posts 

20221210, 15:49  #172 
May 2009
Moscow, Russia
5613_{8} Posts 
Of course, I've no objections. Thank you, Sean!

20221212, 03:41  #173  
Jun 2012
13×307 Posts 
Second set of parameters below queued as C173_785232_11580
Quote:
Using the orginal posted job file: Code:
n: 13412430154895484141862818606541773755250877526911498036451802532740000933585379389777742933827265930661389244830186926816851949173431811572533147379816321246734456628640519 # norm 9.395772e17 alpha 6.459608 e 2.436e13 rroots 5 skew: 11021533.76 type: gnfs lss: 0 c0: 29566114166770514028944559431151323845968 c1: 35325849076340889040277016898908978 c2: 8735032240722787163675795955 c3: 251146757830927681580 c4: 55178061598008 c5: 1876392 Y0: 1481961035514585249264277307725565 Y1: 2873252762515349443 rlim: 134000000 alim: 134000000 lpbr: 31 lpba: 31 mfbr: 62 mfba: 62 rlambda: 2.6 alambda: 2.6 Code:
MQ Norm_yield speed (sec/rel) 40 2745 0.267 60 2688 0.250 80 2692 0.260 100 2660 0.237 125 2826 0.253 Then I ran it again with the following parameters: Code:
n: 13412430154895484141862818606541773755250877526911498036451802532740000933585379389777742933827265930661389244830186926816851949173431811572533147379816321246734456628640519 # norm 9.395772e17 alpha 6.459608 e 2.436e13 rroots 5 skew: 11021533.76 type: gnfs lss: 0 c0: 29566114166770514028944559431151323845968 c1: 35325849076340889040277016898908978 c2: 8735032240722787163675795955 c3: 251146757830927681580 c4: 55178061598008 c5: 1876392 Y0: 1481961035514585249264277307725565 Y1: 2873252762515349443 rlim: 67000000 alim: 33500000 lpbr: 32 lpba: 32 mfbr: 62 mfba: 91 rlambda: 2.45 alambda: 3.75 Code:
MQ Norm_yield speed (sec/rel) 10 8237 0.097 15 8853 0.098 20 8873 0.105 25 8460 0.116 30 8284 0.119 40 7655 0.129 45 7496 0.104 I say we go with the new parameters  they appear to be faster and proven to work. Last fiddled with by swellman on 20221212 at 12:55 

20221212, 12:47  #174 
May 2009
Moscow, Russia
2955_{10} Posts 
Seems good for me. It will be great if we can get a matrix smaller than 10M.
For the reference, last 3 C173 jobs resulting in 8.0M, 7.2M and 9.4M matrices. 
20221212, 17:11  #175 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
2×3^{2}×17×19 Posts 
On the C172 Sean just did with these params, 340M rels got a 12M matrix. So, let's aim for 355M to get the matrix in the 10.x range; say an extra 5MQ?

20221212, 18:14  #176 
Jun 2012
13·307 Posts 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Queue management for 14e queue  VBCurtis  NFS@Home  170  20230102 15:27 
2022 Queue management of 15e  swellman  NFS@Home  186  20221227 12:53 
Queue management for 16e queue  VBCurtis  NFS@Home  154  20221223 21:35 
Queue management for e_small and 15e queues  VBCurtis  NFS@Home  254  20220102 01:59 
Improving the queue management.  debrouxl  NFS@Home  10  20180506 21:05 