mersenneforum.org What happened with exponent 109797829?
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2021-05-02, 05:14 #1 drkirkby   "David Kirkby" Jan 2021 Althorne, Essex, UK 3178 Posts What happened with exponent 109797829? Looking on my hard drive I see various file for the exponent 109797829, Code: [dkirkby@jackdaw gimps]$ls -lh *109797829* -rw-rw-r--. 1 dkirkby dkirkby 40M Feb 17 02:03 p109797829 -rw-rw-r--. 1 dkirkby dkirkby 40M Feb 17 02:02 p109797829.bu -rw-rw-r--. 1 dkirkby dkirkby 27M Feb 17 01:58 p109797829.bu2 -rw-rw-r--. 1 dkirkby dkirkby 27M Feb 17 00:30 p109797829.bu3 -rw-rw-r--. 1 dkirkby dkirkby 27M Feb 16 23:57 p109797829.bu4 -rw-rw-r--. 1 dkirkby dkirkby 3.3G Feb 17 01:58 p109797829.residues [dkirkby@jackdaw gimps]$ taking up around 3.4 GB of space. Clearly I had started work on this. The server shows me submitting data for NF-PM1 with B1=661000, B2=7991000 on 2021-02-16, . https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1 However, on 2021-04-14, curtisc did a PRP test of the exponent. I'm wondering how I "lost" this exponent. I would have thought I would have longer to complete it, especially given I'd clearly started it. The exponent is not in my worktodo.txt file. I don't have a log file that goes back this long. I guess there's nothing more I should do than just delete the files associated with the exponent, but I would like to know what happened in this instance. Dave
 2021-05-02, 05:51 #2 Prime95 P90 years forever!     Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 22×1,873 Posts I can't answer about why you lost the exponent. However, I can tell you that curtisc did not do a PRP with proof. Thus, the exponent does need a double-check. If you have not deleted the save files, you can finish your test as the needed double-check. Simply add the line "PRPDC=1,2,109797829,-1,88,0" to your worktodo.txt file.
 2021-05-02, 05:53 #3 Prime95 P90 years forever!     Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 749210 Posts If you finished P-1 on 2/16 and lost the exponent on 2/17, you may not be far enough along with the double-check to make this effort worthwhile to you.
 2021-05-02, 09:59 #4 drkirkby   "David Kirkby" Jan 2021 Althorne, Essex, UK 32·23 Posts Thank you Prime95. I thought one of the main advantages of the PRP test vs the LL is that the PRP provided a proof so did not require a double-check. So why would curtisc not perform the proof? * Maybe it is faster not to complete the proof? * Maybe it saves upload bandwidth? I just stuck the line you wrote in my worktodo.txt file as a double-check, and see it would take me 38 hours to complete a double-check, as it's "only" 19.39% complete. Code: [Worker #1 May 2 09:44] Iteration: 21300000 / 109797829 [19.39%], ms/iter: 1.546, ETA: 38:00:24 [Worker #2 May 2 09:46] Iteration: 26400000 / 110826539 [23.82%], ms/iter: 1.555, ETA: 36:28:32 whereas the exponent worker 1 was doing is 65.59% complete and should finish in 17 hours and 26 minutes. Code: [Worker #1 May 2 10:19] Iteration: 72700000 / 110825977 [65.59%], ms/iter: 1.647, ETA: 17:26:23 It's not too attractive to swap a 65% completed first-time test for a 19% completed double-check. Looking on the server now https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1 I see it indicates I was assigned the double-check today, but I will abandon that. Is there any way for a typical GIMPS user, without special privileges, to look at an exponent and see if a PRP proof was uploaded or not? Dave Last fiddled with by drkirkby on 2021-05-02 at 10:26
 2021-05-02, 12:52 #5 kriesel     "TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17" Mar 2017 US midwest 10100000001002 Posts Please finish the needed PRP DC. You have a head start over anyone else of ~25%. Curtisc's run may not have done a proof, because it may not have had adequate disk space allowed. PRP proofs require multiple GB of space reserved in prime95 or mprime, and some of U of Central Missouri's lab computers may just not have enough to spare, or their prime95 instances may not all be configured to allow it. https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...45&postcount=4 P-1, PRP, and PRP DC can be separate assignments. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2021-05-02 at 12:53
2021-05-02, 14:59   #6
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

100101011001102 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by drkirkby Thank you Prime95. I thought one of the main advantages of the PRP test vs the LL is that the PRP provided a proof so did not require a double-check. So why would curtisc not perform the proof?
Quote:
 Originally Posted by kriesel Curtisc's run may not have done a proof, because it may not have had adequate disk space allowed.
It is possible that the machine that ran the PRP test does not have the most up to date software. We did not jump from LL tests straight to PRP with proofs. There was a step of just PRP in the middle. [PRP does have vastly better error checking (and correction, which LL did not have) that even without the proofs is worth using it vs LL.] So that may be the reason. Curtisc does not have day to day control of all of the machines that are under his account. I would peg that as the issue and not disk space.

2021-05-02, 15:13   #7
drkirkby

"David Kirkby"
Jan 2021
Althorne, Essex, UK

20710 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by kriesel Please finish the needed PRP DC. You have a head start over anyone else of ~25%. Curtisc's run may not have done a proof, because it may not have had adequate disk space allowed. PRP proofs require multiple GB of space reserved in prime95 or mprime, and some of U of Central Missouri's lab computers may just not have enough to spare, or their prime95 instances may not all be configured to allow it. https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...45&postcount=4 P-1, PRP, and PRP DC can be separate assignments.
kriesel,
Prime95 wrote earlier than given I had done the P-1 test one day, and lost the PRP test the next day, the amount of work done may not be worthwhile doing a double-check. I concluded what he wrote was true, as I had only completed 19%. not 25%.

I've deleted the files, so can't do a double-check now without repeating it from scratch.

Dave

Last fiddled with by drkirkby on 2021-05-02 at 15:21

2021-05-03, 07:19   #8
Happy5214

"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City

5·112 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by drkirkby kriesel, Prime95 wrote earlier than given I had done the P-1 test one day, and lost the PRP test the next day, the amount of work done may not be worthwhile doing a double-check. I concluded what he wrote was true, as I had only completed 19%. not 25%. I've deleted the files, so can't do a double-check now without repeating it from scratch. Dave
I believe kriesel was simply rounding from 19% to 25%, hence the tilde. To be fair, when George said it may not be worthwhile, you had not yet said the test was 19% done and could be finished in less than 2 days (based on the quoted console output). A DC that was 19% done which would be completed with just 38 hours of work was certainly worth doing IMO.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post dabler News 16 2018-06-12 21:45 cipher Twin Prime Search 2 2009-07-15 01:15 BranMuffin PrimeNet 4 2008-11-19 22:33 ixfd64 PrimeNet 26 2006-02-15 23:50 ThomRuley Lone Mersenne Hunters 7 2003-07-31 16:31

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:17.

Fri May 14 05:17:08 UTC 2021 up 35 days, 23:58, 0 users, load averages: 1.26, 1.56, 1.66