VS: Mersenne: An officially sanctioned poach....
Fra: George Woltman Sendt: ma 27-01-2003 21:29 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Emne: Mersenne: An officially sanctioned poach It's been quite awhile since I've done a release of exponents that seem to be stuck - probably over a year. I've identified 185 exponents that have had NO progress reported and are either: a) Below 12,000,000 and been assigned for 200 days or more, or b) Between 12 and 20 million and been assigned for 300 days or more Does anyone see any problems with releasing these exponents back into the pool? Hi George! I don't really understand the question. If these 185 assignments have made NO progress in a year why didn't they expire in about 60 days automaticly? I've seen this expiring happen to some of my machines - no problem - 6n days of inactivity and they dies at my account. Do you by NO progress mean close to NO progress? I would like to have an email informing me about a short period of time to get that machine up and running again. I don't have any reason for postponing any milestone, so my answer could as well be: I know that machine died after many years of work so please expire all the work assigned to machine: xyzxyzxx. With approx. 70 machines and only me to support them I would just like to be warned. br tsc and let us soon find another gem! _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: SV: SV: SV: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking?
Hallo Mary! Ups, I don't suspect you. Maybe the method should be more like: Look at the cleared exponent report to find accounts only or overwhelming returning 66-bits factors. But this might still unwantedly catch you as those factors you find will be in this area. Then one will have to do some TF double checking work of the factors given to the account (can be seen at the assigned tests report). And then again you have to be sure the account also finished it's work on that TF. So as I said it is to complex, to time consuming and not exactly a job for me, as I won't be the GIMPS police. And I very well understand your view TF's starting from eg. 64 bits also have to be done some day. br tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Mary K. Conner Sendt: ti 26-11-2002 00:10 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Emne: Re: SV: SV: SV: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking? At 11:04 PM 11/25/02 +0100, =?utf-8?Q?Torben_Schl=C3=BCntz?= wrote: No, and I am not the GIMPS police. It would offcourse be quite easy simply to check all accounts having done 5+ years TF and having more than 0,6 years pr. foundfactor. On the other hand some accounts could be very old and back in those days a factor could have been found in less effort than now a days appr. 0,5 y/ff. NetForce and Challenge seems to be good candidates for accounts with a very low effort pr. ff. Well, you'd nail me. I do expired exponents for the most part, which makes it much less likely that I will find a factor because almost all of those expired exponents have already been done part way, and if there had been a factor in the parts already done, they wouldn't have expired. So I have 8.783 P90 years in factoring, and only 6 factors found. Unless you count the pre-factoring work I turn in manually to George. Lots of factors found there for much less CPU expended. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: SV: SV: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking?
-Oprindelig meddelelse- From: Brian J. Beesley Sendt: lø 23-11-2002 13:23 This is not a particularly effective cheat; you still end up having to do significantly more than half of the computational work. Is there any evidence that this may be happening? No, and I am not the GIMPS police. It would offcourse be quite easy simply to check all accounts having done 5+ years TF and having more than 0,6 years pr. foundfactor. On the other hand some accounts could be very old and back in those days a factor could have been found in less effort than now a days appr. 0,5 y/ff. NetForce and Challenge seems to be good candidates for accounts with a very low effort pr. ff. Does it make sense to impose a penalty clause i.e. if someone subsequently finds a factor in a range you claim to have sieved, you lose 10 times the credit you got for the assignment? N.B. There will be _occasional_ instances where an honest user misses a factor, possibly due to a program bug, possibly due to a hardware glitch. I'd rather not like the penalty/ punishment. A reward equal to the full effort of doing the TF would be much better - and under those circumstances no one would try to cheat because a factor found at eg. 63 bits would reward very well. The exponents above 79.300.000 are still candidates, though George has chosen to limit his program to this size and I think with very good reason. Hmm. As it happens, one of my systems has just completed a double-check on exponent 67108763. This took just over a year on an Athlon XP1700 (well, actually it was started on a T'bird 1200). The fastest P4 system available today could have completed the run in ~3 months. The point is that running LL tests on exponents up to ~80 million is easily within the range of current hardware. Yes, but that kind of hardware was not at the market in 1995. But regarding Moores law George should have predicted the P4 and SSE2? Personally I feel it is not sensible to expend much effort on extremely large exponents whilst there is so much work remaining to do on smaller ones. I justify running the DC on 67108763 as part of the QA effort. Sure. Let's get a new prime and let us have it fast. BTW, the list of found factors contains 2.500.000+ but the top producers list only contains 30.000- of these. GIMPS must be responsible for far more than only 30.000 factors. Any explanation for that? Well, there are a lot of factors which can be found by algebraic methods rather than by direct computation: e.g. if p+1 is evenly divisible by 4, and p and 2p+1 are both prime, then 2^p-1 is divisible by 2p+1. Evenly? What about 11, 83, 131 and 251 giving: 3,21,33 and 63. Are these just plain luck or does it exist one p+1 / 4 is not even and the factor 2p+1 does not fit? Have a nice day tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: SV: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking?
Which remind me, to avoid the cheat possible, the award for finding a factor should be set somehow bigger than only the nearest 6x bits. Give a factor something like the full value of TFing it to 66 bit! IMHO the TF with a factor found should be equal to an LL; but I have already discussed this with George and he is afraid only factoring would be done if the award is that high. That, and you get some rather ridiculous consequences if you do that. Sorry Nathan. It is my fault you read the IMHO paragraph in a wrong way. I meant I had that point of view UNTIL I discussed it.. As George argue: Nobody would do LL if a succesful TF was rewarded the same - he is truly right. My goal is to get the succesful TF rewarded a bit higher. As it is now someone might skip the 57-65 range and only do the 66-bit part, thus missing factors and get fully rewarded for only doing half the work. When George originally created the list of candidate exponents, he eliminated tens of millions of composite exponents, and an infinite number of negative exponents, non-integer exponents, imaginary exponents, and prime exponents above the range of the program. Composite exponents was removed long before the project. Lucas must have known the exponent needed to be prime. I believe a Mersenne number has to have an exponent which is a positive integer?! The exponents above 79.300.000 are still candidates, though George has chosen to limit his program to this size and I think with very good reason. BTW, the list of found factors contains 2.500.000+ but the top producers list only contains 30.000- of these. GIMPS must be responsible for far more than only 30.000 factors. Any explanation for that? br tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking?
These days you get an assignment say 21.1xx.xxx and it will give you approximately 0.057 P90/y. Team_prime_rib has a calculator for the exact value you will get for any number you TrialFactor and what you get if you really find a factor. Visit www.teamprimerib.com to get the p90.exe program. Which remind me, to avoid the cheat possible, the award for finding a factor should be set somehow bigger than only the nearest 6x bits. Give a factor something like the full value of TFing it to 66 bit! IMHO the TF with a factor found should be equal to an LL; but I have already discussed this with George and he is afraid only factoring would be done if the award is that high. br tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Russel Brooks Sendt: to 21-11-2002 23:13 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Emne: Re: Mersenne: Drifting UP(!) in Top Producers ranking? Mary K. Conner wrote: You get credit for your work doing factoring even if you're not finding factors. Has this changed? When I joined GIMPS a couple of years ago I though Factoring only counted when a factor was found. Cheers... Russ DIGITAL FREEDOM! -- http://www.eff.org/ _ 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: Please fix the primenet error 2250 I've had since 02.58 UTC
_ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: TF - an easy way to cheat
That's not what Nathan meant, and it would have the opposite effect of what Torban wants, which is to guarantee that he never LLs an exponent which has not had a full factorisation effort. Your are truly right, Daran. But my name is Torben. And not Torban. Torben means the the bones of the great god THOR. This god is responsible for the ligthning. And is next to the superior god ODIN. :-) One advantage of this, from Torban's POV, is that his chance of finding a factor through P-1 is *increased* if it has not been properly TFed. What is POV? br tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: TF - an easy way to cheat
Anyone receiving a TF task could edit the worktodo.ini from Factor=20.abc.def,59 to Factor=20.abc.def,65 He would receive approx. twice the credit the effort is worth. Ofcourse nobody would do this, as we are all volunteers! Or could somebody some day be tempted to raise his rank using this method? Does GIMPS hold some log for TF's done by which account? If so could this log please be open? Would this cheat be trapped later by P-1 or does P-1 trust earlier work so factors below say 67-bits are not considered? The above questions are _not_ asked because I intend to use the method. :-/ I think it would miscredit GIMPS as we trust the results of GIMPS. And I would be disappointed if I learned that an LL I did could have been solved far earlier - and using less effort. br tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: http://mersenne.org/primenet/ - the world test status
1800 180921 333 1810 181920 347 1820 182922 364 2 1830 1839 Refer to the PrimeNet statistics charts http://mersenne.org/ips/stats.html for more information. ends somehow interrupted. br tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: http://mersenne.org/primenet/ - the world test status
After deleting the internet cache and doing it again 12:15 (local time) the result stay the same. br tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Untermeyer, Gary Sendt: on 18-09-2002 22:28 Til: Torben Schlüntz Cc: Emne: RE: Mersenne: http://mersenne.org/primenet/ - the world test status This often happens if you try to view the report right after the hour, say at 3:01 or so. Maybe the file never got completely uploaded to the net. I'd check it again at 30 minutes past the hour and see if the next hourly update was more successful -Original Message- From: Torben Schlüntz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 2:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mersenne: http://mersenne.org/primenet/ - the world test status 1800 180921 333 1810 181920 347 1820 182922 364 2 1830 1839 Refer to the PrimeNet statistics charts http://mersenne.org/ips/stats.html for more information. ends somehow interrupted. br tsc _ 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: Some problem about reporting a TF
I lost a TF I know my machine Torbenskværn was ready to report the TF of M19.875.7* today. It now has started M19.917.917. It never wrote the prime.log and it never was credited upon my account, and I don't have prime.spl for that result. What happened? Don't tell me the æ matters. I have results for that machine during the past 2,5 years - no problems. Of course I can back up to immediately before, I guess at 85% of 66 bit; and I will. This starts an another discussion: What happens to that amount of work done to a factor that I some time gets after someone else has brought it from 58 bits up to 64 or 65 where I get the assignment? It seems to me this is just forgotten work. Why don't we donate it to the challenge account? have a very niceday tsc PS.: Though I don't like TeamPrimeRib because they are so fast I can't catch up, I'm still amazed of their site. Go visit http://www.teamprimerib.com. The graphs are wonderful! And so the 7-days producers and the 30-days producers lists. Very good work, guys! Besides you smatch me out by a factor of at least 11. :-( _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Now able to communicate with server.
Tnx, George (and probably numerious people activated on this error 29). I've started upgrading and found a very nice CPU report in 22.8. What I always wanted to know is now right before my eyes: Pentium III, MMX, SSE etc. Also doc's are very enjoyable reading, 10% better here and 25% better there; all it sums up to something. I'm pretty sure all my machines with PII+ CPU now are vers. 22.8 running. I also had a factoring result from a machine in Finland so vers. 21.4.1 now communicate with the server. So yesterday complaining - today enjoying! Had 0.6+ years more of TF, an LL, a P-1, and 2 or 3 factors running in this day. I'm a happy user again of the prime95.exe program. br. tsc winmail.dat
SV: Mersenne: Unable to communicate with server.
What is going on? Yes, it is true I get this error message 29. Then for a few hours yesterday everything seemed to work well again and a had 2 machines updating results. Do I have to update to 22.8 when I'm mostly do trial factoring? I would rather not because I have around 50 machines on 3 locations in Denmark and added to that a few machines in Norway, Sweden and Finland. I can't update all these machines within the 60 days check in limit. And right now some of them already are lacking factors to work with. Can't we just have the server back to normal and continue our work. And then later and planned upgrade to some version? br tsc PS.: Does anyone know what happened to http://www.teamprimerib.com/rr1/topover.htm it has either been updated for days? Where can we download version 22.8? The webpage at http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm shows only version 21.4, from 22 Sep 2001 (for Windows). Thanks --Andy The freesoft.htm page now has a link to version 22. I've hastily added it thanks to this error 29 mess. Not surprisingly, my email load has gone up with all the version 21 Windows clients raising an error. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers winmail.dat
SV: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors
reaction to another mail about this This happens all the time in different shapes so I would expect some happy day we found a crosslinked factor. we will never find a factor who is a factor of Mx and also of My simply because every factor give only one count with my algoritm and is factor of one or zero mersenne numbers for example the factor 7 is a factor of 2^3-1 and 2^6-1 and 2^9-1 and 2^12-1 etc.. but only 2^3-1 of a mersenne number so a factor can never be factor of Mx and My both Yep, you're so truly right. After I used the reverse factoring algorithm a bit harder it is not difficult to see that when you arrive at 1 (and started at 1) the same pattern will repeat (after all we are multiplying by 2 and mod'ing the same value repeatedly from 1). Some how it is no longer a mystery that 13421 is a factor of any 2k*61 (2684 in this case) as 61 is the highest prime in the factorized values of 13420 (factors: 2*2*5*11*61). Again: 2*5*11 is only the k. And also I have found reverse factoring will find it self as a value for Mprimes, 31 is a factor of M5 and so is 127 a factor of M7, and most often just it self -1 for very uinteresting values, like 107 divides M106. :-( On the other hand this insight could make me/us construct interesting and primetested values beyond the scope of Mprime (eg. max 66 bits for numbers below 21.600.000) but in the scope of GIMPS (any prime apx.72.300.000). At least I got one machine for which mprime has no relevance as some uncontrolled reboots happens and I would like a sleep to occur every 10 seconds. Then I can write my own reverse facoring for this machine - it is on anyway for other purposes. Happy hunting tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: SV: apologies
I have forgiven you long ago! :-) What a temper and black mood. :-( Yes I suppose we will find others. The list you show is quite short (12), we know 39 mersennes, have we investigated them all? br tsc Given a Mersenne prime exponent, what is the smallest Mersenne number, composite or prime, which the exponent divides? p: n 2 (none) 3: 2 5: 4 7: 3 13: 12 17: 8 19: 18 31: 5 61: 60 89: 11 107: 106 127: 7 Note that the smallest Mersenne exponent n is prime only for the four Mersenne primes which are also Mersenne exponents (3, 7, 31, and 127) and 89. Do you suppose there are any other examples? Phil Moore _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
VS: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Torben Schlüntz
Sendt: lø 23-03-2002 02:54
Til: Bruce Leenstra
Cc:
Emne: SV: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors
Bruce Leenstra wrote:
You'll notice that 'tempvalue == 1' is only the exit condition
for the loop above. This is because every prime is a factor of some
mersenne number M(v) { plus the set of M(kv), which are all composite
}. Of course GIMPS is only interested in those where v is prime. My
program will abort the loop and prompt me if count (q-1)/2, indicating
q isn't a factor of any M(v). It hasn't happened yet.
Yes I got it now, and with the same
multiply by 2 - take modulus of factor - check for 1 - check for
(q-1)/2 - repeat
just proved a low factor for M641 as well as the usual M29, 43
etc. :-)
And you're right - the algorithm tells - whenever a factor is
found, it will be factor again and again for other GIMPS uninteresting
composite M's, like 89 is a factor for M11 then M22 then M11*x. So there
is no SUPERfactor being a factor for several M's.
Last you say any prime will be a factor for some Mx, quite
interesting, and yes to pick one 641 is a factor of M64.
br tsc
_
Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: Factors aren't just factors
M89 is prime! M89 = 618.970.019.642.690.137.449.562.111 with no known factors. So it would be lovely if we could rule out any possible Mx if x had earlier been a factor for any other My. :-) But no. M11 proves this so nicely: M23 has factors, M89 none. I've started looking for some factors, where f is both factor of Mx and of My. The chance is there as Mx calls for factors of the form 2kx+1 and My calls for 2Ky+1. Let's have an example: 547 is candidate for M7 as for M13: 2*(3*13)*7+1 and 2*(7*3)*13+1 or better: 83 is candidate for M79 and for M6329 as 2*(6329)*79+1 and 2*(79)*6329+1 both equals 83. This happens all the time in different shapes so I would expect some happy day we found a crosslinked factor. happy hunting tsc 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. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: just some comments to improve our site
Daran wrote: Have we sent a newletter since finding M#39? No, no that I'm aware of. But we might have raised limit of numbers factorized by several 1000's. Or the highest number just being handed out by the primenet server has reasched some limit worthwhile mentioning. br tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: Factors
Thanks is a poor word, but anyway thanks to all. I will move on, though my first idea such like: 2kp+1 is a factor when k is 2^x is already dead at M37. :-( damned! I will find another proposal, prove it or disprove it, and continuing getting new ideas. It seems to me that this k (in 2kp+1) is never: 4,12,20,28,36,46,52,60,68,76,84 at least for less than M416.947. Am I again a fool for a pattern already proved? On the other site you can watch this: k=2, 1875 factors in above mentioned space up till M416.947 spanding 35144 primes: k=4, 0 k=6, 1132 k=8, 715 k=10, 465 k=12,0 k=14,233 k=16,351 k=32,138 ... k=64, 65 ... k=72,123 k=74,33 remark, the overall high values of k=2^x factors and remark the low value of eg. k=74. Also remember these factors where obtained by prime95 Advanced factors first of all looking for a low or maybe the lowest value for the factor. So my point here is chance of k=2^x for a factor is high, espcially when p95 has run to the end regarding 64-70 bits low facoring and not found a factor. Now am I wrong in this conclusion and should I drop the the project or is still a small amount of light passing through the halfopen doorway? br happy hunting tsc Try Will Edgingtons's page, http://www.garlic.com/~wedgingt/mersenne.html . Use used to keep a comprehensive archive of known Mersenne factors. I am not sure how up to date this files are, but it is a good starting point. I still keep the data, but have not had time to update the online copies for a while now for several reasons that have nothing to do with GIMPS or other Mersenne stuffs. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: just some comments to improve our site
Why is P-1 factoring not a single schedule task? like the LL and the Trail Factoring? Why is P1 factoring hooked upon the LL test? Why does P1 not have it's own life like the TF and the LL? I realy hated the P1 until now 21.4 fixed that. And I hated the CPU-clocks of earlier versions to, because I have no idea what so ever the clock beat of my computer is, but I can relate to time. Some people might have plenty of mem - outdoing my best a 512M - but some of the machines I (or maybe Primenet) have selected for P-1 have nothing more than 64 or 128M. We also need a a place for rapid starters. Some Gazelle view. Wow! Even though I've only done 0,323 P90 years I'm number 33 in this week I will certainly continue, because I will catch up with those guys having 79 years Hmmm, maybe in percentage of the week before. Also the newsletter should more often be sent. We make progress every day so why don't we tell GIMPS'ers what is happening? Even a small progress is a giant leap, like now all numbers below 4.900.000 has been doublechecked or All numbers below 16.000.000 has been trial factorized. Just my few words happy hunting tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Factors
I have downloaded the factor files suggested by GIMPS but it gives no meaning. How do I read the files *.cmp? And why is this not documented close to the source of the *.cmp files? I am also a bit disannoyed about numbers less than M751 that should be fully factorized seems unavaible, or am I looking the wrong places? Do you know a site which I don't? I'd also like to know about any number fully factorized, whatever size it might be, and whatever size the factor(s) might be. The next step for GIMPS is a faster factoring algorithm and the way to get that will be that someone - maybe a mathematician or some beer-drinking fool like me - finds the stones of immortality. :-) Besides I have the question: why does the advanced facor algortithm of prime95 somtimes find 2 factors? This happens eg. at M1289, has 108817410937 and 15856636079 as factors? Happy hunting tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: Preventing new assignments
You could fool the program by telling it to use dial-up connection at the test/primenet menuitem. Then it will never tell anything until you again tell it to use you internet connection. Then you have the peace to change without a new assignment (and a probably p-1 factoring - which you ofcourse won't becasuse you are using 21.4 of prime. :-) br tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Paradox Sendt: lø 12-01-2002 16:27 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Emne: Mersenne: Preventing new assignments In about 10 days, I've got 5 Pentium4 computers that will be submitting completed LL tests (for 10,000,000 digit numbers). I used to have dozens of smaller computers working on such LL tests for years, and so I have a collection of Prime95/mprime directories which have 60% to 80% completed LL tests in them. I'm going to want to make sure that the currently running mprime's on the P4s do not get new assignments, so that I can simply remove those copies of mprime and replace it with a copy from my collection. For now, I've set the Days of Work to 1. If I were to set days of work to 0, what would happen? How can I tell it to simply submit the results to primenet, disconnect, and then exit the program when it is done? Regards, David Meyer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) About half of my prime checking arsenal: http://www.pdox.net/primework.jpg _ 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
SV: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1 #912
No you wouldn't because they would like yourself go to do only factoring work, and as George said to me when I propose this a year ago: It would make the focus of GIMPS towards factoring and not like it is now on primenumber finding. We will (again in George-words) have to eliminate candidates by using a small amount of time in the factoring field; but only so much/less that we still have power to run LL-tests to really prove primes. Regards and happy hunting tsc A particularly sore point. If we maintained a top savers list whereby for every factor found you were credited with the time an LL test would have taken, then I and the other Lone Mersenne Hunters would pulverise these big university teams. 150,000 factors in the 60-69m range, at an average of 27.2 P-90 years each - h just over 4,000,000 years saved regards Gordon _ 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
SV: Mersenne: I have a RISC/6000 with AIX 3.1 installed
This might run anything; but I'm probably to stupid to manage to set up anything on it. :-/ Can anyone use this machine as is for any purpose related offcourse to primechruncing? If the system has a C compiler, you can certainly run LL tests using Glucas. No C compiler; not even man-pages. But some cute system called SMIT which can do quite many things. :-) Building Glucas is dead easy. If you don't have a C compiler, you can almost certainly install gcc, though this is more complicated and a lot more work than building Glucas. In any case you would probably find a R6000 AIX binary version of Glucas if you asked, or someone out there with a similar system who would build one for you. I go for both; Does any one has a glucas binary for RISC/6000 AIX? I don't know how fast the system might be, but there is plenty of work even for slower systems. I believe it to be 300 Mhz; And it was at least once some kind of a mainframe. BTW I got it for only $ 15! And _yes_ I got slow machines (an -486 80 mhz requering appr. 9 months to complete a 65 bit factoring). Best regards Torben Schlüntz _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: I have a RISC/6000 with AIX 3.1 installed
This might run anything; but I'm probably to stupid to manage to set up anything on it. :-/ Can anyone use this machine as is for any purpose related offcourse to primechruncing? br tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: Re: [Mersenne] celebrate
Nothing to see here in Denmark. It was cloudy. br tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Steinar H. Gunderson Sendt: sø 18-11-2001 21:09 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Emne: Mersenne: Re: [Mersenne] celebrate On Sun, Nov 18, 2001 at 01:09:18PM -0500, Jud McCranie wrote: I should have suggested this yesterday, but let's have a meteor shower to celebrate the probable discovery of a new Mersenne prime! Big, big disappointment here in Norway -- I was outside for about an hour during the maximum, _nothing_ to be seen. No clouds at all, perfectly clear, but not a single meteor. :-( Let's hope the prime verification goes better ;-) /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ _ 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: Now that you are eating on the westcoast
If - and of any worth - I would accept a database in almost any size at my network if it could help factoring faster. And anyway who am I to suggest this: Account ID LL P90* Exponents Fact.P90 Exponents P90 CPU CPU yrs LL Tested CPU yrs* w/ Factor hrs/day -- --- - - --- tsc 35.737 53 36.715 1031181.90 Team leader: Torben Schlüntz happy hunting tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: SV: Mersenne: Strange factor arrived though not calculating it
Yes I did check all prime.log and all results.txt. I would never have missed it if it had been mentioned in any of these files. You probably also did not notice that I have all results I have produced going to a special file called: Results.all (how creative I am :-) ), and this process is done automagicly by a script? br tsc OK. Did you look through the contents of prime.log on whichever system once had exponent 16871993? If the exponent was dropped because PrimeNet informed the system the job was already done, the evidence will be in there. If the system really did run that exponent, found the factor informed PrimeNet, the evidence will also be in there. Regards Brian Beesley _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: What will we do when anyone finds a number of 10 million+ digits which is prime?
What will we do when anyone finds a number of 10 million+ digits which is prime? Will everybody just leave the project because there is no prize to gain any longer? After the introduction of search for 10 million digits number this could leave the project with quite a big hole, say from M14.xxx.xxx and up till the exponent found. It will be kind of difficult to find new volunteers that will use time and electricity to fill the hole if nothing more than glory is won. Will there be an other prize? Will there be a new goal? We have the 4 or 5 biggest primes, are anyone stressing us by using another algorithm like the LL, have access to more CPU, working on a bulletproof method of generating new primes? br tsc _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: Strange factor arrived though not calculating it
It seems like I have had credit for one factor that I never did: M16871993 with factor: 2224518820603490479 I am the owner of this exponent as it is assigned to me. Yes! But I didn't work on it. If you're running v20 then P-1 will be done early - the current test will break off at the next multiple of 65536 iterations whilst the P-1 is run. :-) Thank you, Brian; but look at exponent: M16871993, these aren't handed out for LL test yet (as for as I know), this one is a trial factoring. Now maybe you think I don't control what is going on, but I think otherwise. To convince you that I know everything cooking I show you this script I can run anytime: Z:\primenet\explecho off MULTEM~1\RESULTS.TXTIteration 81 / 13124623 TERMIN~1\RESU0001.TXT Iteration 807 / 11944657 TERMIN~1\RESULTS.TXTIteration 185 / 11511061 TORBEN~1\RESULTS.TXTIteration 1054 / 12510737 APOLD\RESULTS.TXT Iteration 1040 / 11167979 Factoring:-- - HHV012\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M18056699 to 2^65 is 7.69% complete. HHV003\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17954653 to 2^65 is 16.38% complete. JANSTA\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17883379 to 2^65 is 20.01% complete. HHV005\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17790013 to 2^65 is 37.69% complete. HHV014\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M16645553 to 2^65 is 39.02% complete. LAGER2\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M16538857 to 2^65 is 48.15% complete. HHV007\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M18079057 to 2^65 is 42.39% complete. HHV001\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17556293 to 2^65 is 54.26% complete. HHV011\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17863829 to 2^65 is 51.76% complete. ZENTRA01\RESULTS.TXTFactoring M17694427 to 2^65 is 76.71% complete. ZENTRA01\RESULTS.TXTFactoring M17694427 to 2^65 is 77.65% complete. INTEGR~1\RESULTS.TXTFactoring M17785673 to 2^65 is 78.66% complete. HHV002\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M18054301 to 2^65 is 89.72% complete. HHV016\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M18012121 to 2^65 is 86.38% complete. HELLY\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17021969 to 2^65 is 93.43% complete. HHV009\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17950103 to 2^65 is 97.19% complete. 66-- - HHV006\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17960981 to 2^66 is 0.47% complete. --- HHV015\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17889829 to 2^66 is 14.30% complete. --- HHV008\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17950123 to 2^66 is 21.52% complete. --- --- --- --- --- HHV004\RESULTS.TXT Factoring M17919931 to 2^66 is 78.03% complete. --- --- logs-or-results-if-any:- - HHV013\RESULTS.TXT UID: tsc/hhv013, M17927929 no factor to 2^66, WW1: AC1D7755 HHV013\PRIME.LOGUID: tsc/hhv013, M17927929 no factor to 2^66, WW1: AC1D7755 Factors done: RESULTS.ALL 808 lines match Things done this month: RESULTS.ALL 5 lines match And here follows the directory listing for the machine in question: Directory of Z:\primenet\expl\helly2 29-08-1999 11:01 28.672 Rpcnet.dll 29-08-1999 11:01 61.440 Httpnet.dll 25-04-2000 14:331.212.928 phelly2.exe 27-09-2001 15:15 529 PRIME.INI 24-10-2001 23:04 DIR . 24-10-2001 23:04 DIR .. 24-10-2001 23:11 182 worktodo.ini 24-10-2001 23:12 633 prime.log 24-10-2001 23:12 256 LOCAL.INI 25-10-2001 00:03 79 results.txt 25-10-2001 00:04 32 pG481447 9 File(s) 1.304.751 bytes 2 Dir(s) 1.836.318.720 bytes free This directory sorted by date, shows that the last date I did anything on this was 25-10-2001. Here is the entry from the individual primenet report: 16871993 61 F 2224518820603490479 28-Oct-01 17:17 helly Notice the date, 28 oct. Finally the contents of the worktodo.ini from the same library: Factor=16481447,58 Factor=16481557,58 Factor=16833517,59 Factor=16871993,59 Factor=16871999,59 Factor=16872017,59 Factor=16872049,59 Factor=17432083,59 Factor=17432117,59 Please notice, that the exponent in question is located at position 4. So all the 3 tests before the 4.th should have been done. They haven't, it
Mersenne: Strange factor arrived though not calculating it
It seems like I have had credit for one factor that I never did: M16871993 with factor: 2224518820603490479 I am the owner of this exponent as it is assigned to me. Yes! But I didn't work on it. If I did it would have been 3rd in the worktodo.ini, and when it arrived I hadn't touch that since two days ago. I noticed this only because it added a factor. If I had just had the time added to my work I wouldn't have noticed. Too many numbers are running in. I suspect I have lost some time on the same account. What is going on? How could anyone else get a number that I had? happy hunting tsc 2*3*5*7*11*13*17*19*23*29*31-1 is prime _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: Strange factor arrived though not calculating it
True. I was a little to fast about that one. The number though looked promising. :-) tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Greg Hogan Sendt: fr 02-11-2001 00:10 Til: Torben Schlüntz Cc: Emne: RE: Mersenne: Strange factor arrived though not calculating it happy hunting tsc 2*3*5*7*11*13*17*19*23*29*31-1 is prime I am getting 200560490129 = 228737 * 876817. Greg Hogan _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: SV: Mersenne: number of processors participating
Ups, by help from Brian Beesley and a little work with the time= I have it working now. I think it was my old paranoia from a time when I was not running the servers alone - I wouldn't let anyone know that a program like prime95 was active. Now I don't care as I have nobody but users to face. Thanks to all. Happy hunting tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: George Woltman Sendt: ma 29-10-2001 22:47 Til: Torben Schlüntz Cc: Emne: Re: SV: Mersenne: number of processors participating Hi, At 10:01 PM 10/29/2001 +0100, you wrote: I would like to use the servers; but I haven't been able to persuade George to make a Quit function like quit_at: 06:00 to terminate the program when users arrives and optimum performance is needed Look in readme.txt for the Time= entry in prime.ini This feature can be used to make prime95 go dormant at a specified time. Hope that helps, George _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
SV: Mersenne: number of processors participating
I admit I'm not that good in telling primenet what computers I have and what throughput rate to expect. eg.: I made 14 accounts all using the same 150 Mhz machine, though I knew none or only few would be 150 Mhz. These accounts all run occassionally, eg. in company holiday around the clock, outside of holiday more random. Over time I have been wiser to use more power of those machines staying awake all night anyway. :-) I would like to use the servers; but I haven't been able to persuade George to make a Quit function like quit_at: 06:00 to terminate the program when users arrives and optimum performance is needed (with no question what so ever about serverperformance); And I don't wake up at 6 to turn prime95 or anything else off unless there is a severe error reported by users. Happy hunting tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Henk Stokhorst Sendt: ma 29-10-2001 19:30 Til: Alan Vidmar; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Emne: Re: Mersenne: number of processors participating Alan Vidmar wrote: I suggest that there be a switch added so that ppl can use Prime95 as a processor test but without ever getting real assignments,... This is a VERY good suggestion. However it has already been implemented in the latest version (v21). That version contains more improvements so I wondered if it wouldn't be a good idea to inform users through the occasional newsletter. Particulary because it gives a 10% improvement for Pentium I, II and III users and it skips P-1 if it has been done. YotN, Henk Stokhorst. PS those abandoned assignments do't slow down the project. They just scatter the work over a larger range. _ 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
SV: SV: Mersenne: number of processors participating
Yep! But the time entry only allows the program to sleep (still eating all CPU cycles even when running at zero priority). Take any NT 4.0 or W2K machine and you will see the system idle time doesn't add seconds while Prime95 still eats them (and doing nothing). For my servers to become prime95's I need to be sure they only run what I have planned at anytime. I can start Prime95 scheduled. I don't mind! But the users should never have one chance of claiming servers aren't available or even running slow. I know you are certain and I know you gotta be damn good at this (very far beyond anything I will ever manage); but still any doubt will become my users advantage. Make the sleepy nights for my servers glorius. I make them start prime95 by a schedule and You make prime95 die by harikiri - and I decide when everything happens. :-) Tnx in advance. Still happy hunting tsc -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: George Woltman Sendt: ma 29-10-2001 22:47 Til: Torben Schlüntz Cc: Emne: Re: SV: Mersenne: number of processors participating Hi, At 10:01 PM 10/29/2001 +0100, you wrote: I would like to use the servers; but I haven't been able to persuade George to make a Quit function like quit_at: 06:00 to terminate the program when users arrives and optimum performance is needed Look in readme.txt for the Time= entry in prime.ini This feature can be used to make prime95 go dormant at a specified time. Hope that helps, George _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
