Re: Mersenne: On v18 factoring
Daran - you ask why highest and not lowest? The discussion started regarding old machines running v18 which are no longer in the care, custody control of an active GIMPS participant, AND which are asking for factoring assignments which they cannot handle. Whatever assignment is given to them, there is no telling how long until (or even if) they will finish it. We would not want to give them something that would hold up a milestone a year or so down the road. So I agree with Brian, give them the highest available (I don't mean 33M) which will keep them busy for a while, but probably on the order of a year rather than a few months. If it takes them a year and a half to finish, no problem; if it stops running then it goes back to the server, again no problem. As for runaway v18 clients asking for DCs, they would continue getting what they ask for. You make a good point about P-1 completed assignments, but on further reflection I don't think that is necessary. There aren't that many available and certainly not at the higher end of the current range. They will more than likely be P-1 tested when double-checked. Steve -Original Message- From: Daran [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, October 24, 2002 4:37 AM Subject: Re: Mersenne: On v18 factoring - Original Message - From: Brian J. Beesley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 7:52 AM Subject: Re: Mersenne: On v18 factoring Given that the server can tell the difference between a v18 client and a later one, would it not make most sense to have the server assign a LL test on the _highest_ unallocated exponent which v18 can handle if a v18 client asks for a factoring assignment and none suitable are available. This action would effectively remove the client from the loop for a while (probably a few months, given that most v18 clients will be running on slowish systems), thereby alleviating the load on the server, and buying time to contact the system administrator - when this is still relevant, of course. And some useful work may still be completed, eventually! Why highest? Why not give it the lowest? There's a case for only giving version 18 and below clients DCs regardless of the work requested. (I'm assuming that this is possible.) The only other point I'd add, which isn't particularly relevent to this question, is that these clients should always be given P-1 complete assignments if available. Regards Brian Beesley Daran G. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Order of TF and P-1
I don't think the TF limits were ever lowered; it seems they may have been raised, as I have gotten several 8.3M DC exponents which first had to be factored from 63 to 64 and THEN the P-1. It occurred to me that it might be more efficient to do it the other way around, but factoring from 63 to 64 goes relative quickly. If it were a question of factoring from 65 to 66 versus P-1 first, then I think the P-1 wins easily. Steve -Original Message- From: Daran [EMAIL PROTECTED] snip When the TF limits were originally decided, it was assumed that a sucessful TF would save 1.03 or 2.03 LLs. I can't remember whether George has ever said whether they have been lowered to take the P-1 step into account. Daran G. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: dual-P4 xeon/win2k/prime95 / Re: Mersenne: GIMPS forums!
thanks to xyzzy for the fora! (plugh. 'you are at the Y2 room.' go back. 'you are in a maze of twisty passages, all alike.' xyzzy.) Aaron == Aaron Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: at work lately i've been trying to set up a dual-P4 win2k system with prime95. but when it boots only one of the prime95 starts up when i log in. both are set for start at bootup each with cpu-affinity hard-coded. I'm guessing you've installed prime95 twice in two different Aaron directories. yes George that is what i did. If so, what is happening is both are trying to use the service name Prime95 Service and overwriting each other. Try turning off Start at Bootup on both. Edit one of the local.ini files and add ServiceName=Prime95 Service #2. Turn on Start at bootup on both. acknowledged. i will do that when i get the machine back from our admin folks, they are reimaging it with our corporate win2k for a third time... If you run the second prime95 from the same directory with the -A1 command line argument, then you shouldn't have this trouble. i think as Aaron points out that i'm not able to adjust an autoexec sort of startup command line to have the -A1 since i do not have admin access. Aaron However, if you don't have admin access on the Win2K Aaron system, it won't be able to write to the registry locations Aaron to autostart it at bootup. Aaron Your best bet then is just put it in your startup group and Aaron NOT check start at bootup. Of course then it only runs Aaron when you're logged on... hmm. i thought that was always the case. that is, prime95 does not run if i am logged in to the win2k machine. generally that's ok since i stay logged in for months at at ime. thanks, /eli, DTV viewer prime-hunter Aaron Just one of those things... WinNT/2K is designed that way, Aaron with security in mind, so along with that come limitations Aaron to what non-admins can do, and installing services or Aaron modifying some registry locations are part of it. Aaron Aaron Aaron _ Aaron Unsubscribe list info -- Aaron http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime Aaron FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
dual-P4 xeon/win2k/prime95 / Re: Mersenne: GIMPS forums!
thanks for the new forums, George. (fora?) at work lately i've been trying to set up a dual-P4 win2k system with prime95. but when it boots only one of the prime95 starts up when i log in. both are set for start at bootup each with cpu-affinity hard-coded. i've tried with both 22.7 22.8 . the PC has required reimaging 3 times so far, so there are plenty of issues independent of prime95 on the PC. it will be interesting to see whether i can tolerate win2k long enough to test a couple of 10M exponents, before i get fed up and overwrite the disk with redhat linux. in the meantime any clue rental for me re the autostart of ? (if the answer is 'rtfm' , don't sweat it, i'll find it). btw, i do not have administrative access to the PC when it runs win2k. regards, /eli George == George Woltman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: George Hello all, George Thanks to the dedication of a GIMPS member, we now have George our very own bulletin board system. Check it out at George http://www.teamprimerib.com/gimps/ George The forums are empty now, but you can be among the first George to start up a new thread. Sign up and introduce yourself, George then we'll see what this grows into! George I know some folks prefer the mailing list approach for George news. I'll continue to post news on this mailing list and George on the forums. The forums will let us do searches and see George past posts easily. George Have fun, George George P.S. Don't be fooled by the www.teamprimerib.com in the George URL. The forums are for all GIMPS members and will not be George used as promotional tool for this particular GIMPS team. George _ George Unsubscribe list info -- George http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime George FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Error message from prime95 on an old Win95 box
Sounds like the opposite problem: Prime95 is trying to delete a registry entry that doesn't exist. I had one do that to me recently. Rather than uncheck the box, manually edit ( in prime.ini ) the line windows service=1 (or whatever line it has to that effect) to ...=0 and it will no longer see a need to try to delete the registry entry. And the box will now show as unchecked. Hope that helps, Steve Harris -Original Message- From: A T Schrum [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:26 PM No go. The box was unchecked. I checked it, restarted Prime95, and the error message was not there. So I unchecked it, restarted Prime95, and the error message came back. George Woltman wrote: At 09:34 PM 7/16/2002 -0400, A T Schrum wrote: I didn't find a reference to this problem. My old PentiumMMX 200 Mhz box running Win95 OSR2 (with tons of patches) now has Prime95 2.26.1 on it and it runs reasonably faster (about 20ms faster at 768K FFT size). But upon startup, Prime95 reports Can't write registry value and continues on. Should I be concerned? I doubt it. Prime95 should be trying to create a registry entry to run the program at bootup. If you uncheck the Options/Start at Bootup menu item the problem should go away. I'm curious though. Do other Win95 users have the same trouble? _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: mprime crashes but Prime95 doesn't
hello Pierre, you might want to try a comprehensive memory hammer test, such as walking 1s 0s . /eli _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Slow Pentium 4 question
hello Roland, could the CPU be overheating? what is the ambient temperature in the room? have you verified cpu fan and other case fans are operating? is plenty of hot air exiting the power supply fan? P4 has thermal protection which will slow selected areas of the chip, whichever portions are overheating. your bios should be able to tell you cpu temp although the cpu will have already cooled somewhat if you reboot and enter bios setup. you could check windows/hardware menu to see what cpu/clockrate it identifies. also there are shareware programs that will probe benchmark your pc and report exact cpu type, step number, clock rate, whatever. and the motherboard probably has a CD rom with some applications such as a cpu temperature monitor . i'm not sure if this would have been packaged with your PC or not, but if not, the motherboard maker probably has the same apps downloadable on their web site. in my experience, i think a fine P4 cpu temp while running prime95 would be around 59C. /eli Bockhorst, == Bockhorst, Roland P HQISEC [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bockhorst, I think my P4 is running like a P III, at one third Bockhorst, speed doing Mersenne Prime testing. Bockhorst, When I run Prime95v22 it reports my P4 as CPU Bockhorst, features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX Bockhorst, If I change the CPUtype to 12 (P4) and add SSE to the Bockhorst, local.ini file, as in ... CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, Bockhorst, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE nothing changes. Bockhorst, If I change SSE to SSE2 the system crashes with an Bockhorst, illegal instruction message. Bockhorst, I am running Prime 95 on a 256 meg. P4-1600 with 8k L1 Bockhorst, and 256K L2 on Windows 95A Bockhorst, I'm entertaining these theories: Bockhorst, Windows 95a without drivers? doesn't support a P4. (Is Bockhorst, it being asked to?) I don't really have a P4. (I Bockhorst, bought this system expecting P4 performance running Bockhorst, Prime95) L1 cache too small. L2 cache too small Bockhorst, Something else. Bockhorst, Comments/theories/assertions/wild hairs are invited. Bockhorst, My best times my P4 1600 256 meg 133SDRAM Best time Bockhorst, for 256K FFT length: 57.218 ms. Best time for 320K Bockhorst, FFT length: 71.299 ms. Best time for 384K FFT length: Bockhorst, 86.423 ms. Best time for 448K FFT length: 102.487 ms. Bockhorst, Best time for 512K FFT length: 115.680 ms. Best time Bockhorst, for 640K FFT length: 148.042 ms. Best time for 768K Bockhorst, FFT length: 184.596 ms. Best time for 892K FFT Bockhorst, length: 214.233 ms. Best time for 1024K FFT length: Bockhorst, 250.226 ms. Best time for 1280K FFT length: 320.198 Bockhorst, ms. Best time for 1536K FFT length: 386.440 ms. Best Bockhorst, time for 1792K FFT length: 467.666 ms. From the Benchmark site Bockhorst, P4 1500 133SDRAM 256 Full 0.019 0.024 0.030 0.035 Bockhorst, 0.040 0.052 0.063 0.079 0.087 0.120 0.154 0.196 19 24 Bockhorst, 30 35 40 52 63 79 87 120 154 196 Mersenne benchmark Bockhorst, times from http://www.mersenne.org\bench.htm Bockhorst, P III 1 gig times are below Bockhorst, Intel(R) Pentium(R) III processor CPU speed: 996.59 Bockhorst, MHz CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE L1 Bockhorst, cache size: 16 KB L2 cache size: 256 KB L1 cache line Bockhorst, size: 32 bytes L2 cache line size: 32 bytes TLBS: 64 Bockhorst, Prime95 version 22.3, RdtscTiming=1 Best time for 256K Bockhorst, FFT length: 54.165 ms. Best time for 320K FFT length: Bockhorst, 70.726 ms. Best time for 384K FFT length: 84.818 ms. Bockhorst, Best time for 448K FFT length: 101.149 ms. Best time Bockhorst, for 512K FFT length: 114.412 ms. Best time for 640K Bockhorst, FFT length: 148.319 ms. Best time for 768K FFT Bockhorst, length: 180.532 ms. Best time for 896K FFT length: Bockhorst, 212.317 ms. Best time for 1024K FFT length: 243.061 Bockhorst, ms. Best time for 1280K FFT length: 315.420 ms. Best Bockhorst, time for 1536K FFT length: 377.044 ms. Best time for Bockhorst, 1792K FFT length: 448.984 ms. Bockhorst, _ Bockhorst, Unsubscribe list info -- Bockhorst, http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Bockhorst, Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: A runaway P95 install script?
The default for either network retries or modem retries (I forget which, big surprise) is 2 minutes. If there is a communications problem with the machine (asking for exponents but not receiving them for some reason), that would explain the timing. Also, if the machine is running unattended and no one is checking the account status, then it could go on for a very long time. -Original Message- From: Mary K. Conner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, March 22, 2002 12:52 AM It seems to be reserving one exponent every 2 minutes. Since a malicious person could reserve exponents much faster, and would probably not be so steady over so many hours doing it by hand, I suspect it is a matter of a Prime95 process that has lost access to its disk space, thinks it has no work, and keeps downloading exponents, trying to save them, and then noting two minutes later (perhaps the timeout for a Windows share or other network mounted space) that it either has no worktodo, or the worktodo is empty, and looping. It is odd that it has gone on for so long though. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors
Don't be so hard on Phil, I made not only a mistake but one that was very easy to catch. I should know by now better than to trust my memory before sending something out. But it's hard to get used to being senile :-) I guess that also explains why I never pursued it... Steve -Original Message- From: Torben Schlüntz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Phil Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 4:41 PM Subject: SV: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors Actually I should have let Steve answer this, but I can't ignore to say that I already have pointed out that M89 is prime. So Steve had a mistake. Okay?! I do several mistakes every hour. snip _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors
Torben, I noticed something along those lines long ago: the first non-prime
Mersenne number is M11 which factors to 23 times 89. The very next non-prime
Mersenne number is M23, and M89 is also not prime. It occurred to me then
that possibly Mx is never prime if x is a factor of a Mersenne number, but
it was just an observation and I never got around to pursuing it. If so,
then it would (although only very slightly) reduce the number of candidates
to be tested. So I am just as curious as are you.
Jeroen, I am wondering about your phrase if kv is not prime then 2^(kv)-1
isn't also because kv is never prime, it has factors k and v (unless k=1,
of course), and 2^(kv)-1 always has factors 2^k-1 and 2^v-1. I don't know if
you meant something else or if I just misunderstood you. Sorry if that's the
case.
Regards,
Steve Harris
-Original Message-
From: Jeroen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors
to find the value v where prime p is a factor of 2^v-1
tempvalue = p
count = 0
while tempvalue != 0
{
if tempvalue is odd
{
shiftright tempvalue
count++
}
else
{
tempvalue+=p
}
}
if the count is a primenumber then p is thus a factor of a mersenne prime
if the count is not a primenunber it isn't
if p is a factor of 2^v-1 then it is also a factor of 2^(2v)-1
or just 2^(kv)-1 for all value of k are integers above 0
if kv is not prime them 2^(kv)-1 isn't also, so each prime can only be a
factor of one mersenne numer or 0 mersenne numbers
the first question is now simple to solve, just find the 2^v-1 where Mx is
a factor of
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 20-3-02 at 0:21 Torben Schlüntz wrote:
Just of curiosity:
Has it ever happened that a factor for Mx later has proved to be a
mersenne prime itself?
Has the same factor been a factor for two different Mx and My?
In my humble oppinion both questions answers No; but GIMPS could have
proved otherwise.
Anyway, it must exist a great deal of low primes; which by now never can
become mersenne factors (by reason: 2kp+1). So with two types of primes,
those that are mersenne factors and those that never can be, do we have
any means of distinguish them?
Happy hunting
tsc
Btw: (M29 mod 1 + M29 mod 2 +..+ M29 mod 32) = 233which is 1.
factor of M29
_
Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
_
Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
_
Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: LL test efficiency
On Friday 1 March 2002 15:31, Brian J. Beesley wrote: On reflection I can see that there is merit in Steve's idea (provided that restraint is used i.e. not grabbing more work than is neccessary to bridge the rather small exponent gap). Thanks, Brian. I probably should have mentioned in my original message that it should only take about 10-12 days for the Primenet server to hand out all the assignments in that range (15.16M to 15.30M). Regards, Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: LL test efficiency
For those of you interested in optimizing efficiency of LL testing: We are approaching first time tests of 15.30M exponents, at which point the Prime95 program will start using an 896K FFT. However, the P4-SSE2 section of the program will start using that larger FFT size at 15.16M exponents, making it (relatively) inefficient to test exponents between 15.16M and 15.30M on a P4. Since the Primenet server doesn't take this into consideration when assigning exponents, I would suggest you all have enough exponents queued up on your P4s before the server reaches 15.16M to keep them busy until it reaches 15.30M. I know there are other ways around it, but that is the simplest. Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Are problems more likely in the last 1% of a 10,gigadigit LL?
-Original Message- From: Russel Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] How about a Prime95 option where it makes a daily backup for you, saved to a datestamp fileid? It could save them to a subdirectory with the exponent name. That would make it easy for the user to do a cleanup occasionally. There is already a feature which does effectively the same thing. Set 'InterimFiles=100' in prime.ini and it will write a save file in the working directory with a sequential extension every million iterations (or however often you set it). You must manually edit the prime.ini file, it's not a menu option. It's still a good idea to back up the savefile to some other medium every so often in case you lose your whole hard drive. Regards, Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Work being wasted
That's my only point. Rude, yes. Morally/ethically/legally there's really no problem with doing it. legally, who knows - maybe there will be a court case some day if some awful person poaches the 10M exponent ... but morally/ethically there is obviously a huge problem with poaching exponents. (obvious to anyone who has at least a tiny clue about what morality ethics *mean* .) Rob On the basis of legality I would tend to agree with you Rob however I beg to differ on the basis of ethics and morality, Rob however I guess everyone is entitled to their own idea of Rob what is morally and ethically ok. no way! i understand that statement is nonsense. morality ethics are not defined by people's own ideas, they are defined *absolutely* and NOT by any human. just because today's politically-correct NewSpeak people have redefined morality to mean whatever an individual thinks is moral, that doesn't mean that morality has actually been redefined. moral relativism is *bullshit* anywhere you find it, including here on this project. while i'm at it, due to lots of P4 PC hardware problems i have a bunch of doublecheck exponents checked out that will probably never get processed by my re-re-re-re-formatted P4 PC. so am now discovering that i can unreserve them from a different machine than the one to which they were originally assigned. and i'm freeing a bunch in the 7M range presently... if these exponents are of interest to anyone, please have at them - primenet will probably assign them to you if you request doublechecks 5 minutes after i send this email. DOWN WITH EXPONENT-POACHERS as well as all WEAKLING MORAL RELATIVISTS, /eli ps - subtle, aren't i? ;) Rob Rob Reid http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=rob+reid Rob 'Stalk' away ;) Rob _ Rob Unsubscribe list info -- Rob http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ Rob -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Work being wasted
Aaron, i really know nothing about your past except what i've read here. it's your current comments re poaching which i have found objectionable. as you can see, i do feel free to comment regardless of your possible lack of appreciation for my comments. if you repented apologized for your alleged-previous-poaching-transgressions i might think differently, but you appear to be unapologetic. (but i don't really expect you to care what *i* think!!!) really - to each his own. i do recognize your right to think that your current pro-poaching comments are moral even if actually they are not, just as i recognize a moral-relativist's right to so delude themselves on whatever matter of immorality they like. while these folks may be deluding themselves they aren't fooling me - and i'm plenty foolish on my own accord! /e Aaron See, it's the snide comments like that that I don't Aaron appreciate. Aaron It's attitudes like yours that are more likely to drive Aaron people away from GIMPS than whether or not someone poaches Aaron an assignment and results in the occasional triple check. Aaron Fortunately I happen to know that most people who Aaron participate are nice folks. So the fact that a couple Aaron people on here want to make continued references to my past Aaron in an attempt to paint me as an uncaring and morally Aaron reprehensible person isn't enough to dissuade me from Aaron continued participation. :) Aaron _ Aaron Unsubscribe list info -- Aaron http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime Aaron FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Work being wasted
That's my only point. Rude, yes. Morally/ethically/legally there's really no problem with doing it. legally, who knows - maybe there will be a court case some day if some awful person poaches the 10M exponent ... but morally/ethically there is obviously a huge problem with poaching exponents. (obvious to anyone who has at least a tiny clue about what morality ethics *mean* .) Rob On the basis of legality I would tend to agree with you Rob however I beg to differ on the basis of ethics and morality, Rob however I guess everyone is entitled to their own idea of Rob what is morally and ethically ok. no way! i understand that statement is nonsense. morality ethics are not defined by people's own ideas, they are defined *absolutely* and NOT by any human. just because today's politically-correct NewSpeak people have redefined morality to mean whatever an individual thinks is moral, that doesn't mean that morality has actually been redefined. moral relativism is *bullshit* anywhere you find it, including here on this project. while i'm at it, due to lots of P4 PC hardware problems i have a bunch of doublecheck exponents checked out that will probably never get processed by my re-re-re-re-formatted P4 PC. so am now discovering that i can unreserve them from a different machine than the one to which they were originally assigned. and i'm freeing a bunch in the 7M range presently... if these exponents are of interest to anyone, please have at them - primenet will probably assign them to you if you request doublechecks 5 minutes after i send this email. DOWN WITH EXPONENT-POACHERS as well as all WEAKLING MORAL RELATIVISTS, /eli ps - subtle, aren't i? ;) _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Work being wasted
Aaron, i really know nothing about your past except what i've read here. it's your current comments re poaching which i have found objectionable. as you can see, i do feel free to comment regardless of your possible lack of appreciation for my comments. if you repented apologized for your alleged-previous-poaching-transgressions i might think differently, but you appear to be unapologetic. (but i don't really expect you to care what *i* think!!!) really - to each his own. i do recognize your right to think that your current pro-poaching comments are moral even if actually they are not, just as i recognize a moral-relativist's right to so delude themselves on whatever matter of immorality they like. while these folks may be deluding themselves they aren't fooling me - and i'm plenty foolish on my own accord! /e Aaron See, it's the snide comments like that that I don't Aaron appreciate. Aaron It's attitudes like yours that are more likely to drive Aaron people away from GIMPS than whether or not someone poaches Aaron an assignment and results in the occasional triple check. Aaron Fortunately I happen to know that most people who Aaron participate are nice folks. So the fact that a couple Aaron people on here want to make continued references to my past Aaron in an attempt to paint me as an uncaring and morally Aaron reprehensible person isn't enough to dissuade me from Aaron continued participation. :) _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Work being wasted
(apologies for any duplicate postings i generated here; most mailservers reject mail from my semi-improperly-configured linux PC.) _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Work being wasted
hi Aaron, thanks for clarifying your position! i'm a simpleton who lives often below curb-height, and think poaching=stealing=wrong. this exponent poaching seems like a sort of stealing to me and it would surely tick me off vastly if i found my 33M exponent was checked in a day before my PC finished its ~3 months of work. indeed if it did happen to me, i would probably do as Mary has surmised and resign from GIMPS and join another cooperative computing effort such as SETI or anthrax-cure-finding or anthrax-genome-finding or whatever else. i think i see your point regarding the state of 'exponent poaching' long before i joined GIMPS, and how it is no longer useful. thank you for educating me about the past history of poaching here as well as the current state of the issue here. as for parting company with my alleged opinion about what to do: i surely do not support hassling anyone by google-searches or posting home addresses or phone numbers or anything like that. a quick google search for an email address, or a query to a mailing list, does anyone know how to contact this person so i can email them doesn't strike me as any sort of stalking... as long as it ends there, or ends with what i saw here: the guy's a ham-radio-dude, you can look up his email address as a ham callsign or email this ham-mailing-list to maybe find him. as you might imagine by my forward use of language, i actually have an internet stalker of my own. he lives in the SF Bay Area, near where i used to live, and he has done all sorts of threatening things to myself and *many* others. he has spent time in jail due to at least some of: (convicted) violations of anti-stalking laws, (alleged) firebombing of cars businesses, and (convicted) child-porn activities. also he has lost some civil suits which he has initiated against his detractors from various usenet groups. so i understand how horrible it is to be the target of a stalker and would never support or contribute to such activity! regards, /eli _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: mprime iteration time increase, linux athlon, 21a-21b /also: P4 saga
hi, does anyone know why i see a ~25% iteration time increase by moving from mprime v21a to mprime v21b. (i'm considering moving back to v21a since it appears to run faster on my 900 Mhz redhat linux.) regarding the fried P4 machines, the saga continues. despite repeated requests for full refund the vendor is not doing that for me. so i am giving them a 4th chance - i am such a nice guy :| this time they are going to rebuild the system from scratch and put XP on it and load only a single piece of software on it before i start loading up everything on it: i'll load prime95 and run two copies of it, one doing doublechecks and the other doing huge exponents. and i'll use it as a surf-horse with (gack) IE for a month or so. if it survives that test i'll consider it to be ok, although i will be dreading what happens when the PC is running during 100 degree summertime temps! /e _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: another P4 bites the dust / dual-1Ghz OSX mac vs. 2Ghz P4 ?
thanks Brian everyone who has responded i do also have a 900 Mhz Athlon machine too - running redhat linux. i now have my win98 1.8Ghz PC back, supposedly in working order, supposedly the problem was some other s/w i had installed. :| i had installed very little on it beyond prime95. so now i'm running the prime95 torture test for a day or two on it.. in other news, intel is going to replace the previously-fried 2Ghz P4 for free... so maybe i actually will build up a machine myself with that cpu after i get it... all's well that ends well... ? :) /e _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: another P4 bites the dust / dual-1Ghz OSX mac vs. 2Ghz P4 ?
hi, well, i fried a second P4 using GIMPS. first a 2Ghz P4, and now a 1.8Ghz . obviously the vendor has sold me a crappy machine with inadequate cooling/motherboard/something and i am now done with them and they will be giving me a full refund whether they like it or not. so now i am considering Mac OSX as well. my question to you is whether a dual-1Ghz OSX mac would have better or worse GIMPS performance than an adequately-cooled 2Ghz P4 linux or win98 PC. thank you, /eli _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: G-C-D, F-F-T, P-R-I-M-E !
thanks to Alex Kruppa for suggesting a better modification to the beginning of a GIMPS theme song: GCD, FFT, PRIME! (say each letter separately, singing to mickey mouse theme song tune.) Mary, thanks for pointing out that prime95 counts cycles rather than wall time, so that it will not be obvious when cpu throttles back. Brian, please no more two or three colo[u]r LEDs to indicate status of cpu throttle or anything else. almost 10% of humans has trouble distinguishing colo[u]rs, not to mention the large percentage who don't even know how to spell the word colour properly! for some of us it is practically impossible to distinguish red/yellow/green on an LED, especially when they are flashing. this is often a showstopper problem for me when working with computer/networking/lab devices - i have to find another way to determine the device status, or go find someone who can see colors properly. also, it is good to know that you had a toshiba satellite laptop running for 3 years with no fan failure... but i doubt i will restart prime95 on my wife's toshiba laptop any year soon! and your point is very well taken that a low end cpu chip can handle overclocking better than a high end one. for example, the 1.5Ghz P4 could probably handle it better than the 2Ghz. yes, this was an expensive lesson for me to learn empirically! i thought i was on safe ground due to the supposed thermal protection in the P4, even though i did not have intel motherboard. live and learn. further, as for the stated limits, the Asus utility program does some sort of CPU-probe, and it detected the 2Ghz P4 and said that it could be clocked anywhere from 2Ghz to 2.4Ghz! so what is that about?!? either way, i don't expect intel to replace the cpu and today am planning to pay $280 for a 1.8 Ghz P4 as a replacement. btw, the motherboard was never at 90C, it was the motherboard-cpu-temp-threshold that was set to 90C that was triggering. i don't know if i did anything bad to the voltage regulator with my 5% overclocking... if you or anyone did not see the facetiousness in my blaming prime95 for slaying computers, i'll be more clear: prime95 is not at fault for any of these things. i did all these things with full knowledge of possible risks. thus i am the moron, not prime95! prime95 is clearly imbued with genius (seriously). btw, i have driven over nails before and did not blame my gasoline supplier. once i drove over a harvard students keychain and destroyed a tire. but unfortunately i missed the harvard student. i agree with everyone about on/off cycles being damaging to much computer equipment - especially hard drives. i've always set the power management so the drives always spin when AC power is available. Alan, thanks for the idea about pcmcia fan. i had not known those were available. very cool idea. it is great emailing with all of you folks and participating in the GIMPS project too. a happy safe 2002 to you all, /eli _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: slaying cpus with prime95
here are some instances where i have damaged computers by (capriciously?) running prime95! 1 - i just got my wife's toshiba laptop back from toshiba warranty service. running prime95 for ~6 months on it caused the fan to die, and then the laptop would overheat shutdown even without prime95 running. apparently the heat caused lots of disk badblocks too. 2 - my manager at work here had a thinkpad. he ran prime95 despite my worry that it was very tough on laptops. within a few months his harddrive failed - possibly due to months of excess heat... :| this could be considered a classic Dilbertian CLM (career limiting move) on my part, but no worry since my manager is super-cool. 3 - i also ran the prime95 app for a year or so on an ancient cyrix p120+ which had a cpu-fan that stopped. after a couple months of no-cpu-fan, that cpu died completely... 4 - i bought a 2Ghz P4 recently. despite initial worries that it was running too hot (70 C) because fan was too slow (2800 rpm), i got adventurous and clocked the cpu at 2.1 Ghz for a day. weeks later the machine started acting very badly (motherboard cpu temp alarm caused shutdown @ 90 C even without prime95 running). so i returned it to the vendor. they claimed that my overclocking it broke the P4, and that the top of the cpu was actually burnt/blackened from the heat. this is counter to my belief that improper fan/heatsink was the cause, but i can't prove it. also it runs counter to what i've read here elsewhere about the thermal-protection built into P4s 1.7Ghz or faster. they are returning the P4 to intel to see if Intel will replace it for free, but in the meantime i have to pay for a new cpu! (i'm picking 1.8Ghz this time.) so far my count is 4 for computers i've damaged with the help of the the prime95 application. but i'll keep running it because it is the coolest application around (in a hot way). /eli _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: slaying cpus with prime95
As others have already mentioned, those machines would probably have died even without Prime95. The way I have always looked at it, Prime95 generally causes those types of (pre-existing) problems to manifest _before_ the warranty expires, rather than after. This feature is certainly not a Bad Thing :-) Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Steve Elias [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, January 14, 2002 1:58 PM Subject: Mersenne: slaying cpus with prime95 here are some instances where i have damaged computers by (capriciously?) running prime95! 1 - i just got my wife's toshiba laptop back from toshiba warranty service. running prime95 for ~6 months on it caused the fan to die, and then the laptop would overheat shutdown even without prime95 running. apparently the heat caused lots of disk badblocks too. 2 - my manager at work here had a thinkpad. he ran prime95 despite my worry that it was very tough on laptops. within a few months his harddrive failed - possibly due to months of excess heat... :| this could be considered a classic Dilbertian CLM (career limiting move) on my part, but no worry since my manager is super-cool. 3 - i also ran the prime95 app for a year or so on an ancient cyrix p120+ which had a cpu-fan that stopped. after a couple months of no-cpu-fan, that cpu died completely... 4 - i bought a 2Ghz P4 recently. despite initial worries that it was running too hot (70 C) because fan was too slow (2800 rpm), i got adventurous and clocked the cpu at 2.1 Ghz for a day. weeks later the machine started acting very badly (motherboard cpu temp alarm caused shutdown @ 90 C even without prime95 running). so i returned it to the vendor. they claimed that my overclocking it broke the P4, and that the top of the cpu was actually burnt/blackened from the heat. this is counter to my belief that improper fan/heatsink was the cause, but i can't prove it. also it runs counter to what i've read here elsewhere about the thermal-protection built into P4s 1.7Ghz or faster. they are returning the P4 to intel to see if Intel will replace it for free, but in the meantime i have to pay for a new cpu! (i'm picking 1.8Ghz this time.) so far my count is 4 for computers i've damaged with the help of the the prime95 application. but i'll keep running it because it is the coolest application around (in a hot way). /eli _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: prime95 fans slaying cpus
or not, are noisy cpu/case fans or fans that don't spin at all. And if you have thermal monitoring, pay attention to it. Hard drives nowadays almost all have SMART on them, so find a program that can read those stats and see if your drive is giving out warnings. Many vendors include software for monitoring your system health (I know HP and Compaq do, and I think IBM does too but I haven't looked). There are 3rd party programs for all that as well. hmm. i have not seen any hard-drive-temp-monitor tools but thank you for the SMART pointer. i will check into that. and oh ya, i hear ya about checking for non-spinning or noisy fans. my machines' fans always end up noisy since i run them 24x7. And of course, overclocking is pushing the limits anyway, so I guess we shouldn't be too surprised to find that overclocking may ruin a CPU. I do find it curious that the thermal protection on your P4 didn't kick in, but perhaps your computer's BIOS had some default settings disabling that? nope - not that i could see... it seemed as if the motherboard was designed without knowledge of the latest P4 thermal protection. so maybe the motherboard was originally designed for a slower P4 without the thermal protection (1.5Ghz?) ? well, we might think that it might tend to better protect the 2Ghz P4 thermally... Or it had been disabled? I dunno... I don't have a P4 machine (yet), so I can't say. :) me neither, any more :| maybe by tomorrow i'll have one again. In short, I've killed many machines in my life... CPU fans that i figured i would find some like-minded cpu-killers here! stopped working and thus frying the processor, or doing silly things like plugging a 486 in the wrong way, etc. And of all the machines I've fried, NONE were running Prime95. Heck, I guess I'd have to say that running Prime95 on a machine has actually brought me better luck with them than without. :) i wish i could say the same! Aaron Mmm, yes the fan on my laptop (Dell 38000) sounds like someone dumped a load of grit in it - not good :-( I stopped running prime95 (mprime actually) on it for that reason. - -- Nick Craig-Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] maybe there is a monster dust-bunny in there... i couldn't figure out how to properly open the case of my wife's laptop PC. but if i can't resist the primal95 urge, i'll probably have to figure that out and replace the fan myself next year! As others have already mentioned, those machines would probably have died even without Prime95. The way I have always looked at it, Prime95 generally causes those types of (pre-existing) problems to manifest _before_ the warranty expires, rather than after. This feature is certainly not a Bad Thing :-) Steve Harris indeed, prime95 is a great DVT tester, or at least a DT tester. (dvt=deviate-voltage-and-temperature, or something close to that.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Mersenne: slaying cpus with prime95 Crazy thought here, but what if prime95 only ran at x% speed? For example, put some hlts in there and see how that affects the CPU temp. I think for those of us that run Prime95 on laptops find it unnerving when the fans are running full blast all the time, and it would be cool to have a cooler running prime95 rather than no prime95 at all. Thinking about it, you could probably keep the temp down to around normal idle temp... this is a good thought, Jeremy. and indeed there are cpu cooler programs out there which force a few occasional no-op instructions, or some such, in order to keep the cpu temp lower. i suppose i could try this if i try to put my wife's computer on on the other hand a cpu-cooler-program is contrary to my raison-d'etre for my own PCs - keeping every-spare-cycle in use for prime95! if the PCs can't take the prime95 heat, it's just a form of computational natural selection... /eli _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Prime freezing when connecting by DSL to Primenet
Interesting... I have had that happen to me as well a few times with PCs on a DSL (but without AOL). It doesn't happen on a regular basis but does lock up the program (v21.3) for hours or days at a time. Just caught one today that had been stuck like that for seven hours, even 'end task' couldn't stop it. I had to reboot the PC, then it connected and reported in just fine immediately afterwards. Irv, I know this is no help, except to let you know you aren't the only one... Steve Harris -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]Date: Friday, January 11, 2002 10:58 PMSubject: Mersenne: Prime freezing when connecting by DSL to PrimenetI am running version 21.4 of Prime. I recently started using a DSL connection on AOL. ( I am using Version 7.0 of AOL). Since I started using this arrangement, Prime locks up whenever it connects with Primenet. After some delay, during which time everything stops, Primenet reports an ERROR 12031. The only way that I can successfully report to Primenet, is to connect to AOL using my modem.This problem occurs when reporting results, getting new exponents and reporting expected completion dates.Any suggestions? I can give more details if needed.Irv Rosenfeld
Re: Mersenne: Minor mile stone.
On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 07:00:21PM +, Steve wrote: Hi Group I've noticed that now we've got over 30,000 users listed in the top producers table. Welcome to all you new people (about 400) who've joined since the discovery of #M39. Missed a zero, meant 4000 nwe people. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 12:42pm up 90 days, 4:30, 2 users, load average: 1.07, 1.02, 1.00 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Minor mile stone.
Hi Group I've noticed that now we've got over 30,000 users listed in the top producers table. Welcome to all you new people (about 400) who've joined since the discovery of #M39. Happy hunting everyone. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 6:58pm up 89 days, 10:46, 2 users, load average: 1.03, 1.03, 1.03 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: Munich prime party report
EWMAYER wrote: Personally, I don't think there's anything special about a ratio of 2. Certainly not, but perhaps there may be something special about 2.1025, which is 1.45^2 ? At any rate, the sample size is far too small to ascertain a good standard deviation, or to validate any hypotheses. And I think I'll use Zecher for my next machine ID; thanks for the tip :-) Ian Halliday wrote: ...note that the exponents of M(13) and M(14) differby more than a factor of 2, as do the exponents of M(15) and M(16).Similarly for M(35) and M(36) with M(37) and M(38). I don't believe the 13-14 and 15-16 gaps are 2; still, you are correct about 35 to 38. But the 36-37 gap has a ratio of only 1.015, which is extremely small. [I recall that Roland Clarkson said he almost returned the M(37) exponent to the server as it was so close to M(36).] I have mentioned here before that the large gaps tend to be adjacent to the small gaps, which is to be expected if the overall distribution is to remain around the average of 1.45 - but this cannot be counted on. Alex Kruppa wrote: next on schedule, if Steve can make it in March, is eineMa, Starkbier and Nockherberg! :) I am already completely familiar with both the Ma and Starkbier, even to the point of eine Starkbier Ma What better reason to go to Munich after Fasching! (I hope that does not further tarnish the reputation of mathematicians with Daidalos :-) Happy new year, Steve Zecher Harris
Mersenne: Munich prime party report
We finally got the picture, text, and translations approved by all involved, so here is our report on the Munich chapter of the prime party of 7 december (at least as much as we can remember) : http://www.sheeplechasers.org/prime/muenchen/ In case there is no new mersenne prime found in the near future, we plan to make this an annual event - or semiannual, or quarterly, or however often we can get together. We did decide that making it a daily event was totally out of the question :-) Happy holidays, Steve ( Alex) _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: Factoring benefit/cost ratio
Richard, Your first interpretation of verified residues is correct, they are retested until two residues match. Any time a double-check reports in a residue which is different from the first LL test, the exponent is returned to the database to be tested again. This means that at least one of the residues is incorrect, and happens (relatively) often, I believe about two percent of the time. However, as has been pointed out before, the odds of two LL tests on different machines returning the _same_ incorrect residues are astronomical (although, of course, still non-zero). Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:34 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: Factoring benefit/cost ratio Brian, I'm wondering whether we may be misunderstanding each other's contentions here. I thought you object to at least some of what I claimed, but now it seems that you're presenting arguments and evidence that support what I'm claiming. Since my previous postings may have had careless wording or otherwise obscured my intentions, and I did not earlier realize the importance of certain details to the discussion, let me restate what I've meant to claim: 1. It is more valuable to know a specific factor of a Mnumber than to know that that Mnumber is composite without knowing any specific factor. (There's little dispute about #1.) 2. Claim #1 is true not only from the viewpoint of mathematics in general, but also from the narrower viewpoint of the GIMPS search for Mersenne primes. 3. One (but not the only) justification for claim #2 is that, _in current practice_, a composite status derived by GIMPS from finding a specific factor is (slightly) more reliable than a composite status derived by GIMPS from matching nonzero residues from Lucas-Lehmer tests. That is, although in theory, or ideally, those two methods of determining compositeness are equally reliable, there currently exists a slight difference in reliability, in favor of the factor, from a practical standpoint. 4. Our experience (the record), as documented in the Mersenne mailing list or GIMPS history, supports claim #3. - - - - - Brian Beesley wrote: AFAIK our record does _not_ show any such thing. Oh? It doesn't? There is no evidence of any verified residuals being incorrect. Wait a second -- just yesterday you wrote that you had triple-checked thousands of small exponents (which means they had already been double-checked) and that A very few (think fingers of one hand) instances of incorrectly matched residuals have come to light - completing the double-check in these cases proved that one of the recorded residuals was correct. So it seems that the meaning you're assigning to verified is something like retested and retested until two residuals match. Is that a correct interpretation? If not, what is? My claim #3 means that in practice, factors require fewer verification runs to produce matching results than do L-L residues, on average. Do you disagree with that? If not, then don't we agree about claim #3? Furthermore, my claim #4 means that the demonstration that factors require fewer verification runs to produce matching results than do L-L residues, on average, rests on the observed history _including the paragraph you wrote from which I just quoted above!_ Do you disagree? Also, in that same paragraph you wrote, ... - some of the ones where the accepted residual was recorded to only 16 bits or less, which makes the chance of an undetected error _much_ greater (though still quite small) ... Am I correct in interpreting this to mean that you think that using 64-bit residuals is more reliable than using 16-bit residuals? If so, then surely you'll grant that 256-bit residuals would be even more reliable yet, meaning that there's still room for error in our practice of using 64-bit residuals. But a specific factor is a _complete value_, not some truncation, and so its reliability is not damaged by the incompleteness which you admit keeps the L-L residues from being totally reliable - right? Then you wrote so far no substantive errors in the database have come to light, but seemingly contradicted that in the very next sentence, A very few (think fingers of one hand) instances of incorrectly matched residuals have come to light - completing the double-check in these cases proved that one of the recorded residuals was correct. ... And thus _the other_ recorded residual was _incorrect_. Neither is there any evidence that any verified factors are incorrect. Depends on the meaning of verified, of course. :-) Will Edgington (I think) has reported finding errors in his factor data base ... even though he verifies factors before adding them. Mistakes happen. But I think the error rate for factors has been significantly lower than for L-L residuals. Whatever theory states, the experimental evidence
Re: Mersenne: Re: Factoring benefit/cost ratio
George did say that, and I was aware of his statement, but that still has no effect on the point I was making. George's GIMPS stats also give no credit at all for finding factors, but that doesn't mean he considers finding factors worthless. Steve -Original Message- From: Gerry Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, December 01, 2001 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: Factoring benefit/cost ratio Steve Harris wrote: Actually, Richard's statement that a 'Factored' status is better for GIMPS than a 'Two LL' status is not quite true. It's better for the mathematical community as a whole, but not for GIMPS. GIMPS is looking for primes, not factors, and without skipping over any. Hmmm, I must be having a senior moment. I would swear George said that one way a person could lose credit for a correct LL test is if later factoring finds a factor. Is my feeble brain making this up, or is finding a factor more important than stated above? Gerry -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gerry Snyder, AIS Director Symposium Chair, Region 15 RVP Member San Fernando Valley, Southern California Iris Societies in warm, winterless Los Angeles--USDA 9b-ish, Sunset 18-19 my work: helping generate data for: http://galileo.jpl.nasa.gov/ _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Re: Factoring benefit/cost ratio
Actually, Richard's statement that a 'Factored' status is better for GIMPS than a 'Two LL' status is not quite true. It's better for the mathematical community as a whole, but not for GIMPS. GIMPS is looking for primes, not factors, and without skipping over any. This means all candidates must be tested and the non-primes eliminated, and it doesn't matter whether they are eliminated by 'factored' or by 'two matching nonzero LL residues'. It matters to those who are attempting to fully factor Mersenne numbers, but that's a different project altogether, and one that is decades (at least) behind GIMPS. The only reason we do any factoring at all is to reduce the time spent on LL testing. Besides, if you do manage to find a 75-digit factor of a 2-million-digit Mersenne number, that still leaves a 125-digit remainder. Really not much help :-) Regards, Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Daran [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, November 30, 2001 2:00 AM Subject: Re: Factoring benefit/cost ratio (was: Mersenne: Fw: The Mersenne Newsletter, issue #18) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 6:49 PM Subject: Factoring benefit/cost ratio (was: Mersenne: Fw: The Mersenne Newsletter, issue #18) But ones factoring benefit calculation might [should would be in line with the popular theme of prescribing what's best for other GIMPS participants :)] include not only the time savings of eliminating the need for one or two L-L tests, but also the extra benefit of finding a specific factor. I can see no way of objectively quantifying this benefit. In the GIMPS Search Status table at www.mersenne.org/status.htm the march of progress is from Status Unknown to Composite - One LL to Composite - Two LL to ... Composite - Factored. More desireable - whether or not recorded on that page - would be Composite - Least (or greatest) factor known. Most desireable (other than Prime) would be Composite - Completely factored'. This reflects the view (with which I agree) that it is more valuable to know a specific factor of a Mnumber than to know that a Mnumber is composite but not to know any specific factor of that Mnumber. So a Factored status is better for GIMPS than a Two LL status, but calculations of factoring benefit that consider only the savings of L-L test elimination are neglecting the difference between those two statuses. If one consciously wants to neglect that difference ... well, okay ... but I prefer to see that explicitly acknowledged. It seems to be implicitely acknowledged in the way the trial factoring depths are determined. If one places a non-zero value on a known factor, then the utility of extra factoring work on untested, once tested, and verified composites would be increased. It would have to be set very high indeed to make it worth while returning to verified composite Mersennes. Richard Woods Daran G. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: 1st 6 P90CPU yrs jump!
On Sun, Nov 11, 2001 at 06:59:48AM +0100, Guido Lorenzini wrote: Hi all! Thank you very much to all that guys who gave me suggestions about the timings problems! Last night, at 1:25 AM UTC, Pluto (the italian name of the Mickey's dog: you may know it as the Pup), which instead hasn't problem at all, has completed its (and mine) first 33mio LL-test: unfortunately M33243421 isn't prime but it is exciting to make a jump of more than six years in the top producers awards page! Now I'm definetively entered into the Top 400 producers zone! Waiting just two weeks for Pippo (Goofy) the next mega-jump...Soon I'll in sight of Top 100!! Sorry for this minor post, just to communicate this private milestone. Regards guido72 Hi Guido I took the liberty of running you through my primestats perl script and get the following information: Run Date: Sun 11 Nov 2001 Participants counted: 24,546 Extra details for user ID: guido72 Position User Name CPU YearsExponentsCPU P90 Tested Hrs Per Day 350 guido72 42.868 79528.57 72 people are faster than you but behind you, at an average speed of 807.85 CPU hours per day they are approximately25.32 years behind you. You will be in the center of the chasing pack in something like 787.64 days. 129 people are slower than you but in front of you, at an average speed of 413.16 CPU hours per day they are approximately13.01 years in front of you. You should be in the middle of the pack that you are chasing in something like 979.54 days. End of output. So it looks like things are going to slow down a bit from now on:-)) You can get the perl script from my web page at: http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/linstuff.html Be sure to read the documentation in the .txt file. The script should run on most platforms, I know it works on Unix, Linux, NT4, and Win2000. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 2:14pm up 34 days, 5:57, 1 user, load average: 1.03, 1.02, 1.00 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: number of processors participating
Henk, I don't have a consistent set of statistics, but I do save the world test status page every few months. So I can tell you that on 2-apr-2001 it showed 38652 machines on 20983 accounts, and right now it shows 30186 machines on 15659 accounts. I'm sure I didn't just happen to catch it at its peak; I recall there being over 21000 accounts at one time. WRT team '.', I recall a few months ago it seemed to be holding up some double-checks at the low end of the assignments, but it did eventually complete them all. Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Henk Stokhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, October 27, 2001 1:20 PM Subject: Mersenne: number of processors participating L.S., I read a message some time ago on this list that claimed that the number of processors had gone down by about 9000. I don't have stats on this other than the actual available from the status pages. Does anyone have stats over the last year, like numer of pc's and/or processor types, processor speeds? If there would really have been a decrease in participating processors, (I don't think so) an updated graph of Primenet throughput would show by now, is there any update in the pipeline? I went through the status.txt file to see if the new 'stress test' button could have played a significant role, I don't think so. By the way if one runs prime95 without a user name the application fills in an S0 as user name. I found 3170 entries with a name '.' (only a dot) The fast majority of these entries seem to be have been abandoned. They have been reserved over a long time with a constant daily flow. Does anyone know more about this? YotN, Henk Stokhorst _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: AW: Mersenne: Prime Net Server
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, September 10, 2001 1:58 AM BTW some people claim that the PrimeNet server is working, just very, very slowly. In that case it's more than likely that the server is sufferring a DoS attack :( That was my first thought. Isn't mersenne.org physically located on Entropia's servers? I still have been unable to get to mersenne.org at all, but was able to get to Entropia's home page (although it took several minutes to partially download before I gave up waiting). Regards, Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Like missing baby's first step
This is indeed a good reason for doing it that way. A similar situation arises when setting up a new client. One time I set one up on a machine without a permanent connection; it was assigned an LL test that would take about a month and immediately started P-1 factoring. A few days later I checked on it and it had found a factor and was sitting there with nothing to do! Now I always make sure a new setup has at least two eponents queued up. Even a machine with a permanent connection will be unable to request new work if the server is down. Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Hoogendoorn, Sander [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 11:52 AM Subject: RE: Mersenne: Like missing baby's first step This is done to make sure your computer has always some work queued up in case a factor is found and your computer is not online or the primenet server is unavailable. In this situation there is more time to get a new exponent after the factor is found. Sander _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: scientific american
Yes the article does go into great detail re Beowulf clusters, but the penultimate paragraph contains: An equally important trend is the development of networks of PCs that contribute their processing power to a collective task. An example is SETI@home, ... As usual, we get ignored while SETI gets all the publicity. -Original Message- From: xqrpa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sunday, July 22, 2001 2:43 AM Subject: Re: Mersenne: scientific american Article seems to detail tightly-coupled Beowulf clusters, not the sort of internet-linked distributed computing we are doing. Have I got the wrong article? I'm looking at: http://sciam.com/2001/0801issue/0801hargrove.html Best Wishes, Stefanovic - Original Message - From: Spike Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 10:22 PM Subject: Mersenne: scientific american There is an article this in the new Scientific American on distributed computing, but no mention of GIMPS. I feel cheated. spike _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: scientific american
Most people just find aliens more interesting than primes. One doesn't find articles about prime numbers in the tabloids. I didn't join GIMPS for the cash prizes; I'd have a better chance buying a lottery ticket. But I'm sure many people do join for that reason, probably the same ones who do buy lottery tickets. And if I do happen to find a mersenne prime, the article will appear in places like Scientific American, not the National Enquirer... ;~) Steve -Original Message- From: Nathan Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sunday, July 22, 2001 12:06 PM I think the reason SETI attracts so much of the public attention is simply that anyone can imagine the significance of playing a role in discovering aliens, while the cash prizes for GIMPS (while larger than those for distributed.net) aren't something that really attracts people's attention at first glance. Nathan _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: 1000 barrier
On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 09:40:04PM +, Russel Brooks wrote: ID: rlbrooks 866MHz P3 450MHz P2 ( 133MHz P1 doing factoring) I took the liberty of running you though my perl script that tells you more or less what you want to know, the results are. Run Date: Sat 21 Jul 2001 Participants counted: 22,255 Extra details for user ID: rlbrooks Position User Name CPU YearsExponentsCPU P90 Tested Hrs Per Day 997 rlbrooks14.568 76222.96 142 people are faster than you but behind you, at an average speed of 330.62 CPU hours per day they are approximately 7.89 years behind you. You will be in the center of the chasing pack in something like 636.91 days. 357 people are slower than you but in front of you, at an average speed of 162.09 CPU hours per day they are approximately 5.08 years in front of you. You should be in the middle of the pack that you are chasing in something like 725.63 days. End of script results - From this I deduce that you are set to overtake more people than will overtake yourself, but given the timescales involved, many people will upgrade their processors within the next 725 days, one of those people may be you so really the results don't tell you very much do they:-) The script is called primestats and is available from my web page in the CGI Linux Stuff, section, there is documentation and a sample report bundled with the script. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 3:04am up 7 days, 5:05, 2 users, load average: 1.12, 1.31, 1.23 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: Prime web site
I've noticed that as well... haven't been able to get to the website, but Prime95 has no trouble reporting in or getting exponents. Steve -Original Message- From: Rick Pali [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Steinar H. Gunderson Both WWW and FTP down from here. :-( Prime95 has no trouble, so that's cool! Rick. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Spacing between mersenne primes
Random distribution of Mersenne primes does indeed mean we may not find another one for years, but it also means we may find the next two just a few weeks apart. There is also a nearly random order in which the first-time LL tests are _completed_. Assignments are being given out around exponent 12.8 million, but there are 9737 uncompleted in the 11-12 million range and 3496 in the 10-11 million range, as well as over a thousand below that... not to mention the handful below M(39?). We could easily be unlucky enough to have 'skipped over' one already, in which case it could be reported in any day now. (And don't forget... one could have been found recently that hasn't been published yet!) Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Brian J. Beesley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:35 PM snip Maybe M39(?) is not massively overdue, but I think it is at least about due now. However, random distribution means we could be unlucky not find another prime for two more years, or possibly even longer... A new discovery would give the project a shot in the arm, though! Regards Brian Beesley _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Spacing between mersenne primes
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 07:52:48PM -0500, Ken Kriesel wrote: At 10:56 AM 5/16/2001 -, Brian J. Beesley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another point - we're coming up to the second anniversary of the discovery of M38(?) - I think we're overdue to find another one! It would be nice to find another soon. But I don't think we're overdue. Long ago in Internet time I wrote: Recently I've been thinking about this subject, and I've thought what if it starts to work like a fractal, the more distance that you get between points the greater chance there is of a point popping up right in the middle. I'm not a mathamatician by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it's an interesting theory. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 2:07pm up 105 days, 14:55, 2 users, load average: 1.14, 1.19, 1.13 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: ECM Question...
While we're on the subject, can someone explain how to derive the group order for factors found using ECM? I've been carrying out ECM on an old PC for almost a year now, and I'd like to be able to derive, and factorise, the group orders for the factors that I've found. I've been making an effort to understand the maths, and I'm getting there slowly, but I've found nothing yet that explains how to derive the group orders. If my understanding is correct, you would need to know the equations used by mprime to derive the co-ordinates of the starting point for each curve. Anyway, if someone could explain how to derive the group order, or point me in the right direction, I'd be very grateful. Regards, Steve If the sigma is the same, then a curve with B1=25 will find any factor that a curve with B1=5 finds. When you run 700 random curves at B1=25, you might theoretically miss a factor that someone else finds with B1=5, if he gets a lucky sigma so that the group order is very smooth. But in general, using the same number of curves, the higher bound should find all the factors that the lower bound can find. But dont be tempted into running only a few curves at very high bounds. The strength of ECM is that you can try curves with different group orders until a sufficiently smooth one comes along. So skipping bound levels is usually not a good idea unless you have reason to believe the the number unter attack has only large factors which call for a higher bound. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: SUMOUT errors
For what it's worth, I have had the exact same problem getting illegal sumouts when using the modem on this 475Mhz K6 PC. Hasn't happened since january but had been happening about once a fortnight for months, and _only_ when the modem was heavily in use (Rockwell HCF 56K Data Fax PCI Modem). I had forgotten all about it until I read Jeramy's message. It has never happened on any of my other PCs. Oddly enough, I have noticed on Athlons that the iterations run about 2% faster when the modem is connected! Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Jeramy Ross Date: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 9:24 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: SUMOUT errors I don't really know how much help this will be since I don't know your exact situation and am not a expert by any means, but here goes! First, the software modem may be a culprit. I have had problems with ones of the HSP variety. Most show up as 'HSP Micromodem56' or something very similar on your system. Most of these modems also use a chipset manufactured by PCTel. Fairly stable, but use a nice chunk of CPU time when online, and I have received errors when I am checking email and/or surfing the web while using this type of modem. I have no hard evidence to tie this modem to the errors, but all errors happened when I was using that modem or soon after (I hooked up a external modem just to see if the same would happen with it and I did not receive errors when using it). I have no idea if you have a modem similar to that one or not, but it may be the problem. Also, the electrical environment may be vastly different. I am assuming that where you had your computer was at school, and it is now at home. At my home, I have problems with various utility problems, and have been told by others that utility problems could cause such errors. I invested in a UPS with line conditioning to hopefully control some of those problems. Maybe one of these two things could be your problem.. I wish you the best of luck in finding and fixing the problem! - Jeramy _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Primestats perl script updated, (bug fix).
Hi All I've noticed that sometimes the topproducers table goes a bit strange, this causes the primestats script to output 2 Meg worth of error messages, not good if you run it in a cron job, and then the cron job backs up your inbox. So I've tracked the bug down and fixed it so now you only get 24 lines of error message when we have a problem with topproducers.shtml rather than 2 Megs worth. It's here: http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/linstuff.html -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 1:35am up 103 days, 2:22, 2 users, load average: 1.03, 1.08, 1.11 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: 26 exponents
Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: 26 exponents On 12 May 2001, at 15:26, Nathan Russell wrote: On Sat, 12 May 2001 14:20:36 -0400, Jud McCranie wrote: snip Thirdly most people will neither know nor care about the detail of how allocations are made. That's an excellent point. When I first started I had no idea what exponent I would get or why. A better fix would be to patch PrimeNet so that it can assign an exponent for two LL test runs simultaneously. (Whichever finishes first becomes the LL test, the other is the double-check). While that's basically a good idea, it's important to be honest with participants. A patch would not be enough. People need to be informed about departures from documented practice. That _might_ be a good idea, except in the eventual situation where both participants return results indicating their number is indeed prime. Whoever had the slightly slower machine will not be very happy! Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: W2K screen saver vs. Prime95
From my experience with dozens of cases on all flavors of Windows, the power save mode has no effect on screensavers. They will continue running with the monitor off. The ones with sound effects (such as underwater) continue producing their noises. If anyone has any ideas on how to make it otherwise, I would love to hear them. Steve Harris Note: If you have power saving on your monitor, once your monitor turns off, any running screen saver is supposed to stop running. Whether that's the case or not for many screen savers, I have no idea. Besides the blank screen, another good, low impact saver is the logon one. Aaron _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Top producers differents from number of accounts
On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 05:50:29PM +0200, michel claes wrote: Dear all, I have checked somme GIMPs statistics. I have found some strange things. http://mersenne.org/ips/topproducers.shtml repports 15898 Accounts. But if you coun them there are 20,000+ (yes I've counted them). It's something that's always puzzled me aswell. What I think is probably happenning is that it gives a place to every unique stage withing the process, ie one user with 2000 years worth of processing in 1st place would count as one, and 15 users all with 4.251 years worth of processing also counts as one. This is all just my own guess, so don't take my word for it. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 6:07pm up 69 days, 18:51, 2 users, load average: 1.22, 1.21, 1.08 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: LL question
Oops, I meant mod M(-1) which is M-1... Steve I don't believe that can ever happen, but if it did then the next step would just use mod(-1) which is p-1. The mod function never returns a negative number. Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Spike Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 1:47 AM Subject: Mersenne: LL question OK I understand how you start with 4, then square and subtract 2, then take the mod M, then repeat P times. If the remainder is 0, then M is prime. But what if the mod M comes out to 1 on one of the intermediate steps? Then 1^2 - 2 = -1 Then what? spike _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: ECM memory usage
I've been carrying out ECM for some time now on small exponents (under 40,000) and I'm curious about the amount of memory that it uses. According to readme.txt, the minimum memory required is 192 times the FFT size. For the exponents I'm looking at, I suspect that the FFT size is of order a kilobyte (BTW, can I look the FFT sizes and breakpoints up somewhere?) and so the minimum memory required is less than 1MB. However, I use mprime with the available memory set to 24MB and I've noticed that ECM uses almost all of this. I'd like to know why ECM is using so much memory - does it enable it to run faster? And how much memory would ECM 'like' to use if it was available? Regards, Steve _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: atomic clock
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 10:13:40PM -0800, John R Pierce wrote: which atomic clock would that be? The US Naval Observatory master clock? http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/time.html probably has contact info. my local server time is referenced to a time server that is a few stratums removed from USNO time, my time seems to stay within about 50mS of USNO at all times. Strange that this subject should be brought up here, I noticed something in my logs a day or so ago where my machine was 4-5 minutes different from a server that I was using, can't remember weather it was mail, news or mersenne. Every time I connect to the net (probably five to six times per day), my machine synchronises its self with a time server in Manchester, North West England. So I know that my machine isn't wrong. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 1:07pm up 53 days, 13:50, 2 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress
-Original Message- From: Jeramy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sunday, March 11, 2001 5:10 AM Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress Martijn wrote: *SNIP* Another solution that will work: Have as default a 7 day check in period at most and only a grace period of 7 days (not 60). Let the user set the check in period to a higher value only via the expert menu and after results have been checked in. That way abandoned exponents get released in 14 instead of 80 days. Kind regards, Martijn That idea sounds the least painful of all that have been discussed so far (to me at least), and since the discussion of what people want in a new version of Prime95 has also been floating arround... this sounds like a good suggestion to be submitted. It would not only take care of a problem, but would also not be so harsh to those who own slower machines. A win-win situation from those points of view. Great idea, Martijn!! Best wishes, Jeramy I agree this is a good idea, although the 7-day grace period may be a little drastic. But even reducing that just from 60 to 30 days (along with a 7-day default check in) would release abandoned exponents in 37 days instead of 88. This would recycle them more than twice as fast, greatly enhancing the odds of someone eventually getting the assignment who will actually finish it. And I don't believe it would be necessary to put the default changes in the expert menu; most people seem to not bother changing the defaults anyway, and it is already impossible to change the defaults until after the first exponent is assigned (unless you start/set up the program while offline). As others have mentioned, the problem is NOT slow machines but rather abandoned exponents, which has nothing to do with machine speeds. This change would have no effect on those of us who have been regularly completing our work and reporting it in, regardless of whether or not we have slow machines. Regards, Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress
I said the idea to set the DEFAULTS lower was a good one. Anyone who is serious about the project could very easily change those defaults. I have several machines with dialup access which don't connect with the server for weeks at a time, but a 7-day default would not affect me in the least. I change the settings on each machine depending on its circumstances; I have some set for 39 days. (Even a 1-day default wouldn't bother those machines, but I did say I thought 7 days might be a little drastic.) The people who abandon exponents are the ones who would not bother changing the defaults, hence returning them sooner. Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Brian J. Beesley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sunday, March 11, 2001 2:44 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress On 11 Mar 2001, at 7:55, Steve wrote: Another solution that will work: Have as default a 7 day check in period at most and only a grace period of 7 days (not 60). Let the user set the check in period to a higher value only via the expert menu and after results have been checked in. That way abandoned exponents get released in 14 instead of 80 days. That idea sounds the least painful of all that have been discussed so far (to me at least), and since the discussion of what people want in a new version of Prime95 has also been floating arround... this sounds like a good suggestion to be submitted. It would not only take care of a problem, but would also not be so harsh to those who own slower machines. A win-win situation from those points of view. Great idea, Martijn!! I agree this is a good idea, although the 7-day grace period may be a little drastic. But even reducing that just from 60 to 30 days (along with a 7-day default check in) would release abandoned exponents in 37 days instead of 88. This would recycle them more than twice as fast, greatly enhancing the odds of someone eventually getting the assignment who will actually finish it. The downside is that there would probably be a great increase in the number of assignments which are still running but don't complete before the expiry date. Clearly there is a balance to be struck somewhere, but 7 days seems to me to be _ludicrously_ short. In fact, as assignments take progressively longer to run, the "grace period" should be extending, rather than contracting. We should also bear in mind the very valuable contributions made by those people who do not have permanent (or near-permanent) network connections, and those people who are using clients without the PrimeNet communication protocol. Requirement to check in frequently is off-putting to these people. (Some would put it a lot stronger than that!) I don't think we want to risk driving these people out of the project. As others have mentioned, the problem is NOT slow machines but rather abandoned exponents, which has nothing to do with machine speeds. I fail to see how reducing the check-in interval would have any impact on the "problem". Those people who are checking in every 28 days aren't running into the 60-day expiry deadline. The 60 day expiry value is a server parameter, not a client parameter. In any case, as I explained above, I think that a drastic reduction in the value would be dangerous. Might I suggest a couple of alternative approaches. Both of these would require the identification of exponents which are "seriously lagging" - perhaps the 100 smallest outstanding LL and the 100 smallest outstanding DC assignments. (1) Removing these assignments from PrimeNet and managing them seperately. Anyone who is prepared to make special arrangements to acquire these assignments is unlikely to default by reason of lack of commitment. (2) Alternatively, awarding double PrimeNet CPU time credit for the completion of these assignments. The downside to this is that, as well as requiring changes to the server software, recycled "small" exponents would have to be released at random times of the day, to prevent them being systematically "grabbed" by a few users. Regards Brian Beesley _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: numbering the messages
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 12:08:09PM +0100, Robert van der Peijl wrote: We can't all share the same opinion :-) But I'll ask you this: how many Mersenne list messages have you missed since you joined the list? Don't know. Respectfully, you probably don't know. Would you want to miss, say, a posting by George Woltman, and not know about it? Missed many before I joined the list and the world kept on turning. It's common practice in the printed world to consecutively number the publications. Besides, I don't think it's that difficult to add a message counter. (Could you give me a good reason why the server shouldn't number the messages?) Well there isn't a good reason why not, and there is already a counter of sorts in the Message ID in the header, but it's not very human readable. Surely the list management software keeps a count of how many posts have been sent out to the group, it's just a case of reading/writing that digit into a header line. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 3:10pm up 36 days, 16:51, 2 users, load average: 1.16, 1.14, 1.06 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: numbering the messages
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 03:23:04PM -0500, Joshua Zelinsky wrote: Robert van der Peijl wrote: How useful/practical/difficult would it be to have the messages numbered automagically? If its not too much trouble, then automatic numbering would be pretty helpful. But I'm not sure many people would pay attention to it. I think that the intention is for it to be server side and included in the X-Headers eg: From: Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mersenne-Count for 2001 is message 229 The first line in the example is one that my machine puts in the header of the message, and the second line is a line that is put there by the server that manages the list. It'd make more sence if the number didn't go back to zero each year, that way you could do without the date in that part of the header, so it could become just: X-Mersenne-Count 229 But having said all of that I don't really think there's much point in doing this. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 1:39am up 36 days, 3:20, 2 users, load average: 1.58, 1.32, 1.14 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: PrimeStats, Perl script for the PrimeNet Top Producers Table
Hi Primepickers PrimeStats is a perl script that interogates the top producers table at: http://mersenne.org/ips/topproducers.shtml, after you've saved it to disk, it will give you a report on participants as specified by yourself in a seperate data file. The script will also give you a detailed report of the future prospects of one user ID that you supply to the script via the command line, this detailed report tells you how many people are in front of the user but going slower and how many people behind but going faster and gives you estimates of when the user will catch the pack in front and when the chasing pack will catch up etc. The script is available here: http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/linstuff.html And here is a sample report that finds current details for 10 users and gives a detailed report for one of them (me): Run Date: Thu 15 Feb 2001 Participants counted: 20,018 Extra details for user ID: sjlen Position User Name CPU YearsExponentsCPU P90 Tested Hrs Per Day 1264 S18743 8.921 16225.16 3056 felipel 3.667 8 49.83 3171 sjlen3.512 7 66.59 3496 mbandsmer3.050 19 24.85 4021 Pse 2.488 5 45.91 5394 Lalo11.549 18 12.62 5981 S16318 1.319 3 28.17 6773 mage21 1.010 3 17.49 7411 S17376 0.838 2 19.11 7434 Paradoks 0.833 7 6.84 3171 sjlen3.512 7 66.59 712 people are faster than you but behind you, at an average speed of 115.27 CPU hours per day they are approximately 1.75 years behind you. You will be in the center of the chasing pack in something like 312.84 days. 825 people are slower than you but in front of you, at an average speed of51.04 CPU hours per day they are approximately 1.37 years in front of you. You should be in the middle of the pack that you are chasing in something like 763.26 days. Any comments or suggestetions for improvements or error reports are welcome. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 3:39pm up 13 days, 17:18, 3 users, load average: 1.22, 1.18, 1.18 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: PrimeStats, Perl script for the PrimeNet Top Producers Table
My apologies and thanks to Andy for pointing out that one of the files was corrupted in the tarfile. I've fixed it now. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 6:29pm up 13 days, 20:08, 2 users, load average: 1.06, 1.06, 1.05 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: [screen saver]
Levi, does that GPhotoShow allow someone to use their own pictures? That's exactly what I was talking about. If so please let me know where I can get it. Some of you seem to misunderstand what I am getting at. I'm sure most serious contributors don't want a screensaver (I detest them), but in a situation where a friend or co-worker lets you install Prime95 on their PC but just HAS to have one (especially a really slow one), I would like to give them an option which: #1 - is Prime95 friendly and #2 - is easy to convince them to use. The "personal photo slide show" fits both of those criteria wonderfully. I know there are a lot of freeware screensavers available, and I know a lot of them don't hog cpu cycles too badly, but if this is the best one for both reasons above then we should make it available to those who can use it. I am losing literally hundreds of P90 hours a day to screensavers but I can't tell my friends not to run them because they'll just tell me to remove Prime95 from their PC and that's even worse! You should all know by now that there are a lot of people running Prime95 who couldn't care less about it, but will let it run if someone asks. OK so I'm anal-retentive about optimization. Sorry :-) Steve -Original Message- From: Levi Broderick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:45 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: [screen saver] There's a rather good freeware screen saver written by Gianpaolo Bottin called GPhotoShow. It's just a slide show with transitions and provides a *lot* of free CPU time in between the pictures -- I run it along with Prime95 on this computer (450 pII) and there is no noticeable slowdown in either program on any priority setting. This could suffice unless a person wanted a GIMPS display integrated into the screen saver, though I'm not sure at all what there would be to display. Just throwing this out to the list. :) ~ Levi http://www.bottin.com/gpshow.htm - Original Message ----- From: "Steve" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:38 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: idea for a new prime95 version Excellent idea, Russ. I was discussing with Like Welsh the problem of people attached to their killer screensavers, and as he pointed out: "But maybe they'd watch pic of their kids/dog/vacation instead? The *particular* screensaver I was thinking of was the Photo Slide Show variety. Slap an image on the screen, wait 15 seconds, fade out, display another. Lots of free CPU time between pics." Certainly it won't work for everybody, but I'm sure there would be a lot of takers. Now, anybody know how to write such a thing? Could be released with the prime95/NT software or as a seperate item to be downloaded from the same site. Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: idea for a new prime95 version
Excellent idea, Russ. I was discussing with Like Welsh the problem of people attached to their killer screensavers, and as he pointed out: "But maybe they'd watch pic of their kids/dog/vacation instead? The *particular* screensaver I was thinking of was the Photo Slide Show variety. Slap an image on the screen, wait 15 seconds, fade out, display another. Lots of free CPU time between pics." Certainly it won't work for everybody, but I'm sure there would be a lot of takers. Now, anybody know how to write such a thing? Could be released with the prime95/NT software or as a seperate item to be downloaded from the same site. Steve Harris -Original Message- From: Russel Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, February 05, 2001 5:19 PM Subject: Mersenne: Re: idea for a new prime95 version Joshua Zelinsky wrote: directory of picture files and Prime would pick one to display Unfortunately, the people who care enough about their screensavers to make them Prime95 non-friendly are probably not going to be willing to settle for a few still shots. The cat idea still sounds really good. Maybe, but with the increasing popularity of digital camers it would allow people to build a 'personal' screen saver with their own pictures. Cheers... Russ _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Re: screensavers
Could I respectfully point out that the windoze screensavers run at priority 4. If you raise Prime95/NTPrime's priority to 4, you will split CPU time more or less evenly between the screensaver and the Mersenne client. In fact there should be a bit more going our way than the screensaver does; the screensaver does voluntarily relinquish the CPU occasionally - otherwise a client running at priority 1 would get nothing. A while back I set the priority for Prime95 to 5 at night and left it at 1 during the day on several PCs. In some cases in helped tremendously but in other cases it had no effect whatsoever. I don't remember if that correlated with machine type, OS or screensaver type; it was quite some time ago. I may revisit that and look for a pattern. I do remember one in particular, the "win95" screensaver running on a pentium pro with Win95 OS brought Prime95 almost to a dead stop, but changing the priorities at night slowed the screensaver so much you could barely see it move while Prime95 ran almost at optimum speed. I remember that one because it was the most successful implementation of the resetting of priorities. Others ranged from some effect to no effect. I believe the least successful were some screensavers which did not come with windows but were downloaded from elsewhere; but I am also sure there were some that came with the OS that were just as bad. Steve Harris _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: idea for a new prime95 version
"Alexander Kruppa" wrote: The screen-saver idea is important for another reason. I asked several coworkers and secretaries to let Prime95 (NTprime, actually) run on their PCs and they agreed, but they were less than happy when I asked them to change the pretty 3-d screen savers for something that lets NTprime have more cpu power. With the selection Microsoft offers right now, that means "Blank Screen" or "Marquee" - neither is extremely exciting to watch. Before long, most of them went back to the old screen savers and NTprime slowed down to a halt. "...slowed down to a halt" is no exaggeration. I've seen screensavers slow it down to more than 7 seconds per iteration at 800+ MHz. I have it running on some PCs where the user has the screensaver set to start after 5 minutes then sets the power management so the monitor turns off after 10 or 15 minutes... and what really bothers me is that the screensaver continues to run even with the monitor off. (Is there some way to prevent that which I don't know about?) One idiot even had her settings such that the screensaver didn't start until _after_ the monitor went off. There are so many screensavers available now that one can be found to match any personality, and I have found it impossible to get people to let go of one they really like. So I don't believe Brian's idea will do very much good; but then every little bit helps. Steve Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Results didn't go back to the server:
Recently my system failed to return a result back to the server, on my account it shows as being overdue, but I have this message in my results.txt: M8200667 is not prime. There was an error writing to the spool file and then it said (in the log file) that it would try to reconnect in 60 minutes, so I stopped mprime and started it again hoping that it would send the results, but it just got more work to do (I have moved house and didn't have net access for 3 weeks so ran out of work). Any suggestions or help greatly received. -- Cheers Steve email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps. web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/ or http://start.at/zero-pps 2:11pm up 13 days, 36 min, 2 users, load average: 1.02, 1.01, 1.00 _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: P-1 Credit
I've found 2 factors so far during P-1 testing and received 0.001 years (about 8 or 9 hours) credit for each. Not much consolation as it 'cost' upwards of 100 P90 hours each to find them, but it beats getting no credit for spending the same amount of time not finding any. Steve "binarydigits" Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Terry S. Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 07, 2000 1:46 AM Subject: Mersenne: P-1 Credit Does anyone have any skinny on when we will start getting credit for 1. doing P-1 testing? 2. finding a factor during P-1 testing? Terry Terry S. Arnold 2975 B Street San Diego, CA 92102 USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] (619) 235-8181 (voice) (619) 235-0016 (fax) _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.exu.ilstu.edu/mersenne/faq-mers.txt _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.exu.ilstu.edu/mersenne/faq-mers.txt
Fw: Mersenne: The Ultimate Factoring Laptop, Boltzmasnn's Headstone, And Getting It All Done By The Next Mersennium
That thing will do about 10^32 P90cpu-years per SECOND (ball-park estimate). Certainly could be useful! Steve 'binarydigits' Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: xqrpa [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]Date: Friday, September 01, 2000 12:56 AMSubject: Mersenne: The Ultimate Factoring Laptop, Boltzmasnn's Headstone, And Getting It All Done By The Next Mersennium Have we got number-cruncher to look forward to! For the Millennial Meanest Machine, see: http://www.newscientist.com/features/features.jsp?id=ns225415 Best Wishes, Stefanovic
Re: Mersenne: Celerons
FYI, Jan 5 saw the launch of the 400MHz Celeron both in the Slot One (SEPP) and PPGA Pin Grid Array Versions (sorta like socket 7 but not). Although the celeron has its 'own' chipset - the EX, all the Celerons that we have built have used a BX motherboard. All decent BX motherboards support the Celeron in Slot One versions. The PPGA motherboard uses a ZX chipset if I remember rightly. How this compares to the BX as far as performance is not aparent at this time. I have several friends who are using Slot One Celerons for heavy gaming (Quake, Unreal etc) and I have to say the 333 I saw (actually built) had FPS rates comparable with a P2 +/- a few %. The 300s and 333s can be overclocked simply by upping the bus speed and it is VERY common to see 300s running at 450. The 333 requires a little more cooling to run at 500. I would steer clear of the old cacheless 266. I think It was the first Intel CPU EVER to have an IComp2.0 rating LOWER than its clock speed and I read several web reviews comparing it to a lowly 200 P55C. If anyone would like us to build a GIMPS cruncher, let me know. Steve Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.pcavenue.com 1) Does anyone know the preformance of a 266 Celeron, VS a 266 MMX P1 vs a 266 P2 The Celeron 266 [and all slower, and Celeron 300's that aren't 300A] have NO level 2 cache, so I suspect would get severely NAILED on Mersenne performance. The Celeron 300A and all 333 and above have 128K of level 2 cache thats full core speed, so perform quite comparably to the similar clock speed Pentium-II systems (which have 512k of level 2 cache which is 1/2 the core speed). retail Celeron systems however often use the severely deficient 440EX chipset instead of the 440BX, this can impact performance (plus they have very few expansion slots). 2) I am buying a new PC, does the Celeron hurt preformance so badly to not be effective? If you get a celery 300A on a decent 440BX motherboard, not at all. Performance is excellent. In fact, if you populate said 440BX with 100MHz capable PC100 SDRAM, there's a very good chance you can get it working reliably at speeds upwards of 450MHz. The various system wide benchmarks I've seen floating around the net indicate this combination will run just as fast as a pentium-II at the same clockspeed. -jrp
Mersenne: Status Reports
The status reports are a great way of keeping track of each machine's work. Currently the reports are arranged in exponent order. I think it would be preferable, at least by the people with more than 10 PCs to arrange the list by machine 'name'. My second choice would be 'days to go' with the shortest time period at the top. Can the cgi for this be done easily? Otherwise I guess I found another use for Excel. Thanks Steve Gardner Test Point Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] Browse 83000 Computer Products At www.pcavenue.com
Mersenne: More Newbie Questions.
Just a couple more I promise. OK my P90 hours are averaged based on actual work done, not work under way, correct? Some of my PCs were initially allocated large exponents 500 and therefore will not be reporting in for some time - the same machines have never checked in. Is this why my count is lower than when I calculate it? Secondly, I have some employees that love their screen savers. By adding the Priority line in prime.ini I plan to increase the productivity of the machine. What should the priority be set atI think screen savers are a 4 or 5 right? Will this cause the screen saver never to activate? More importantly will that slow down my employees productivity due to normal apps running slower? Third, does anyone have good evidence of the prime95 performance increase by going from 128 to 256Mb. Before I shut down our corporate server I would like to know if it's worth it. Thanks guys (and gals?). Steve Gardner Test Point Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] Browse 83000 Computer Products At www.pcavenue.com Participant In The Great Internet Mersenne Prime Number Search at www.mersenne.org
Mersenne: Newbie Questions
If this is documented somewhere forgive me. I have looked. In the individual account status report, it is not obvious to me how the P90 CPU hrs/day is calculated. I have calculated that I should have about 400 but my report shows 111. All machines are running at full tilt with no screen savers. Some of my machines are still on their first assignment. Does a PC with a long task check in every so often or does it wait until the end of the task? Is this why my count is low? Why when my setup has 5 days work indicated does my machine get a month long task. Just wondering. I'll probably have more questions Steve Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out 84000 computer products at www.pcavenue.com
Re: Mersenne: interesting theorem
Try http://www.utm.edu/research/primes/notes/conjectures/ for a list of interesting conjectures including this one. Steve Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out 84000 computer products at www.pcavenue.com -Original Message- From: Aaron Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 9:11 PM Subject: Mersenne: interesting theorem I ran across an interesting statement on the top of a math paper that I was helping my sister with. It said that every even number greater than 4 is the sum of two primes. I am curious if this has been proven and if anyone knows where I could find more info about this. Thanks. -- Visit my new and improved home page at http://www.fireantproductions.com/cannona ICQ #: 22773363
