Re: Mersenne: 22.8.1 has increased iteration time
Hi, On Thursday 29 August 2002 15:30, you wrote: > I have noticed a small but definite increase in the iteration time of > version 22.8.1 as opposed to 21.4. > > During the night, when my 2.2GHz Pentium IV system was free of all other > processing activities, the iteration times were as follows: > > 21.4 47 msec > 22.8.150 msec > It also could be a better detection of system clock frequency. I think new 22.8 detects automatically the frecuency, while in older versions one can set it manually in 'local.ini'. So I think that v. 22.8 displays better accurace time/iteration. Regards. Guillermo. -- Guillermo Ballester Valor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ogijares, Granada SPAIN _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Error rates
A user has broken down the GIMPS error rate for exponents between 2 million and 7 million. See ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/err_rate.xls. I'd ignore the data from 6 million to 7 million as there are many triple-checks to be done. The data from 5 million to 6 million will not change much at all. The data from 2 million to 5 million is accurate. There is a lot of interesting data in this spreadsheet. Our overall error rate is roughly 3.5%. If you have an error-free run, the error rate is in the 1.4% to 2% area. If you have an SUM(INPUTS) != SUM(OUTPUTS) error or ROUNDOFF > 0.40 error that is not caused by an approaching FFT crossover, then there is a 56% chance that your LL test will be no good! _ 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 <>
Re: Mersenne: Still unable to communicate with server.
At 16:59:08, Friday, 8/30/02 Brian Beesley wrote: > Are we losing users? Well, if users can't connect to the server, they're > going to be discouraged. Ditto anyone still using Windows 95 - Prime95 v22.3+ > has problems since George apparently upgraded his development kit. As of version 22.5, this is not true. George has fixed every issue regarding Win 95 that has come up. I would volunteer to check that v22.8 still works ok in Win 95, but I don't currently have access to my Win 95 machine. -- Nick Glover [EMAIL PROTECTED] "It's good to be open-minded, but not so open that your brains fall out." - Jacob Needleman _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Still unable to communicate with server.
- Original Message - From: "Brian J. Beesley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 2250 is a problem with the server being offline for some reason. That's not what the faq says . but I think you're correct. At least, when I restarted this morning (with a 'primenet.ini' containing 'Debug=1', as suggested to me by George), it ran fine. I'll keep running with 'Debug=1'. If the problem recurs I'll at least then have a report to look at. > Hmm. Surely "UseHTTP" is now obsolete since there hasn't been RPC support for > some time? > The faq says to make sure you're connecting with http - which I took to mean 'UseHTTP=1'. > Are we losing users? Quite possibly but not this user :-) It was damn annoying, however . though I feel that George might well be using somewhat stronger language. > > Another good reason for changing to linux? > No the sisyphean spirit dictates that you acquire a second rate OS and that you bloody well stick with it :-) Thanks Brian, George. Cheers, Rob _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Still unable to communicate with server.
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002 20:59:08 +, Brian J. Beesley wrote: >Are we losing users? Well, if users can't connect to the server, they're >going to be discouraged. Ditto anyone still using Windows 95 - Prime95 v22.3+ >has problems since George apparently upgraded his development kit. Well, Win95 is getting increasingly uncommon (and for good reasons, stability and support for USB come to mind). That said, would it be difficult for George, after 22.x is released, to build a version against the old development kit? My CS education has all been done on Unix, so I'm sorry if "build against" is he wrong term, or if it's less trivial to do such things in windows. Nathan _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: Still unable to communicate with server.
On Friday 30 August 2002 04:22, Sisyphus wrote: > Hi, > Recently started getting error 29 with Windows, PrimeNet version 21, so > I've upgraded to version 22.8. > Now I get error 2250 - so we're definitely making progress 2250 is a problem with the server being offline for some reason. > > :-) > > 'prime.ini' contains 'UseHTTP=1'. And I've tried the stuff relating to > proxies/firewalls mentioned in the faq (though this was not an issue with > version 21). Still can't get a connection. > > Where to, now ? Hmm. Surely "UseHTTP" is now obsolete since there hasn't been RPC support for some time? Are we losing users? Well, if users can't connect to the server, they're going to be discouraged. Ditto anyone still using Windows 95 - Prime95 v22.3+ has problems since George apparently upgraded his development kit. Another good reason for changing to linux? Anyone with this problem could also try Prime95 v22.1, which _does_ appear to work on Win 95 _and_ hasn't had the connection problems others have been reporting (though there have been occasions this week - at least 12 hours on one occasion - when the server was broken). I find all this a bit hard to understand (and harder to wrestle with when I'm hopelessly overloaded with "work" - as usual at this time of year) since web comms on TCP port 80 is pretty standard these days; even firewall tunnelling is pretty much a "given". When it stopped working, which end was broken so far as standards compliance is concerned? Regards Brian Beesley _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Re: Mersenne: 22.8.1 has increased iteration time
On Thursday 29 August 2002 13:30, Gary Edstrom wrote: > I have noticed a small but definite increase in the iteration time of > version 22.8.1 as opposed to 21.4. > > During the night, when my 2.2GHz Pentium IV system was free of all other > processing activities, the iteration times were as follows: > > 21.4 47 msec > 22.8.150 msec Is the exponent very close to the run length threshold? If so you're now running with per-iteration roundoff checking. On my P4 1.8A (with PC800 RDRAM) I found this made very little difference, but systems with more limited memory bandwidth may be more affected by this. > > I am continuing processing on the very same exponent using the new > version. Is this allowed? It works, reliably, though sometimes the FFT run length may change at the time of the upgrade. Regards Brian Beesley _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
