mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Factoring (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   Pascal's OPN roadblock files (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=19066)

henryzz 2014-03-14 16:47

[QUOTE=wombatman;368959]Good deal. That was from the "in-memory singleton removal" step, so yes, I believe you're correct.[/QUOTE]

I presume you don't have enough memory to run in-memory for all the relations then.

wombatman 2014-03-14 18:05

I have 16GB. Here's a more recent (and full) text:

[CODE]commencing relation filtering
estimated available RAM is 16305.1 MB
commencing duplicate removal, pass 1
read 10M relations
read 20M relations
read 30M relations
read 40M relations
read 50M relations
read 60M relations
found 11768832 hash collisions in 66546671 relations
commencing duplicate removal, pass 2
found 10711860 duplicates and 55834811 unique relations
memory use: 330.4 MB
reading ideals above 720000
commencing singleton removal, initial pass
memory use: 1506.0 MB
reading all ideals from disk
memory use: 2020.6 MB
keeping 64682070 ideals with weight <= 200, target excess is 315009
commencing in-memory singleton removal
begin with 55834811 relations and 64682070 unique ideals
reduce to 15017164 relations and 16253912 ideals in 29 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 83
filtering wants 1000000 more relations
elapsed time 00:15:19[/CODE]

VBCurtis 2014-03-15 00:17

[QUOTE=wombatman;368956]Currently working on an SNFS 206. Now at over 65M relations (54.5M unique) and getting:

[CODE]begin with 14655138 relations and 16282704 unique ideals
reduce to 13932177 relations and 15555212 ideals in 24 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 184[/CODE]

Does this seem right?[/QUOTE]

I would run SNFS-206 as 29 bit project, which would need 40-44M relations. Did you run 30/30 bit? Or 29/30?

wombatman 2014-03-15 01:45

Started at 29/29, but relations per Q was something like 1.2, so I upped it to 29/30, which only got the ratio to ~1.4. I finally upped to 30/30, which got the relations to ~1.6-1.8.

axn 2014-03-15 05:47

[QUOTE=wombatman;368974]
[CODE]begin with 55834811 relations and 64682070 unique ideals
reduce to 15017164 relations and 16253912 ideals in 29 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 83
filtering wants 1000000 more relations
elapsed time 00:15:19[/CODE][/QUOTE]

You probably need another 4m relations (+/-)

wombatman 2014-03-15 20:24

I hope that + isn't too much :wink:

[CODE]found 13656903 hash collisions in 73722283 relations
commencing duplicate removal, pass 2
found 12450896 duplicates and 61271387 unique relations
memory use: 362.4 MB
reading ideals above 720000
commencing singleton removal, initial pass
memory use: 1506.0 MB
reading all ideals from disk
memory use: 2219.1 MB
keeping 67635537 ideals with weight <= 200, target excess is 348691
commencing in-memory singleton removal
begin with 61271387 relations and 67635537 unique ideals
reduce to 21692607 relations and 21441590 ideals in 21 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 100
filtering wants 1000000 more relations
elapsed time 00:17:11[/CODE]

wombatman 2014-03-15 23:31

And finally,

[CODE]found 13875110 hash collisions in 74533091 relations
commencing duplicate removal, pass 2
found 12652410 duplicates and 61880681 unique relations
memory use: 362.4 MB
reading ideals above 720000
commencing singleton removal, initial pass
memory use: 1506.0 MB
reading all ideals from disk
memory use: 2241.4 MB
keeping 67949229 ideals with weight <= 200, target excess is 352493
commencing in-memory singleton removal
begin with 61880681 relations and 67949229 unique ideals
reduce to 22429981 relations and 21984408 ideals in 21 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 102
removing 409145 relations and 390804 ideals in 18341 cliques
commencing in-memory singleton removal
begin with 22020836 relations and 21984408 unique ideals
reduce to 22013981 relations and 21586738 ideals in 9 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 100
removing 296550 relations and 278209 ideals in 18341 cliques
commencing in-memory singleton removal
begin with 21717431 relations and 21586738 unique ideals
reduce to 21713764 relations and 21304858 ideals in 8 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 100
relations with 0 large ideals: 8154[/CODE]

Sheesh.

schickel 2014-03-15 23:39

Ooops....cross-posted, but for future reference:[QUOTE=wombatman;369032]I hope that + isn't too much :wink:[/quote]Keep an eye on these two numbers. The closer they get to convergence, the closer you are to being done.....[CODE]begin with [COLOR="Blue"]61271387[/COLOR] relations and [COLOR="blue"]67635537[/COLOR] unique ideals
reduce to [COLOR="blue"]21692607[/COLOR] relations and [COLOR="blue"]21441590[/COLOR] ideals in 21 passes
max relations containing the same ideal: 100
filtering wants 1000000 more relations
elapsed time 00:17:11[/CODE]If you compare this run to the last run you posted, you can see how the number of relations is getting closer to the number of ideals. (Depending on how effectively the relations combine; the first singleton removal usually lets you know if it's going to succeed: a large surplus bodes well.)

wombatman 2014-03-15 23:49

It's funny you should mention that--I actually did go back to one of my previous runs and check the logs. I noticed that it moved on with the conditions you mention, so I've been checking every now and then since the # of relations actually pulled past the # of unique ideals. Crazy stuff.

swellman 2014-03-16 01:35

[QUOTE=wombatman;369003]Started at 29/29, but relations per Q was something like 1.2, so I upped it to 29/30, which only got the ratio to ~1.4. I finally upped to 30/30, which got the relations to ~1.6-1.8.[/QUOTE]

For a 29/29 bit job, Yafu requires 45M relations before it will even attempt filtering, and 91M for a 30/30 bit job. NFS@Home [url=http://escatter11.fullerton.edu/nfs/crunching.php]requires even more[/url].

Increasing bits doubles the speed and improves yield but requires double the number of relations.

You can also use a higher siever (e.g. 14e, 15e, etc) to increase yield but at a slower rate without changing the required number of relations. It's all a trade off.

wombatman 2014-03-16 02:51

Ah, I see. I knew from the last number I ran that increasing the bits would increase my relations needed, but I had it in my head that 30/30 would be more like 60-70M for some reason. Thanks for the NFS@Home--that's very helpful going forward.


All times are UTC. The time now is 20:34.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.