Mersenne: Resurrecting an lapsed machine?
I've just noticed in my personal account report, that I've only got the one machine listed. I should have two (this one, and my mother's.) The most likely explanation is that her machine is configured to comunicate manually, and she hasn't been doing this. I visited her a couple of weeks ago, and it was still happily hacking through a DC. I won't be visiting her for some time, and I can't ask her to do any more than trivial admin. Would it be sufficient just to tell her how to set it to automatic communication? Would this upset the primenet server? Regards Daran G. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: P-1
Hi, At 06:35 AM 7/24/2001 +0100, Daran wrote: As far as I can tell, both first time and DC LLs do P-1 factoring, but not trial factoring. (I suspect they will trial factor first if the exponant has not already been trial factored far enough, but I don't recall encountering this.) Both will do trial factoring if necessary. It is pretty rare that a DC needs more trial factoring. if the historical error rate for P-1s is the same as for LLs, (which is a reasonable assumption, given that they use the same FFT code*), then the probability of a second P-1 (using the same bounds) finding a factor that a first misses will be about 1% of this, i.e 0.02-0.05%, and only a single DC would be saved. Clearly not economical. You are correct. Since P-1 factoring was introduced over a year ago, I'm sure there have been quite a few needless P-1 runs. This happens primarily on triple-checks and first-time tests that were abandoned after the P-1 run completed. On the plus side, double-checking has still not reached the point where first-time checking was when P-1 factoring was released. Saying all that doesn't mean we couldn't break out work into more work unit types, it would just mean we'd also have to have a factoring DC work unit type if it was to be removed from the LL runs. I'll see if I can work out a solution with Scott. A minimum solution would have the server return whether or not the exponent has already had P-1 factoring done. A better solution would include giving CPU credit for P-1 factoring and making it a separate work type. I'll keep y'all posted. Best regards, George _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Resurrecting an lapsed machine?
You could even make a shadow mprime install on your own pc that you use exclusively to keep your mothers exponent alive. You could also set the auto check in time on your mothers machine to a large value. (maybe even + holidays (on / no comm) when you are there) - Original Message - From: Daran [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:07 AM Subject: Mersenne: Resurrecting an lapsed machine? I've just noticed in my personal account report, that I've only got the one machine listed. I should have two (this one, and my mother's.) The most likely explanation is that her machine is configured to comunicate manually, and she hasn't been doing this. I visited her a couple of weeks ago, and it was still happily hacking through a DC. I won't be visiting her for some time, and I can't ask her to do any more than trivial admin. Would it be sufficient just to tell her how to set it to automatic communication? Would this upset the primenet server? Regards Daran G. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Re: Mersenn: 1000 Barrier
Russel Brooks wrote: I've been with GIMPS for about two years and yesterday achieved a personal milestone; I finally broke thru the 1000 barrier and made it to 996 on the top producers list. Each step forward is getting smaller and smaller though; I think I'm approaching the knee of the curve and will eventually start going backwards. ID: rlbrooks 866MHz P3 450MHz P2 ( 133MHz P1 doing factoring) Was glad to hear that you seem likely to keep moving forward for a while. I have been playing here for almost 3 years, and have been in the 500's or 600's for a while. I have a P166 factoring, a PIII-650 double-checking (it's at work, and I don't want to share the fame and glory of finding a new prime with my employer). At home, I just upgraded a dual Celeron 500MHz to dual P-III 1GHz, and a Celeron 333MHz to P-IV 1.3GHz, so I should crack the 500 barrier among top producers fairly soon. After that I may have one of my dual processors work on something else (if that speeds up the other significantly). Great fun, ain't it? Gerry -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: P-1
-Original Message- From: George Woltman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Daran [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 24 July 2001 21:17 Subject: Re: Mersenne: P-1 I'll see if I can work out a solution with Scott. A minimum solution would have the server return whether or not the exponent has already had P-1 factoring done. Better, perhaps (but more work to implement) would be to have the server return the B1 and B2 values used. The client could compare these to the values it would use if it were going to do this, based upon its available memory, and caculate whether a rerun would be economical. A better solution would include giving CPU credit for P-1 factoring and making it a separate work type. That might be a little complicated, since a machine which has high memory availability only at night might be better off getting two different types of work to do. I'll keep y'all posted. Best regards, George Daran G. _ Unsubscribe list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
