Re: Poaching -- Definition (was: Mersenne: Re: Mersenne Digest V1#1038)
On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Richard Woods wrote: >Paul Missman wrote: >> I know that this might be earth shattering news for you, >> but there is no such thing as "poaching". > >I think that folks who've been following the poaching discussion from >the beginning know that there is indeed such a thing, and what it is. >But let me post a refresher for the sake of newcomers. You know, the "anti-poachers" seem so strident and self-absorbed and hell-bent on their mission to make "poaching" into the next offense that the U.N. investigates that I'm inclined to begin doing some poaching just to tweak them a bit. I wonder what numbers this Woods fellow has reserved...;-) Kel A GIMPS participant since George had only 300 of us running his fine program(s) _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: SMT
At 21:01 11/03/2001 -0500, George Woltman wrote: >Can prime95 take advantage of SMT? I'm skeptical. If the FFT is broken >up to run in two threads, I'm afraid L2 cache pollution will negate any >advantage of SMT. Of course, I'm just guessing - to test this theory out we >should compare our throughput running 1 vs. 2 copies of prime95 on an >SMT machine. Could things be setup so that factoring and LL-testing went on "simultaneously?" This would speed up the overall amount of work being done. Kel _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: ERROR 7: Server has run out of exponents to assign
Hi All, Anyone else seeing this error? I'm trying to get exponents to factor but the server reports that there are none available...is that right? Am I seeing a server glitch? Thanks, Kel _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Good news for Pentium 3 and Celeron 2 owners
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, John R Pierce wrote: >> I feel it is ridiculous that George has to beg/borrow the latest >> architecture in order to optimise Prime95. I also know from being a member >> of the prime search community for the last three years the amount of hard >> work George puts into the project. > >agreed. how come AMD isn't burying George in processors so he can better >optimize for their architecture? Sounds like a good idea to me. I've long been impressed by the amount of work that George puts into this project, and would be very willing to contribute a few bucks so that we could purchase the needed hardware to further the project. The members of Team Anandtech have often contributed money and/or hardware to various things. I believe they supplied the $$$ and hardware for the team's personal proxy server for their distributed.net efforts, and have contributed to at least one "game box" for the team members. Why can't we do something similar? Of course, George would have to find the time to do all of this wonderful new coding...;-) Kel _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Spontaneous reboots
At 09:58 02/24/2001 +, Brian J. Beesley wrote: >On 23 Feb 2001, at 22:18, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > >> After being away for five days recently, I noticed that my computer >> (running Linux kernel 2.4.1, by the way -- 2.4.2 now) had rebooted. >> Just a few hours later, it rebooted again -- and that night, it rebooted >> _again_. >> >> If I turn off mprime (v20), the problem goes away -- the computer >> doesn't reboot, at least not the 36 hours I tested. After I start >> mprime, it reboots in just a couple of minutes now. > >As other people have suggested, it sounds like an overheating >problem. Most programs do not use the FPU much, and the FPU is a >major contributor to power consumption within the CPU. Did you have this problem before upgrading to the 2.4.x kernel series? As a simple test, try compiling one of the 2.2.x kernels and booting to that to see if the same thing happens. Maybe something about the 2.4.x kernels, your hardware, and mprime aren't playing nicely. Yet another $.02 contribution, Kel _ 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, QA, primenet etc
At 17:04 02/03/2001 -0500, Jeff Woods wrote: >At 04:48 PM 2/3/01 -0500, you wrote: > >>After hanging around the Anandtech DC forum for awhile, I'm convinced that >>this completion time "problem" might be GIMPS biggest hurdle to getting >>more participation. Very few "loonies" like us are willing to wait 14 >>months for the calculation of one result. Those folks at Anand's are >>interested in visible changes in daily statistics, something GIMPS doesn't >>provide when doing LL testing. > >Then why is SETI@home so popular, when it shows little in the way of daily >statistics, either? My understanding is that it is possible to have a significant change in daily statistics with SETI@home. A fast machine can complete a SETI work unit in 8 to 10 hours, I believe. Additionally, I believe that SETI@home is "sexier" for the general public and has done a much more thorough job of selling itself via the general media. BTW, I do participate in GIMPS (and have since around 1996 or so), so it's not as if I think it's a bad thing. I just think it will be tough to attract significant membership numbers (say two hundred thousand users, just to throw out a number) when an exponent takes 14 months to complete. Kel _ 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, QA, primenet etc
At 14:57 02/03/2001 -0600, Ken Kriesel wrote: >In the QA effort, we've seen a few instances already of errors caught >midway by doing a manual/email version of this. Brian Beesley had an error >detected this way in his run of a double-check of a 10-megadigit exponent. >This exponent takes a PII-400 428 days (yes 14 months) to complete, >so detecting the one error and restarting early saves about 10.5 PII-400 >months. After hanging around the Anandtech DC forum for awhile, I'm convinced that this completion time "problem" might be GIMPS biggest hurdle to getting more participation. Very few "loonies" like us are willing to wait 14 months for the calculation of one result. Those folks at Anand's are interested in visible changes in daily statistics, something GIMPS doesn't provide when doing LL testing. Kel U. _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
