On Sat, 12 May 2001 16:38:47 -0400, Jud McCranie wrote:
>At 08:14 PM 5/12/2001 +0000, Brian J. Beesley wrote:
>
>rather small, so the reason a third or fourth run is neccessary is
>>very probably because results with mismatching residuals are being
>>submitted for some reason. Most probably random glitches?
>
>Another nice thing would be if people who have submitted several results
>that don't match other people's results they could be notified that they
>may have a hardware problem.
I can't help wondering whether some users would find that to be overly
invasive or startling; however, if I had such a problem - especially
one that could cause slow thermal damage - I would want to know about
it.
I deal with altogether too many people on other mailing lists and
newsgroups who believe that it is normal for their machine to take two
attempts to make it through a 25-minute kernel upgrade. Granted, a
5-week GIMPS run is a more stringent criterion, but AFAIK most
machines /should/ be able to survive without more than 1-2 errors a
year (I've had two since I started last January).
Nathan
_________________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
