Mersenne Digest Saturday, March 10 2001 Volume 01 : Number 825 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 07:34:23 +0100 From: Martijn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress Henk Stokhorst wrote: > L.S., > > Maybe it would be a good idea to have a special version of prime95 that > has an option to request exponents that have expired after having been > reserved for a long time without any progress being on the work for that > exponent. The server should issue those exponents only to people who > have that option. That version should only be available to people who > have fast (700 MHz or more) machines running most of the day. That would > help prevent exponents expiring multiple times. > > YotN, > > Henk Stokhorst Nope bad idea smaller exponent = smaller runtime = lower clock frequency so it would then be better to have them assigned to machines that are slow real pentiums for instance (It does really not matter if such an exponent is finished in 4 or 30 days. The multple expiering problem is an entirely fake one. It does not hinder progress, it only makes (relatively small) exponents unavailable for 90 days, in that time we work on other exponents and life goes on. Martijn Kruithof _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 08:29:35 +0100 From: "Robert van der Peijl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: expired exponents We might not need a special version of prime95. How about if the _PrimeNet server_ itself only issue expired exponents to "power"-users? If that is a real possibility, perhaps Scott Kurowski could look into that? Robert. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henk Stokhorst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 12:45 AM Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress L.S., Maybe it would be a good idea to have a special version of prime95 that has an option to request exponents that have expired after having been reserved for a long time without any progress being on the work for that exponent. The server should issue those exponents only to people who have that option. That version should only be available to people who have fast (700 MHz or more) machines running most of the day. That would help prevent exponents expiring multiple times. YotN, Henk Stokhorst _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 02:24:15 -0800 From: Scott Kurowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: RE: expired exponents Hi Robert, [Robert van der Peijl:] > We might not need a special version of prime95. > How about if the _PrimeNet server_ itself only issue expired > exponents to "power"-users? > If that is a real possibility, perhaps Scott Kurowski could > look into that? I would instead recommend a broader strategy that expires exponents based upon the assignment age (days run) and current iteration at null (not started), perhaps at 60 days age. Did someone already suggest that? This will have the system effect of generally causing machines that grab and hold excess exponents to lose smaller exponents to new or more productive machines, while making up for those losses by grabbing fewer, ever larger exponents. This would happen in addition to the current automatic expiration process. The risk that a machine actually started a long-held exponent before contacting the server to learn it had been reassigned is somewhat greater. The result would be slightly more frequent 'opportunistic' double-check passes as the machine forges along to complete the then-redundant test, probably after the reassignment machine finishes. Maybe that's a good thing. George Woltman manages the server's individual exponent and range assignments from time to time. If overriding a 'squatter' is important enough, he could do so manually. However, if server changes are necessary, we defer to him for those requirements. (If there are replies, please cc me directly since I receive only the Mersenne list digests.) regards, scott kurowski Entropia, Inc. San Diego, California P.S. if there are any GIMPS folks on this list nearby, I'll treat lunch or beers... I left Ernst and Luke in Silicon Valley. :-( _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:09:53 -0000 From: "Brian J. Beesley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress On 9 Mar 2001, at 0:45, Henk Stokhorst wrote: > Maybe it would be a good idea to have a special version of prime95 that > has an option to request exponents that have expired after having been > reserved for a long time without any progress being on the work for that > exponent. No need for this. Henk, I'll mail you privately explaining why. > The server should issue those exponents only to people who > have that option. Two problems here: (a) needs a server fix; with due respect I think there are other things which need fixing more urgently e.g. keeping proper tabs on P-1 so that work is not replicated wastefully. (b) reeks of elitism. Whilst I understand your motives, I think there are a lot of people who would object for that reason. > That would help prevent exponents expiring multiple times. Is that _really_ a problem? If anything it only points out a lack of commitment to the project amongst some of the contributors. Regards Brian Beesley _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 07:23:34 -0500 From: Dennis Pope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress Robert van der Peijl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 7 Mar 2001 03:11:22 +0100: >We would have to uglify (is that good English?) the user interface >however, to make the whole thing believable. In answer to your question, Alice didn't think so: `I only took the regular course,' said the Mock Turtle with a sigh. `What was that?' inquired Alice. `Reeling and Writhing, of course, to begin with,' the Mock Turtle replied; `and then the different branches of Arithmetic-- Ambition, Distraction, Uglification, and Derision.' `I never heard of "Uglification," Alice ventured to say. `What is it?' The Gryphon lifted up both its paws in surprise. `What! Never heard of uglifying!' it exclaimed. `You know what to beautify is, I suppose?' `Yes,' said Alice doubtfully: `it means--to--make--anything-- prettier.' `Well, then,' the Gryphon went on, `if you don't know what to uglify is, you ARE a simpleton.' from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll Lewis Carroll was a Professor of Mathematics (a rather dull one, if the stories are true) but this small book, written to entertain a little girl, is what has eternalized his name (not to put a damper on anyone's day). By the way... "Eternalized"... Is that good English? Best regards, Dennis Pope _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: 9 Mar 2001 10:07:59 -0500 From: "Robert Deininger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: RE: expired exponents On Fri, Mar 9, 2001 5:24 AM, Scott Kurowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I would instead recommend a broader strategy that expires exponents based >upon the assignment age (days run) and current iteration at null (not >started), perhaps at 60 days age. This is a bad idea, unless there is also a mechanism to report partial progress on manual check-out exponents. Currently, the server thinks there is no progress up until the moment the final result is submitted. Expiring an exponent based on "current iteration at null" would be very annoying if the work is actually almost complete. I've had double-checks checked in by "poachers" _long_ before they were due to expire. That's bad enough, but if the server starts making it official, there won't be much point checking work out at all. - --------------------------- Robert Deininger [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 10:12:43 -0500 From: Jeff Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress At 11:09 AM 3/9/01 +0000, you wrote: > > That would help prevent exponents expiring multiple times. > >Is that _really_ a problem? If anything it only points out a lack of >commitment to the project amongst some of the contributors. *THAT* is precisely the reason that such people should not be assigned the very exponents that are most necessary to reaching the next "milestones". For those of us that measure progress both in Teraflops and in milestones, we've not seen much lately, mainly due to the things that Henk was complaining about. _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 16:13:13 +0100 From: "Robert van der Peijl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: numbering the messages To those of you who are afraid of missing some postings on this list. It's common knowledge that e-mail servers are down from time to time. That and other reasons could cause you to miss out on some of the postings from the list. The mersenne list digests are numbered sequentially. Suppose the messages sent to the subscribers of the mersenne discussion list were (also) numbered sequentially. (The counter could be reset to 0 on a yearly basis) It would then be easier for each of us to quickly spot any dropped messages. For instance, I'm counting 221 Mersenne list messages on my computer since 1-1-2001. (That's if I count from Martijn's message written on 1 Jan 12:14:14 +0100 up to and incl. Brian Beesley's message written on 9 Mar 11:09:53 -0000) What's your count? How useful/practical/difficult would it be to have the messages numbered automagically? Robert. _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:29:56 -0000 From: "Brian J. Beesley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: RE: expired exponents On 9 Mar 2001, at 2:24, Scott Kurowski wrote: > > I would instead recommend a broader strategy that expires exponents based > upon the assignment age (days run) and current iteration at null (not > started), perhaps at 60 days age. Did someone already suggest that? I think that's a _brilliant_ idea. It's probably not hard to implement, either. The downside that needs to be discussed is what happens to manual tests (e.g. using programs that don't have PrimeNet client code). At present these can be extended (kept alive) using the manual testing page, but there is no way of signalling the current iteration using this form. I think PrimeNet would probably have to be made aware of which assignments were being handled manually and have these assignments exempted from "early release" on the grounds of apparent inactivity. AFAIK this shouldn't destroy the policy, as those using the PrimeNet manual testing forms are probably amongst the more conscientious contributors. (?) > [... snip ...] > The result would be slightly more frequent 'opportunistic' double-check > passes as the machine forges along to complete the then-redundant test, > probably after the reassignment machine finishes. Maybe that's a good > thing. For LL test assignments, this is undoubtedly true. For double-check assignments, we'd probably end up with a small number of "accidental" triple-checks. IMO this is not a real problem, _provided_ the number really is small. > > George Woltman manages the server's individual exponent and range > assignments from time to time. If overriding a 'squatter' is important > enough, he could do so manually. However, if server changes are necessary, > we defer to him for those requirements. > Indeed there are frequent incidents of assignments which are "lagging" being "pirated". Obviously widespread abuse of the automatic assignment scheme should _not_ be encouraged, but anyone who is really upset can actually do something about it even now - providing they don't mind PrimeNet not crediting the CPU time! Regards Brian Beesley _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 09:00:57 -0800 From: Spike Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: RE: expired exponents > Scott Kurowski wrote: > > P.S. if there are any GIMPS folks on this list nearby, I'll treat lunch or > beers... I left Ernst and Luke in Silicon Valley. :-( > _______________________________________ Speaking of Silicon Valley, its past time we had another GIMPS party up this way. I was planning to suggest one when we found our next MP, but since that hasnt happened, well, we just can't wait to have a prime schmooze. Im not so generous as Scott to buy everyone's dinner, but Ill pop for a pitcher or two. Who wants to go for prime rib at the Tied House in Palo Alto? When? spike _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 12:46:37 -0600 From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: Re: GIMPS parties (was: expired exponents) How about GIMPS parties in places other than California? Anybody else on the list in the New Orleans area? And next month I will be in Newcastle & Edinburgh, anybody in that area? No need to wait for the next prime to have a party! Steve Harris - -----Original Message----- From: Spike Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: PRIME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, March 09, 2001 11:31 AM Subject: Re: Mersenne: RE: expired exponents >Speaking of Silicon Valley, its past time we had another GIMPS >party up this way. I was planning to suggest one when we found >our next MP, but since that hasnt happened, well, we just >can't wait to have a prime schmooze. Im not so generous >as Scott to buy everyone's dinner, but Ill pop for a pitcher >or two. Who wants to go for prime rib at the Tied House in >Palo Alto? When? > >spike _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:40:25 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: GIMPS parties (was: expired exponents) - --part1_9f.1245bbe4.27da8ba9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello fellow GIMP members. I like Steve's idea about that one. I am from New Jersey. ~~Marky E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - --part1_9f.1245bbe4.27da8ba9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SCRIPT" FACE="Comic Sans MS" LANG="0"><B>Hello fellow GIMP members. <BR> <BR>I like Steve's idea about that one. I am from New Jersey. <BR> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SCRIPT" FACE="Comic Sans MS" LANG="0">~~Marky <BR>E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]</B></FONT></HTML> - --part1_9f.1245bbe4.27da8ba9_boundary-- _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 15:23:04 -0500 From: "Joshua Zelinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: numbering the messages 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. Regards, Joshua Zelinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 15:26:07 -0500 From: "Joshua Zelinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: RE: expired exponents Spike Jones wrote: > > Scott Kurowski wrote: > > > > P.S. if there are any GIMPS folks on this list nearby, I'll treat lunch >or > > beers... I left Ernst and Luke in Silicon Valley. :-( > > _______________________________________ > >Speaking of Silicon Valley, its past time we had another GIMPS >party up this way. I was planning to suggest one when we found >our next MP, but since that hasnt happened, well, we just >can't wait to have a prime schmooze. Im not so generous >as Scott to buy everyone's dinner, but Ill pop for a pitcher >or two. Who wants to go for prime rib at the Tied House in >Palo Alto? When? Are there any East Coast GIMPS members at all? :) Joshua Zelinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] New Haven, Ct. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 15:34:14 -0500 From: "Joshua Zelinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: Security of prime95 + electricity costs. Hey guys, A lot of people who I've tried to persuade to join have been worried about two issues. 1. How will Prime95 affect security? I don't think there would be any major problems created, but the readme doesn't discuss this much and this isn't my area of expertise. Any thoughts? 2.What the are actual monetary costs would be of running Prime95. In particular, what are the percentage increases from normal costs. Answer to both of these would help a lot. Sincerely, Joshua Zelinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 15:35:00 -0500 From: "Joshua Zelinsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: Security of prime95 + electricity costs. Hey guys, A lot of people who I've tried to persuade to join have been worried about two issues. 1. How will Prime95 affect security? I don't think there would be any major problems created, but the readme doesn't discuss this much and this isn't my area of expertise. Any thoughts? 2.What the are actual monetary costs would be of running Prime95. In particular, what are the percentage increases from normal costs. Answer to both of these would help a lot. Sincerely, Joshua Zelinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:23:58 -0600 From: "Jeramy Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: GIMPS parties (was: expired exponents) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C0A8AC.F6460880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Same here. Cali is a bit far to travel for a broke colege student in = Oklahoma :) Perhaps there is a better, more centrally located area. - - Jeramy ----- Original Message -----=20 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 1:40 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: GIMPS parties (was: expired exponents) Hello fellow GIMP members.=20 I like Steve's idea about that one. I am from New Jersey.=20 ~~Marky=20 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C0A8AC.F6460880 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Same here. Cali is a bit far to = travel for a=20 broke colege student in Oklahoma :)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Perhaps there is a better, more = centrally located=20 area.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>- Jeramy</FONT></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE=20 style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: = black"><B>From:</B>=20 <A [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> </DIV> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A = [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> </DIV> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, March 09, 2001 = 1:40=20 PM</DIV> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Mersenne: Re: = GIMPS parties=20 (was: expired exponents)</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = face=3D"Comic Sans MS"=20 color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SCRIPT"><B>Hello fellow GIMP = members. <BR><BR>I=20 like Steve's idea about that one. I am from New Jersey. = <BR><BR></FONT><FONT=20 lang=3D0 face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#0000ff size=3D2 = FAMILY=3D"SCRIPT">~~Marky=20 <BR>E-mail: <A=20 href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A></B></FONT>=20 </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> - ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C0A8AC.F6460880-- _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:25:37 -0600 From: "Jeramy Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: GIMPS parties (was: expired exponents) Make that a broke college student who forgets to use his spell checker :-) Its been a long week ... ;-) HAPPY WEEKEND EVERYONE! - -Jeramy - ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeramy Ross To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 3:23 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: GIMPS parties (was: expired exponents) Same here. Cali is a bit far to travel for a broke colege student in Oklahoma :) Perhaps there is a better, more centrally located area. - - Jeramy - ----- Original Message ----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 1:40 PM Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: GIMPS parties (was: expired exponents) Hello fellow GIMP members. I like Steve's idea about that one. I am from New Jersey. ~~Marky E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 22:25:06 -0000 From: "Brian J. Beesley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: Security of prime95 + electricity costs. On 9 Mar 2001, at 15:35, Joshua Zelinsky wrote: > 1. How will Prime95 affect security? I don't think there would be any major > problems created, but the readme doesn't discuss this much and this isn't my > area of expertise. Any thoughts? The _only_ security risk to the user associated with Prime95 is the same risk associated with downloading and executing _any_ program. Possibly we should be providing MD5 checksums to go with the binaries so that they can be checked for non-interference. The network communications between the server and client pose no risk as there is no instruction payload. All the code you need is in the binary executable and the DLLs supplied. > 2.What the are actual monetary costs would be of running Prime95. In > particular, what are the percentage increases from normal costs. Depends how much extra you're running the system ... if it's on 24 hours a day anyway, the answer is _nothing_. Normally I switch off monitors on systems left running unattended (this is in any case good practise from the fire prevention point of view); power consumption of system units does vary but somewhere around 150W would be typical. So allow 1 KWh per 6 hours extra running. How much that costs obviously depends on how greedy your utility provider is. Concensus of opinion is that running a system 24x7 does not affect significantly the expected time before hardware failure. Regards Brian Beesley _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 17:27:42 -0500 From: Jeff Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress At 10:00 PM 3/9/01 +0000, you wrote: >Isn't the "problem" just that the milestones are rather a long way >apart at the moment? Does it _really_ matter that there's an >outstanding exponent around 3.25 million which needs double-checking >when there are so many more to go before we complete double-checking >up to 6973593 - which is the next obvious milestone, after completing >coverage of first tests up to that value, and always assuming that we >don't find another prime smaller than Hajratwala's Number in the >meantime? Actually, the next obvious milestone is checking all below M(6972593) for the first time. There are 67 exponents unchecked at all below that exponent, and that number has been VERY VERY slow to reduce, mainly due to number campers or 386's trying to test that number. I also massaged today's assignments report, and found that there are over 200 exponents assigned over a year ago (and some as far back as 1998), NOT including those expected to take that long (i.e. 33 million+). Some exponents have been run for over a year, and have "days to run" estimates of 2900 days or more -- yes, nearly EIGHT YEARS. The point is that we could crank through these laggards if the Primenet server would have simply ensured they were assigned to a "top 1000" producer, or to a machine of sufficient calibre and reliability (historically, per prior test results). You said you had a good reason not to do that, but didn't want to post it here (you were going to mail it privately to Henk). Why not discuss it here? >Somehow the laggards always do get swept up in the end; there seems >to be an adequate supply of self-appointed "gap fillers" (or pirates, >according to your point of view). The result is that many of the >assignments which are the "longest overdue" eventually end up with >three, four or even more completed LL tests. Said "overchecking" could be eliminated by ensuring that the oldest exponents are assigned to the most reliable machines possible. _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 15:00:44 -0600 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mikus Grinbergs) Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress On Fri, 09 Mar 2001 10:12:43 -0500 Jeff Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 11:09 AM 3/9/01 +0000, you wrote: > > > > That would help prevent exponents expiring multiple times. > > > >Is that _really_ a problem? If anything it only points out a lack of > >commitment to the project amongst some of the contributors. > > *THAT* is precisely the reason that such people should not be assigned the > very exponents that are most necessary to reaching the next > "milestones". For those of us that measure progress both in Teraflops and > in milestones, we've not seen much lately, mainly due to the things that > Henk was complaining about. I consider the attitude "GOTTA GET IT DONE" to be rat-race oriented rather than thank-you-for-participating oriented. It implies to those with less-than-state-of-the-art equipment: "__You__ are an obstacle in the way of GOTTA GET IT DONE -- there are no seats for you on this bus". Would the world come to an end tomorrow if the GIMPS participants were more tolerant of those who do __not__ measure progress in Teraflops ? mikus _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 16:59:46 -0600 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mikus Grinbergs) Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress On Fri, 09 Mar 2001 17:27:42 -0500 Jeff Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The point is that we could crank through these laggards if the Primenet > server would have simply ensured they were assigned to a "top 1000" > producer, or to a machine of sufficient calibre and reliability > (historically, per prior test results). Is that what we want - an elitist organization which SEGREGATES those participants to whom we do not attribute "sufficient calibre" ? > > Why not discuss it here? I thought this project was an association of VOLUNTEERS. I believe we should welcome ALL who offer to participate. mikus _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 19:55:07 -0500 From: George Woltman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Mersenne: Re: rat race (was prime95 - v21 progress) Hi all, At 03:00 PM 3/9/2001 -0600, Mikus Grinbergs wrote: >I consider the attitude "GOTTA GET IT DONE" to be rat-race oriented >rather than thank-you-for-participating oriented. It implies to >those with less-than-state-of-the-art equipment: "__You__ are an >obstacle in the way of GOTTA GET IT DONE -- there are no seats for >you on this bus". The mailing list has covered this several times in the past. I suggest there is a middle ground - maybe GET IT DONE IN SEMI-REASONABLE TIME. Both camps have very valid points. One camp wants to see steady progress. The other knows that all machines can usefully contribute. If you own a less-that-state-of-the-art machine and want to run first time tests that will take a year or more to complete, that's OK. However, it is not unreasonable for the GIMPS community to suggest an exponent in the 9 million and up area rather than a recycled one below M(6972593). Changing prime95/primenet to only recycle smallest-500 double-checks and smallest-500 first-time tests to PII-300 or better machines might address the concerns of both camps. I don't think distinguishing between long-time and new users makes sense - the 3 month timeout before another PII-300 gets the exponent should not slow down progress greatly. Since prime95/primenet does not currently support the above it is GIMPS' fault, not the fault of the current user with the slow machine! Regards, George _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 02:24:00 +0000 From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 09:15:17 -0000 From: "Brian J. Beesley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress On 9 Mar 2001, at 17:27, Jeff Woods wrote: > Actually, the next obvious milestone is checking all below M(6972593) for > the first time. There are 67 exponents unchecked at all below that > exponent, and that number has been VERY VERY slow to reduce, mainly due to > number campers or 386's trying to test that number. Or fast systems slowing because an animated screensaver is being run? This can easily happen if you ask someone else to run Prime95 on their system as a favour. > > I also massaged today's assignments report, and found that there are over > 200 exponents assigned over a year ago (and some as far back as 1998), NOT > including those expected to take that long (i.e. 33 million+). Some > exponents have been run for over a year, and have "days to run" estimates > of 2900 days or more -- yes, nearly EIGHT YEARS. I remember getting "wound up" about this shortly after I joined the project. George replied that these problems have a way of sorting themselves out; experience proves him right. > > The point is that we could crank through these laggards if the Primenet > server would have simply ensured they were assigned to a "top 1000" > producer, or to a machine of sufficient calibre and reliability > (historically, per prior test results). To which [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mikus Grinbergs) replied: > Is that what we want - an elitist organization which SEGREGATES > those participants to whom we do not attribute "sufficient calibre" Well _I_ don't! Back to Jeff Woods: > > You said you had a good reason not to do that, but didn't want to post it > here (you were going to mail it privately to Henk). Why not discuss it here? > Now I believe Henk is a responsible individual, and I've no reason to suspect Jeff is any less so. The system we have at the moment is reasonably robust and will stand a certain amount of abuse. However, abuse on a large scale will break it. I don't want to be responsible for that. What I mailed to Henk privately amounts to a minor form of abuse of the system. One paragraph of that private message reads: (start quote) Obviously you should be careful when doing this, else you are likely to be accused of "pirating" assignments. Also there would be chaos if several people were doing this, which is why this reply is being sent to you only and not to the list. (end quote) Jeff, if you (or anyone else, for that matter) want to take advantage of the idea I mailed to Henk, I suggest you mail Henk privately and discuss amongst yourselves how you're going to coordinate your combined effort. My contribution to your "sturmgruppe" ends here because I don't believe that anyone's CPU cycles are inherently more valuable than anyone else's. Oh, and if you happen to find a new Mersenne prime whilst you're working in this mode, I would hope that you'd be prepared to share the credit with any other person who happens to "own" the PrimeNet assignment at the time. Regards Brian Beesley _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 12:03:13 +0100 From: "Martijn Kruithof" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Mersenne: prime95 - v21 progress Hello, because of the discussion about the speed on the slowest exponents I did some calculations: Result: The limits like 750 MHz or even 350 MHz for the smalles exponents are completely ridiculous, certainly if we do not take into account the number of it is on, a 1000 MHz machine on for 8x5 hours a week will take longer than PII 233 on 24x7. If we want to get it done as soon as possible we must calculate what would be fastest: Observation the relatively slow machines are often used as servers / private firewalls and on 24x7 On the other hand relatively slow machines may be hardly on. Some calculations (benchmark page) on the fictive exponent 4000000 yields 24x7 on a: 486@33: 1Y+182 days (Ok that seems long) PI@60: 43 days (Seems we can wait on that, as long as the machine is reliable) PII@233: 10 days (Seems as of now it really does not matter anymore) Cel@300: 8 days PIII@450: 6 days PIII@1000: 3 days Athlon@1200: 2 days Some calculations on the ficive exponent 8000000 (486 left out) PI@60 : 177 days (Doubtfull) PII@233 : 40 days (Seems we can wait on that, as long as the machine is reliable) Cel@300 : 31 days PIII@450 : 23 days PIII@1000 : 12 days Athlon@1200 : 9 days Some calculations on the ficive exponent 12000000 (486 left out) PI@60 : 1Y+29 days (Seems to long) PII@233 : 87 days Cel@300 : 68 days PIII@450 : 50 days PIII@1000 : 27 days Athlon@1200 : 17 days When we take into account that the timeout offset is 60 days (so someone starting an assignment and not doing anything at all costs 60 days, nobody works on the exp. so that is a delay of the entire project) We should probably reassign exponents to machines that have already finished at least 2 exponents, and based on that info will return this assignment within 60 days. That would be like doublechecks reassigns for PI / PII / Celeron, Primality reassigns for PIII / Athlon. Exponents in the lower 10% of a range should be reassigned if no progress has been reported for 60 days. A good better solution optimizing for progress would be to re-assign expired exponents to machines that have finished exponents already and will finish them in for instance approximately 20 days (Assigning the smaller exponents to slower machines and larger exponents to faster machines) The actual number of days can be calculated from the "ballpark". So that optimal progress is made. We must try to keep slow machines in as long as possible as they really contribute to the progress. So optimal progress will be made by giving smaller machines small exponents and larger machines large. Kind Regards, Martijn _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers ------------------------------ End of Mersenne Digest V1 #825 ******************************
