Contributing to Cunningham Project - Page 19

Gimarel · 2021-01-12, 17:58

My two best polys:

Code:

# norm 1.742952e-18 alpha -7.250051 e 2.198e-14 rroots 3
skew: 28373488.56
c0: -36289735353276157276527068902255490733853568
c1: 4334673014099287941043579868135706812
c2: -407368329922469859774625933879
c3: 1748229736159966635685
c4: 1727908216745850
c5: 3603600
Y0: -6922993593233741704051927826032280373
Y1: 22185579502781921755367
# norm 1.726629e-18 alpha -6.853313 e 2.170e-14 rroots 3
skew: 20914898.48
c0: -9021236659014956031207533880822959360049758
c1: 3167077071049478779652836766937560993
c2: -376983337640966863439394185914
c3: 12016958982774661681885
c4: 1754473649639850
c5: 3603600
Y0: -6922993560523700440001809682589016812
Y1: 22185579502781921755367

VBCurtis · 2021-01-12, 19:06

My poly search will complete Wed afternoon (USA-westcoast time).

Without Gimarel, I'd be pretty convinced msieve was no longer competitive for poly select. Nice work, again!

I'll do a bit of test-sieving, in particular tinkering with adjust-strategy 2 that henryzz suggested a month ago and Charybdis has found speeds many jobs but not all jobs.

I ought to have a CADO server running Thursday evening for this job; I'll post the port number here when it's ready. This job with be I=15, default number of threads 4 per client (you can override if you wish). I'll be aiming about 30 cores at the job personally.

EdH · 2021-01-12, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by charybdis

. . . I tried spinning with EdH's script but didn't get an improvement.

Just to be fair to Max0526. It is his spin. I (and swellman) just got with him to work on bringing it to a wider availability and try to automate it for ease of use. Also, there is more to the process that hasn't been brought forth yet. So, there may still be some room for improvement.

Gimarel · 2021-01-12, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

Without Gimarel, I'd be pretty convinced msieve was no longer competitive for poly select. Nice work, again!

I use the sizeoptimisation of cado, so it's not entirely msieve.
And I modified a few parameters of msieve.

VBCurtis · 2021-01-14, 00:10

My poly score was about 5% worse than Charybdis'.

Charybdis has test-sieved his best vs both of Gimarel's, and declares the results (in speed and yield both) a dead heat between his best and Gimarel's higher-scoring poly. I'll do some testing this evening, pick one of the polys, and will get the CADO server running Thursday some time.

Since I am not a security expert and don't know how to harden my machine well, I prefer to leave the server address not on this public forum. Please PM me if you wish to contribute to this factorization, and I'll send you the server address and port number once I have it up and running (should be same as it was for the GNFS-207 team job).

VBCurtis · 2021-01-14, 07:23

The machine is up and serving workunits. PM me for server info.

Please remember to include the flag --bindir=./build/{yourmachinename}, as the las binary cado-nfs-client downloads from my machine may crash on your machine's architecture.

Also, recall --override t {n} changes the default 4 threads to however many threads you'd like your client to run.

Q-range is 2000 per workunit, so they run pretty fast; you won't waste much work if you stop the clients (say, Ed's machines when they nap for the night).

Initial ETA on the machine is around 90 days, with 20 cores running. That's at Q=30M.

EdH · 2021-01-14, 13:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

. . . (say, Ed's machines when they nap for the night). . .

Just to note that my slumbering machines are supposed to go dormant after finishing a WU. If you see (m)any crashed WUs for me, please let me know.

EdH · 2021-01-14, 14:30

I've turned loose a bunch of my machines, but I forgot to check on memory needs. I may have to remove a few. I've forgotten how they fail. I will try to look for faults, but if you see some that should be dropped, let me know.

charybdis · 2021-01-14, 14:50

My machines are up and running.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdH

I've turned loose a bunch of my machines, but I forgot to check on memory needs. I may have to remove a few. I've forgotten how they fail. I will try to look for faults, but if you see some that should be dropped, let me know.

Adjust-strategy 2 does use a bit more memory than the default, but each process should still fit within 4GB.

EdH · 2021-01-14, 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by charybdis

. . .
Adjust-strategy 2 does use a bit more memory than the default, but each process should still fit within 4GB.

Thanks! All of the machines I connected, but one, appeared to be running OK. My strategy for simplicity of a single script, uses all available threads in a single process for all but one of my machines. That machine has 24 threads and lots of memory, so I treat it differently.

VBCurtis · 2021-01-14, 17:37

'top' shows 2.6GB per process on my machine. Glad these params work on all your machines, too!

We've already found 20M relations, and ETA is Jan 25th. Naturally, that ETA will stretch out as we get to higher Q, and Ed's machines don't run 24 hrs a day.

I set rels-wanted to 540M; I think with the tight bounds on mfb0 and lambda0 that's plenty to get a matrix in the 30M range.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cunningham ECM efforts	pinhodecarlos	Cunningham Tables	7	2017-12-21 13:29
Cunningham ECM Now Futile?	R.D. Silverman	GMP-ECM	4	2012-04-25 02:45
Cunningham Project on YouTube	Batalov	Cunningham Tables	0	2012-02-26 02:58
Extended Cunningham or so	rekcahx	Factoring	6	2011-08-19 12:45
Introduction: ECM work done on Cunningham Project composites	garo	Cunningham Tables	2	2005-01-20 10:06

2021-01-12, 19:06	#200
VBCurtis "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 4737₁₀ Posts	My poly search will complete Wed afternoon (USA-westcoast time). Without Gimarel, I'd be pretty convinced msieve was no longer competitive for poly select. Nice work, again! I'll do a bit of test-sieving, in particular tinkering with adjust-strategy 2 that henryzz suggested a month ago and Charybdis has found speeds many jobs but not all jobs. I ought to have a CADO server running Thursday evening for this job; I'll post the port number here when it's ready. This job with be I=15, default number of threads 4 per client (you can override if you wish). I'll be aiming about 30 cores at the job personally.

2021-01-14, 00:10	#203
VBCurtis "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 3×1,579 Posts	My poly score was about 5% worse than Charybdis'. Charybdis has test-sieved his best vs both of Gimarel's, and declares the results (in speed and yield both) a dead heat between his best and Gimarel's higher-scoring poly. I'll do some testing this evening, pick one of the polys, and will get the CADO server running Thursday some time. Since I am not a security expert and don't know how to harden my machine well, I prefer to leave the server address not on this public forum. Please PM me if you wish to contribute to this factorization, and I'll send you the server address and port number once I have it up and running (should be same as it was for the GNFS-207 team job).

2021-01-14, 07:23	#204
VBCurtis "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 3×1,579 Posts	The machine is up and serving workunits. PM me for server info. Please remember to include the flag --bindir=./build/{yourmachinename}, as the las binary cado-nfs-client downloads from my machine may crash on your machine's architecture. Also, recall --override t {n} changes the default 4 threads to however many threads you'd like your client to run. Q-range is 2000 per workunit, so they run pretty fast; you won't waste much work if you stop the clients (say, Ed's machines when they nap for the night). Initial ETA on the machine is around 90 days, with 20 cores running. That's at Q=30M.

2021-01-14, 14:30	#206
EdH "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 3×1,229 Posts	I've turned loose a bunch of my machines, but I forgot to check on memory needs. I may have to remove a few. I've forgotten how they fail. I will try to look for faults, but if you see some that should be dropped, let me know.

2021-01-14, 17:37	#209
VBCurtis "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 1001010000001₂ Posts	'top' shows 2.6GB per process on my machine. Glad these params work on all your machines, too! We've already found 20M relations, and ETA is Jan 25th. Naturally, that ETA will stretch out as we get to higher Q, and Ed's machines don't run 24 hrs a day. I set rels-wanted to 540M; I think with the tight bounds on mfb0 and lambda0 that's plenty to get a matrix in the 30M range.