mersenneforum.org OFFICIAL "SERVER PROBLEMS" THREAD
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2018-03-22, 22:09   #1453
GP2

Sep 2003

29·89 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by tha What would be desired is the server accepting the new B1/B2 limits.
I suspect that if you had done the test with known factors in quotation marks, and it reported no factor, then the B1,B2 would at least show up in the history, even though Primenet gives no credit due to "result not needed".

Or at least that's the way I recall it used to work.

2018-03-22, 23:21   #1454
tha

Dec 2002

787 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by GP2 I suspect that if you had done the test with known factors in quotation marks,...
That is exactly what I was able to do during the last run.

2018-03-22, 23:32   #1455
chalsall
If I May

"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002

2·4,663 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by tha That is exactly what I was able to do during the last run.
The exact job I asked one of my machines to do was:
Code:
Pminus1=N/A,1,2,22351237,-1,400000,9000000,134107423,1564586591,3889115239,6403852912871,55203442762393
And it diligently refound some factors already known.

2018-03-23, 01:46   #1456
GP2

Sep 2003

29×89 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by chalsall And it diligently refound some factors already known.
That's because you forgot the quotation marks:

Code:
Pminus1=N/A,1,2,22351237,-1,400000,9000000,"134107423,1564586591,3889115239,6403852912871,55203442762393"

 2018-03-27, 09:15 #1457 tha     Dec 2002 787 Posts Are any further tests desired to resolve this issue?
2018-03-28, 10:07   #1458
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter

Jun 2011
Thailand

22×7×11×29 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by GP2 That's because you forgot the quotation marks:
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tha Are any further tests desired to resolve this issue?
Yeah, we took Chris and beat him hard so next time he remember the quotes...

2018-03-29, 06:58   #1459
tha

Dec 2002

787 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by LaurV Yeah, we took Chris and beat him hard so next time he remember the quotes...
I meant the original issue, getting new B1/B2 values accepted by the server, even if a factor for that exponent already exists.

 2018-03-31, 09:38 #1460 S485122     Sep 2006 Brussels, Belgium 110001111012 Posts forgotten or orphan assignments It seems one of the PrimeNet Assignment Rules is not enforced : Code: PrimeNet Assignment Rules Since PrimeNet began, the server has recycled exponents where the client computer is 60 days past due in updating the server. This rule has been fairly effective and will continue. I queried the current active assignments. I excluded the ranges where there are too many active assignments because of the limit in the query page. I found more than 1700 that were more than 60 days late reporting. A lot of them are obviously forgotten assignments : probably on a machine that crashed and was reinstalled or scraped. I think a query should be run regularly over the whole 0 to 1000M range to eliminate active assignments that are more than 60 (or being generous 90) days late. Such a query does not need to run daily, monthly is more than enough, especially after the first run. Jacob
2018-03-31, 09:46   #1461
axn

Jun 2003

478110 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by S485122 I queried the current active assignments. I excluded the ranges where there are too many active assignments because of the limit in the query page. I found more than 1700 that were more than 60 days late reporting
Have you excluded manual assignments from this list? Also, are these all LL tests? Or are there PRP cofactor tests in there as well?

2018-03-31, 15:26   #1462
S485122

Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

1,597 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by axn Have you excluded manual assignments from this list? Also, are these all LL tests? Or are there PRP cofactor tests in there as well?
DVRA LEX SED LEX.
The rules apply to all and everything : even manual assignments (they can extend their assignments up to 3 years or more !). But if you look at the active assignments yourself, you will see that it is clearly a problem of forgotten/orphan assignments.

Jacob

Last fiddled with by S485122 on 2018-03-31 at 15:27 Reason: missing space allowing to be more more explicit

2018-03-31, 15:59   #1463
GP2

Sep 2003

29×89 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by S485122 I think a query should be run regularly over the whole 0 to 1000M range to eliminate active assignments that are more than 60 (or being generous 90) days late. Such a query does not need to run daily, monthly is more than enough, especially after the first run.
Does it really need to be run over the entire range up to 1 billion?

Consider M332,197,123. Someone supposedly started a manually-assigned double-check, although with zero progress and no updates since it was assigned two-and-a-half years ago.

It probably wouldn't be scheduled for a normal double check until the 2030s. Anyone who wanted to could poach it, or maybe a result will miraculously be returned in the meantime.

But does it really matter if we let that ghost assignment linger? We only need to expire forgotten assignments in active ranges, where they're actually holding up progress.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post ewmayer Lounge 39 2015-05-19 01:08 ewmayer Science & Technology 41 2014-04-16 11:54 cheesehead Soap Box 56 2013-06-29 01:42 cheesehead Soap Box 61 2013-06-11 04:30 Dubslow Programming 19 2012-05-31 17:49

All times are UTC. The time now is 07:39.

Mon Nov 30 07:39:06 UTC 2020 up 81 days, 4:50, 3 users, load averages: 1.28, 1.32, 1.33