mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Conjectures 'R Us (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=81)
-   -   Sierp base 3 - mini-drive Ia (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=10506)

Flatlander 2008-10-27 01:53

1 Attachment(s)
90-91 complete.

Flatlander 2008-10-27 11:02

1 Attachment(s)
39809884*3^91905+1 is prime.
91-92 and 92-93 complete.

Flatlander 2008-10-28 01:19

Taking:
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-93K-94K.txt"]93K-94K[/URL]

Flatlander 2008-10-28 16:24

Taking:
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-94K-95K.txt"]94K-95K[/URL]
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-95K-96K.txt"]95K-96K[/URL]

Flatlander 2008-10-28 22:03

35382962*3^93533+1
Is prime.

Flatlander 2008-10-29 01:09

Taking:
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-96K-97K.txt"]96K-97K[/URL]
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-97K-98K.txt"]97K-98K[/URL]
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-98K-99K.txt"]98K-99K[/URL]
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-99K-100K.txt"]99K-100K[/URL]

I'll stitch them together and run them on one core. Should take 6-7 days.

mdettweiler 2008-10-29 02:34

[quote=Flatlander;147017]Taking:
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-96K-97K.txt"]96K-97K[/URL]
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-97K-98K.txt"]97K-98K[/URL]
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-98K-99K.txt"]98K-99K[/URL]
[URL="http://gbarnes017.googlepages.com/sieve-sierp-base3-0M-50M-99K-100K.txt"]99K-100K[/URL]

I'll stitch them together and run them on one core. Should take 6-7 days.[/quote]
Gary, I think KEP is sieving k=50K-200K right now for n=25K-100K, correct? Just curious, what/when was your last status report from him?

Once he's finished sieving that, we'll be ready to start the second Sierp. base 3 mini-drive. I was thinking that we should probably call it something like "Mini-drive - Sierp base 3 (II)" to avoid confusion with this one (while still preserving this thread and its log of events).

As for what exactly to put in the second mini-drive: do you think we should do 50K-150K (for a drive containing about as many k's as the Riesel base 3 mini-drive), or should we do the whole 50K-200K range all in one mini-drive?

KEP 2008-10-29 07:13

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;147031]Gary, I think KEP is sieving k=50K-200K right now for n=25K-100K, correct? Just curious, what/when was your last status report from him?

Once he's finished sieving that, we'll be ready to start the second Sierp. base 3 mini-drive. I was thinking that we should probably call it something like "Mini-drive - Sierp base 3 (II)" to avoid confusion with this one (while still preserving this thread and its log of events).

As for what exactly to put in the second mini-drive: do you think we should do 50K-150K (for a drive containing about as many k's as the Riesel base 3 mini-drive), or should we do the whole 50K-200K range all in one mini-drive?[/QUOTE]

Hi Max

Regarding k>50M to k<=100M, it is sieving around 107G at the moment. It is removing 1 k/n pair for that range every 46-130 seconds. If you can wait 4.3 days, then I'll have it taken to 150G, and it was never the intention nor does it look efficient to take it further than 150G in sieve.

Hope this helped clear out some things

KEP!

gd_barnes 2008-10-29 12:37

[quote=mdettweiler;147031]Gary, I think KEP is sieving k=50K-200K right now for n=25K-100K, correct? Just curious, what/when was your last status report from him?

Once he's finished sieving that, we'll be ready to start the second Sierp. base 3 mini-drive. I was thinking that we should probably call it something like "Mini-drive - Sierp base 3 (II)" to avoid confusion with this one (while still preserving this thread and its log of events).

As for what exactly to put in the second mini-drive: do you think we should do 50K-150K (for a drive containing about as many k's as the Riesel base 3 mini-drive), or should we do the whole 50K-200K range all in one mini-drive?[/quote]


I assume you mean k=50M-150M and 50M-200M not 50K-150K and 50K-200K. (lol)

Obviously you don't remember the first part of our Riesel base 3 mini drive very well. Doing a k=150M range for n=25K-100K would be insane! You think a k=100M range was hard to administer at the lower n-ranges, try doing a k=150M range. Not a chance!

Keep in mind I have to balance k's remaining on not just the k-range being processed in post 1 of the thread for the drive but also on my web pages for all k-ranges for the base as well as list primes there, remove k's remaining, etc. Everything must balance and be in sync at nearly all times.

First, we'll do k=50M-100M for n=25K-100K to get it 'on the same page' as the Riesel side. In the mean time, one person like me (when I free up a resource or 2) or anyone else who wants to volunteer for it, can run k=100M-200M for n=25K-35K or 25K-40K. Later on, we can start a drive for that k-range for n=35K (or 40K) to 100K. It's best that only one person or at most 2 do it. If that works out well, we'll plan on doing it that way for future mini drives.

I have no desire to run a drive again with a k=100M range for n=25K-100K. There are too many primes at the lower n-ranges for such a large k-range. When ranges are completed out of order, it makes things difficult and extra CPU hours are used.

One thing to remember though, we still have plenty of work on the Riesel base 3 drive for n=50K-100K. Micha has sent me a sieved file for it and I think it's mostly sufficient for n=50K-60K (while continuing to sieve n=60K-100K) but I have to remove some k's yet and then divide it up into n=1K files. Also, I needed a break from that drive for a bit. I'll likely post more files some time on Friday after I'm back from my business trip. Let's think about getting the Riesel drive closer to n=70K or so before starting a Sierp base 3 drive II.

I agree on making the Sierp drive a different thread and drive...as you indicated a 'II' prefix is good. After that, we'll do it in k=100M ranges adding one to a Roman-numeral prefix each time.


Gary

gd_barnes 2008-10-29 12:49

[quote=KEP;147051]Hi Max

Regarding k>50M to k<=100M, it is sieving around 107G at the moment. It is removing 1 k/n pair for that range every 46-130 seconds. If you can wait 4.3 days, then I'll have it taken to 150G, and it was never the intention nor does it look efficient to take it further than 150G in sieve.

Hope this helped clear out some things

KEP![/quote]


Yes, 150G is sufficient. We may sieve the n=50K-100K part of it to 175G.

You are also running k=100M-200M at the same time...Is that correct? I'm asking because if not, it's more efficient for you to do so.


Gary

KEP 2008-10-29 13:43

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;147076]Yes, 150G is sufficient. We may sieve the n=50K-100K part of it to 175G.

You are also running k=100M-200M at the same time...Is that correct? I'm asking because if not, it's more efficient for you to do so.


Gary[/QUOTE]

I've split the sieve over 3 cores, because it lowered the completion time from ~30-35 days, to ~10 days. I know it is not all to efficient, but the difference is only a few percent, so I decided to do it this way. I may add, that I only sieve the 3 ranges to 150G and not any further. Once the 50M-100M range completes, I'll e-mail you the sieve file, and then continue complete the other 2 ranges, starting with 100M-150M and then six days later complete the 150M-200M range in about 10 days :smile:

Regards

KEP


All times are UTC. The time now is 20:45.

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