Re: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1 #941
At 12:06 AM 3/1/02 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was there _really_ no posting made to the Mersenne mailing list between Mon, 18 Feb 2002 (02:19:32 -0500 From: Justin Valcourt) and Tue, 26 Feb 2002 (19:46:54 +0100 From: Henk Stokhorst) ?? A span of over eight days with no message? Really? Were the Olympics *that* interesting? Or is it only _my_ copy of the Mersenne Digest V1 #941 that is missing any posting between those two dates? Go check the mailing list archives. But yeah, it was pretty dead for awhile. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: error: Another mprime is already running!
At 08:58 PM 3/1/02 +, Brian J Beesley wrote: That would be a crude and surely unusual way of economising Definitely so, but it's the only way I can think of that someone might use a hard link when installing mprime For someone coming from Windows, that might be the way they think to do it I couldn't think of any other non-freak-error way for this error to occur when no process named mprime was running _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://wwwndatechcom/mersenne/signuphtm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://wwwtasamcom/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: 11438839 Lost !?
At 02:28 AM 3/3/02 +0200, Daidalos wrote: Hmm Do I remember having finished one more exponent? Indeed According to my primelog file, I send the result for exponent 11438839 on Wed Nov 07 17:42:43 2001 I also seem to remember that it used to appear on my result report before I don't recall when it stop appearring there, but it must have been since early January, when my place in the Producers List moved to its current area Anyway, what we do now? And where's my exponent? There was a database synchronization on Dec 12th When that happens, most of the results submitted since the last synchronization are cleared out of PrimeNet (they are always held in the master database, however) Your PrimeNet credit for the exponent stays, however If you want to look in the master databases, you can download them from the bottom of this page: http://wwwmersenneorg/statushtm _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://wwwndatechcom/mersenne/signuphtm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://wwwtasamcom/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: Which changes have been made to the server
At 03:13 AM 4/2/02 -0800, Aaron wrote: I think there's always some of that when they do a database sync. What truly puzzles me is that I *still* have exponents showing up on my status page (thus, apparently not synchronized) going back to March of *last* year. Again, that has always been the case, where some exponents I have finished don't get cleared, but I think there are some now that have survived 2 or 3 database syncs and yet they remain. Looking at the status report right after the synch, I could see that a very few results from between 7.7M and 9.9M or above 16.8M were removed, and most were left behind. For the 7.7 and 9.9 range, it seems that the left behind results in this range are actually doublechecks (even if PrimeNet believed they were first times), and since the active doublecheck range hasn't gotten this far yet, the results were for some reason left behind. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: My numbers have been re-assigned to someone else...
At 06:15 PM 10/4/02 +0100, Barry Stokes wrote: Was using 21.4.2, now on 22.9.2 (upgraded today). It only grabbed a few exponents when I started it, and it wasn't that the program released them, they were just re-assigned by the server. The trouble is, I have now completed one of these factoring jobs, and it's no longer assigned to me, which is quite annoying, as it means that work is going to be duplicated by whoever now has the number. Not necessarily. If you return that result, then the next time that person checks in with PrimeNet, it will give them a exponent already tested error and remove the exponent from their worktodo. If they haven't already started work on it, then no work will be duplicated. I work almost exclusively on expired exponents, and even though they are expired, sometimes whoever was previously assigned will finish the work, and since I have my days between checkins set at 1, it gets removed from my worktodo quickly (and then my box fetches new work to replace it). I highly recommend that you get that result back to PrimeNet ASAP, wipe the others from your worktodo, and get new work. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Poach?
At 01:30 PM 11/19/02 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Individual Account Report 15 Nov 2002 16:54 (Nov 15 2002 9:54AM Pacific) 11976787 65 447705659.6 11.0 61.0 15-Nov-02 15:43 17-Sep-02 02:26 hl 1196 v19/v20 Individual Account Report 19 Nov 2002 08:00 (Nov 19 2002 1:00AM Pacific) 11976787 D 65 447705663.3 7.3 57.3 15-Nov-02 15:43 17-Sep-02 02:26 hl 1196 v19/v20 Last week this was a 1st test assignment, now it's a double check? Unfortunately there was a server sync in the meantime, so I can't check the cleared.txt. But I find in hrf3.txt: 11976787,berra,WV1 It's probably an assignment that expired, but the original holder was still working on it on a very intermittently connected computer, and eventually finished it. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking?
At 11:27 PM 11/20/02 +, Russel Brooks wrote: I have 3 pcs doing factoring. I have been checking my position on the Primenet Top Producers Factoring list. I have noticed my position drifting up in the standing while I haven't found any factors. How does happen? You get credit for your work doing factoring even if you're not finding factors. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: SV: SV: SV: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking?
At 11:04 PM 11/25/02 +0100, =?utf-8?Q?Torben_Schl=C3=BCntz?= wrote: No, and I am not the GIMPS police. It would offcourse be quite easy simply to check all accounts having done 5+ years TF and having more than 0,6 years pr. foundfactor. On the other hand some accounts could be very old and back in those days a factor could have been found in less effort than now a days appr. 0,5 y/ff. NetForce and Challenge seems to be good candidates for accounts with a very low effort pr. ff. Well, you'd nail me. I do expired exponents for the most part, which makes it much less likely that I will find a factor because almost all of those expired exponents have already been done part way, and if there had been a factor in the parts already done, they wouldn't have expired. So I have 8.783 P90 years in factoring, and only 6 factors found. Unless you count the pre-factoring work I turn in manually to George. Lots of factors found there for much less CPU expended. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Runaway machine sucked up all the factoring assignments
The machine novarese/NSPC19 has gotten itself into a loop and reserved tons of factoring assignments and PrimeNet is now out of them. Damn Y2.003K bug! :) _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Factoring Top 100
At 12:07 AM 1/22/03 +, Russel Brooks wrote: Well I've recently reached my 2nd GIMPS goal of getting into the top 100 factoring. Last summer I made it to the top 1000 LL testers and then switched from double checks to factoring to make my mark there. Now what to try for? :-) Bah, top 100 factoring isn't that hard! :) I just checked my ranking and with only four computers I'm sitting at 140 and top 100 looks quite doable. You could make your mark by poaching the last remaining exponent under M38, assuming that Draco Malfoy doesn't beat you to it. :) _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1 #1036
At 04:27 PM 1/24/03 +, Gordon Spence wrote: Of course, as this is a *public* volunteer project, there are a lot of us, who have been in the project for a long-time (6+ years) who regularly look through these for no other reason than we *want* to. Aye, I like having as detailed an access as possible. All of these discussions about strategies couldn't be taking place unless we could see and analyze these trends and problems. No. If I was setting out to poach numbers - which in itself is a moot point. You don't *own* an exponent, they are after all simply numbers. However, I digress. If I was setting out to poach numbers, then I would simply setup a few 3.06 Ghz P4's and just start at the bottom of the list (smallest exponents) and let rip. Complete an exponent every day or so. So some of them might be completed before me, so what, we then have a triple check. If someone wants to do it, you won't stop them. While participants don't own exponents, there are rules for using Prime95, and participating using Primenet that one has to agree to in order to use them. The rules are explicit about agreeing to how credit is given and prizes awarded. It should be a rule that if one uses Prime95 or Primenet or any of its reports, that one does not use it or the information in the reports to target exponents assigned to others. If one wants the benefits that arise from this cooperative scheme, one needs to agree to participate in a cooperative manner. You are missing the point about it being useful to have triple checks. Nothing is redundant. There are plenty of triple checks that happen accidentally. There is no GIMPS need to do some on purpose, especially to the detriment of a participant that is following the rules. If someone feels a personal need to do triple checks, they should do them on exponents that are already double checked. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1 #1038
At 10:01 PM 1/26/03 +, Gordon Spence wrote: 4. Get it into perspective. The number of times this actually happens is miniscule. Out of the millions we have checked what are the poached items? Dozens, a few hundred?? Given that nobody poaches factoring assignments and the vast majority of those were weeded out before entering public testing, I will exclude factoring assignments. There have been 214,935 first time LL's and 184,754 doublechecks completed. That's nowhere near millions. I don't know the history of every exponent, but there are patterns that definitely indicate poaching (i.e when you look at exponents just below a milestone and observe an exponent returned six times). There have been at least several thousand exponents poached. One poacher I looked at had between half and two-thirds of exponents he completed as triple checks. This was a blind do the leading edge without checking poacher. Even when no milestone is looming, I estimate there is an average of at least one poach every day, and these are not inadvertent poaches where a previous assignee ends up completing an exponent. These are known poaches by known poachers. The only time poaching activity drops to miniscule is when the spotlight is thrown on poaching by this list. 5. It has correctly been pointed out that life doesn't end if a milestone slips. Well guess what? That is a double-edged sword - life doesn't end if an exponent gets poached either. The fact that life doesn't end is not an excuse to poach. Poaching hurts the project because it drives away participants. It is not harmless. I don't know why people keep defending it. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Poaching -- Discouragement thereof
At 10:45 PM 1/26/03 +, Brian J. Beesley wrote: On Sunday 26 January 2003 19:55, Mary K. Conner wrote: [ big snip - lots of _very_ sensible ideas!!! ] Primenet, and Primenet should preferentially give work over 64 bits to SSE2 clients, and perhaps direct others to factor only up to 64 bits unless there aren't enough SSE2 clients to handle the over 64 bit work (or if the owner of a machine asks for over 64 bit work). Umm. Last time I checked, it seemed to be a waste of an SSE2 system to be running trial factoring ... the LL testing performance is so good that they really should be doing that. It would only apply to SSE2 machines that want to run factoring. We can't force SSE2 owners to run LL if they want to run factoring. At least this would put the SSE2 power where it shines in factoring, instead of the bit ranges where it is abysmally bad. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1 #1038
At 10:06 PM 1/26/03 -0500, Paul Missman wrote: I know that this might be earth shattering news for you, but there is no such thing as poaching. Neither GIMPS or Primenet have any license to these numbers, nor are they the only entities testing large numbers for primality. If my sister reads from her math book a method of testing large primes, knows nothing of Primenet or GIMPS, tests the numbers on her home computer, and finds a large prime, she is gonna publish it. She might choose to send any results to GIMPS, or not. She might double check it using GIMPS provided software, or not. But for sure nobody has any reason to prevent her from doing any of this. There simply is no real problem here that is begging for solution. Anyone is entitled to test any number they want for primality. GIMPS isn't the prime number police, nor would they have any right to be. I never meant to suggest that people outside of GIMPS have no right to be doing testing. If someone scoops GIMPS to a prime (and it has happened), then c'est la vie. If someone just wants to test some numbers (even using Prime95) without using the cooperative Primenet data, and even report their results to George, that's fine. What I'm suggesting is that if someone decides to participate in GIMPS and use Primenet (including the databases and reports), then they should most definitely not be using those databases and reports to pick candidates for testing that have been assigned to other people. If they want the benefits of the cooperation, then they should respect the assignment process that produces those benefits. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1 #1039
At 12:04 AM 1/28/03 +, Gordon Spence wrote: [snip] From: Mary K. Conner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1 #1036 [snip] There are plenty of triple checks that happen accidentally. There is no GIMPS need to do some on purpose, especially to the detriment of a participant that is following the rules. If someone feels a personal need to do triple checks, they should do them on exponents that are already double checked. Actually the project *does* deliberately do a fair number of triple checks. You just see them as double checks that's all. Why? where the residue bits returned from the first and second, do not match. Different animal. I know about extra checks when residues don't match. I'm speaking of triple or higher checks where all residues agree. The only reason to do those other than the exponents that have only 16 bit residues is to check for cheating. If those kinds of checks need to be done, they ought to be done with intelligence, not by random poaching. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: An officially sanctioned poach....
At 10:08 AM 1/28/03 -0500, George Woltman wrote: At 09:36 PM 1/27/2003 -0800, Mary K. Conner wrote: Garo identified some Team_Prime_Rib exponents in there. I'll exempt all Team_Prime_Rib exponents Looking at the other exponents in the factoring range I'm not worried about reclaiming factoring assignments right now. The tsc machines show some very odd behavior. The exponents do a red light, green light game. One exponent I've been following started at 5, went to 2, back up to 5, then ran all the way up to 15 before dropping back to nothing and now it shows a 1. Others are similarly dancing around When factoring, the iterations will increase from 1 to 15 for each bit level. In other words, the field provides no useful information for trial factoring assignments. Far be it from me to tell you that you are wrong, but that is not at all consistent with what I observe with my own exponents. For instance, exponent 19373911 shows a 9 right now, it connected a short while ago and the machine is early in the 66 bit pass. The percent complete is about to hit 12.5%, at which time I should be able to force a manual connect and then it will show a 10. Yep, it now shows a 10. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Why is trial factoring of small exponents slower than large ones?
At 05:00 PM 2/7/03 +1300, G W Reynolds wrote: I am using mprime 22.12 on a pentium 166 MMX to do trial factoring. For the exponents currently being assigned from primenet it takes this machine about 12 minutes to factor from 2^57 to 2^58. I thought I would try factoring some small exponents (under 1,000,000) from the nofactors.zip file. I put FactorOverride=64 into prime.ini and started mprime as usual but progress is _much_ slower, it will take about 8 hours to factor from 2^57 to 2^58. Others have given great explanations, but I would like to suggest that if you want to work in ranges outside of PrimeNet that you stake your claim with the Lone Mersenne Hunters so as to avoid duplicating work of others who may also be working in the same area (and I know there is at least one person working in that region). The LMH have communicated via a Yahoo groups email list in the past, but may be moving to the GIMPS BBS (www.teamprimerib.com/gimps) for future communications. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
