Re: Mersenne: results.txt
The results file is a history file. If it mentions it did a test on a number, and found it's not prime, it's already told primnet all that. It just keeps a history file in there the way a lot of programs do. --Peter At 11:26 07/07/1999 +0200, you wrote: I have a question about the result file in prime. My computer automaticly connects the prime server when a calculation is ready. Now I saw that the file results.txt still contains the result of a former calculation. If the current calculation is ready and the computer reach the server will the old one also be send to the server? Is this correct? Or do I have to delete something from the result.txt file bye, Paul van Grieken Alcatel Telecom Nederland afd: T-TAC NE Kamer:4121 Postbus 3292 2280GG rijswijk Nederland Phone: + 31 70 307 9353 Fax: + 31 70 307 9476 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Prive: Ruys de Beerenbrouckstraat 1 2613AS Delft Netherlands Marklin collector Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
RE: Mersenne: safe to defrag?
At 09:54 06/24/1999 -0700, you wrote: From: Jud McCranie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Since Prime95 writes to the disk periodically, is it safe to do a disk defragmentation while it is running? My computer is up 24/7. Prime95 writes to disk every 30 minutes, and my email program (Eudora) checks for new mail every 20 minutes. Three times a week my computer automatically runs Win98 defrag program to defrag all 7.5GB of HDD space (a 4.3 HDD, and a 3.2HDD) I've never had any real problem. Everytime something writes to disk defrag restarts, scans for errors, and then checks over all that it has defraged, and picks up where it left off. This takes 1 to 2 minutes. I've had some unexplained computer hangs while defragging, but I can't attribute that to Prime95. So that's the long. The short is, it's entirely safe to defrag while running Prime95. --Peter Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Re: [Re: Mersenne: Serious problems with v.18]
I second that. At 16:33 06/06/1999 +0100, you wrote: NO MORE. The end.. Chris Jefferson, Girton College, Cambridge, [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have a proof that x^n+y^n=z^n never has integer solutions for n2. However, it won't fit into my signature file Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Re: Mersenne: Serious problems with v.18
This is normal. Because of the bug in v17, all the math it was doing was wrong, so using that 77% would have been a waste since it was incorrect data. There is no need to try and retrieve that data. It's useless. --Peter At 04:11 06/04/1999 -0600, you wrote: Before the upgrade, I was 77% of the way through an exponent in the 7M area. Now it says 0%. It looks like it couldn't read older versions' save files and started over! How do I recover that 77%? (I assume it would have to be checked to see if the version 17 error struck it, and either corrected or discarded if it had...) Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Re: Mersenne: An example of inconsiderate CPU hogging
However, one thing to note is that SETI @Home doesn't seem to be as "idle priority" as Prime95 is. I ran it for a while, and I felt I could notice a slowdown, and when it wasn't minimized, there was a VERY noticeable slowdown. I think SETI @Home actually steals more than just idle cycles, and gets a few more. --Peter At 22:45 06/04/1999 -0400, you wrote: The message of the day on the Sun machines here at the University of Michigan included the following today: * * * * * Please do not run the Seti At Home program on the Login Servers. Although it is for a good cause, the Login Servers do not have any spare CPU cycles to donate. Running Seti At Home interferes with other users getting their work done. * * * * * This illustrates the importance of getting permission before running processor-intensive programs on machines that are not entirely your own. There are only about thirty people logged in on the machine that I'm using right now, and as usual almost all of them are running Pine; even with this comparatively light load the slowdown was apparently bad enough to be a problem. I suspect that people trying to run Seti on these machines at a peak time of year would create a big performance drag, and force the administrators to monitor individual users' processor usage more closely to prevent such abuses. It is easy to forget about such consequences in the quest for CPU time. I'd like to think that GIMPS members, on the whole, do not deserve warnings like the one above. Let's keep it that way. David A. Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Re: Mersenne: Iteration time?
At 19:38 05/03/1999 -0500, you wrote: Does anybody have a idea of what the iteration time for a PII 450a running Prime95 under Win 98 should be (LL test in the 683 range)? Shane Should be something like .200 seconds. I'm working on something in the 735 range and it's doing .218 sec on my P2 450. BTW, you say PII 450a...implying a Celeron 300A overclocked to 450...in which case it's a Celeron 450A...not PIIbut the Celeron and P2 are about the same speed for Prime95 Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Re: Mersenne: Single precision in consoles
I see your point, and I'm aware it can be done. I didn't mean any kind of personal attack on you for your idea. Creative thinking is one of the most important things in my opinion. I just think such important and interesting things as GIMPS shouldn't be spread over to consoles. GIMPS is working incredibly well and so many numbers are getting crunched so quickly by the mass effort. If we all remain patient, we will soon have another mersenne prime on the list. At 13:59 04/13/1999 +, you wrote: Hello, I know many have complained about my console idea (which, as I said, was not very realistic at this point), because they only have single precision. I just want you to consider that George once had an _integer_ version of Prime95 running, but it was roughly 7 times slower (if I remember right) that the FPU version. (The factoring code for 486es and clones _is_ integer, BTW.) However, there is strength in numbers. A _lot_ of people have consoles. So even if they aren't as much worth as a P3/Mhz or whatever, they still _help_, much more than 486es. /* Steinar */ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Re: Mersenne: Really really crazy idea...
At 21:19 04/12/1999 +0100, you wrote: People then said most consoles are really bad at accurate floating point calculations because they aren't used much in games. Who said that? Floating point maths is used extensively in 3D calculation, which all modern consoles excell at. Yes, but I think it's a question of single precision vs. double precision. The SSE or 3DNow! units of the K6-2 and P-3 can't be utilized by Prime95 because they are single precision only. Most games only use single precision floating point calculations. The consoles are the same. Prime95 needs a double-precision unit to do it's complex calculations. Overall I think the console idea is a really bad one. --Peter Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Re: Mersenne: IMPORTANT: BUG IN VERSION PRIME95 17
Please, oh please tell me this is some kind of cruel April Fools Joke. It's not though is it? Oh well. Sorry. --Peter At 18:04 04/01/1999 -0500, you wrote: Hi all, Please forgive me. I'm terribly sorry. I've discovered a bug in version 17 of prime95 and its variants (ntprime, mprime, OS/2 version). All Lucas-Lehmer tests above 4,194,304 (except those that were done as a continuation of a v16 run) are no good. I feel sick. I've uploaded version 18 of prime95 and ntprime. I'll port it to Linux and Windows 3.1 as soon as I can. Please download and install this new version immediately from http:\\www.mersenne.org\freesoft.htm Version 16 and earlier users were not affected by this bug. Neither were those users that are double-checking. I've asked Scott to change Primenet to assign double-checking work to version 17 clients in the future. I don't know if he can do this or not, let's hope so. After upgrading, you will get error messages that look like this: Error reading intermediate file: p6180331 Renaming intermediate file q6180331 to p6180331. Error reading intermediate file: p6180331 This is normal. Prime95 must discard the incorrect version 17 save files. My records indicate that 10,794 of the 59,169 Lucas-Lehmer tests above 4,194,304 will have to be discarded. This will set GIMPS back roughly 3 to 4 months. This will not affect your standings on the PrimeNet server's Top Producer's page. For those that like to look at the bright side of things, I can find only one bit of good news. This will give you a better chance to win the $50,000 EFF prize once I sort out the mess and have the server hand out smaller exponents to retest. Once again, I'm sorry for the bug and the wasted CPU cycles the last few months. Humbled, George Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
