20210124, 18:56  #111  
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
5^{2}·311 Posts 
@Kriesel: Please consider prime95 version 30.4 for your P1 efforts
Quote:
No B2. But gpuowl will use good bounds and Ben Delo is using good bounds, so it isn't a huge problem. 

20210125, 03:52  #112 
Romulan Interpreter
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand
2·3·5·7·47 Posts 
I take all my P1 assignments through GPU72, only for the vanity of having the "credit" registered two times (once in Gimps, once in Gpu72). I "hacked" MISFIT in helping me organize them and split them between cards, but the assignments are taken manually, therefore you won't expect me to reserve less than few hundreds of them at a time. The cards go through them quite fast, and I have no time to reserve P1 work every 10 minutes... At least, till Scott will fix MISFIT to handle P1 beside of TF (he promised some time ago, but I didn't see any announcement of a new version, most probably he was busy, or in holiday).
A week or two ago I took 400 P1 at the front wave, from GPU72, of which there are about 90 left to go. Note that usually I raise the default B1/B2 from 1e6/30x to 1.5e6/30x, but few days ago I went back to 1.2e6/30x for one of the cards which was much slower in stage 2. With the default B1/B2 selected by the owl, they would go even faster, but I found out that the best spot for credit per time unit (wall clock) is somewhere at B1=1.2e6, while the most efficient point is somewhere at B1=1.5e6 (i.e. where my chance of finding factors, therefore eliminating exponents is the highest per wall clock time). Therefore, because I take the P1 assignments not from PrimeNet, they do not appear in the list as assigned to me. I mean, you can't see a LaurV guy hoarding lots and lots of P1 exponents. This raise the question what to do about users who take lots of assignments from other sources than PrimeNet (as GPU72) and "block" them? Are there such users? (no idea, just asking). Last fiddled with by LaurV on 20210125 at 04:06 
20210125, 15:29  #113 
Einyen
Dec 2003
Denmark
3·5·7·31 Posts 
What about these P1 assignments?
https://www.mersenne.org/assignments...hk=1&exfirst=1 10 from "Albrecht Heeffer" Nov 18th 17 from "OneAfterlife" Nov 24th 20 from "Wentao Huang Nov 29th 10 from "Chad Steenerson" Dec 11th13th 20 from "ANONYMOUS" Dec 19th. No visible progress on them, and they were all in Cat 1 when assigned and are now 3768 days old. How many days should Cat 1 P1 assignments be allowed to finish? Last fiddled with by ATH on 20210125 at 15:30 
20210129, 21:19  #114 
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
37·277 Posts 
More than 1/3 of all the assignments in the 101M102M range are P1's that are a month old (105 of 300 total). 45 are 2 or more months old
https://www.mersenne.org/assignments...rst=1&excert=1 Last fiddled with by Uncwilly on 20210129 at 21:19 
20210129, 23:19  #115  
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
3×43×79 Posts 
Quote:
This is now becoming a formal policy decision discussion. Some think it doesn't make sense. The code allows it. Convergence is...? 

20210129, 23:35  #116 
Einyen
Dec 2003
Denmark
3×5×7×31 Posts 
I'm currently poaching the ones from "Albrecht Heeffer" and "OneAfterlife" from November, and I do not feel bad at all about it.
There are no progress on them and no expiration rules and they over 2 months old for a Cat1 P1 assignment. That is unacceptable and no one seems to be doing anything about it. On the P100 and V100 on Colab Pro I'm probably finishing PRP tests in not much longer time than others would take to do a P1 test. Seems kinda wasteful these days spending much time on P1 when only doing 1 PRP test + Cert. Last fiddled with by ATH on 20210129 at 23:40 
20210129, 23:47  #117  
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
3×43×79 Posts 
Quote:
To share, I expended some compute to clear out the 104M range where a FT was done without a P1. We do what we do. With what amuses our sorry little butts. Please do try to keep up... 

20210129, 23:54  #118 
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
10011111001111_{2} Posts 

20210130, 16:36  #119 
Mar 2019
13·17 Posts 
I don't see why the server can't just autoexpire these after a month. That would put an end to all this...

20210130, 17:32  #120  
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
37×277 Posts 
Quote:
FTC Cat 0 expiry rules are applied to P1 in Cat 1 range and TF in Cat 2 range FTC Cat 1 expiry rules are applied to P1 in Cat 2 range and TF in Cat 3 range FTC Cat 2 expiry rules are applied to P1 in Cat 3 Any Cat 2 that doesn't have P1 already done, gets assigned with P1 as part of the FTC. Same pattern in the DC range. And like others have pointed out, P1 can be less well done that in the past, as we are not saving 2 full primality checks. 

20210130, 18:02  #121 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
2^{5}×191 Posts 
Or maybe:
Cat 0 expiration rules apply equally to all assignment types on PrimeNet API issued FTC Cat 0 exponents, and are applied promptly Cat 1 expiration rules apply equally to all assignment types on PrimeNet API issued FTC Cat 1 exponents, and are applied promptly Cat 2 expiration rules apply equally to all assignment types on PrimeNet API issued FTC Cat 2 exponents, and are applied promptly That has the advantages of conceptual simplicity, moving wavefront/milestone exponents toward completion rapidly, and moving exponents toward completion in an orderly way, especially focused on prime95 set and forget installations. (Good luck to whoever scripts that on the server.) A FTC assignment in mprime / prime95 will first do P1 on an exponent if it is not adequately done already, and memory available is adequate, and the exponent could get stalled or abandoned while in P1 or LL or PRP. A TF assignment in whatever can get delayed. Such an assignment ought not delay progress on a wavefront exponent indefinitely, especially when it is an unneeded, pastoptimalbitdepth, manual TF. Also it's worth considering an end to issue of firsttime LL via PrimeNet or in general. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 20210130 at 18:15 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Trial Factoring  Factor Confirmation?  butera  PrimeNet  6  20210402 21:34 
possible overlapping Fermat factor ranges  MattcAnderson  FermatSearch  3  20210105 14:34 
Trial Factor Bit Depth  lavalamp  Operation Billion Digits  8  20100802 18:49 
trial division over a factor base  Peter Hackman  Factoring  7  20091026 18:27 
Shortest time to complete a 2^67 trial factor (no factor)  dsouza123  Software  12  20030821 18:38 