[quote=gd_barnes;147648]Max,

The first k/n pair remaining in port 5000 is now n>560K. Therefore, please process the results to me for n=540K-545K and 549K-555K. All results should be there.

The next range that I'll suggest you do is n=560K-580K when the lowest k/n pair is above that range.

n=555K-560K will be done at the very end of the server so we won't be able to fully complete n=540K-560K at PrimeSearch until a little later.


Thanks,
Gary[/quote]
Okay, sounds good. I'll do this while I'm doing the 1st Drive results tomorrow, as described in its respective thread. :smile:

LLRnet IB5000 has completed 540K-545K and 549K-555K, results emailed to Gary. :smile:

Hey Max, I don't see your cores on port 5000.

Carlos

[quote=em99010pepe;147736]Hey Max, I don't see your cores on port 5000.

Carlos[/quote]
Actually, I've still got one core of my dualcore on port 5000; however, I had to turn off my quad-core for the time being. I do, however, plan to get it back online within a few days, after which I plan to leave it on port 5000 until we finish Drive #3. :smile:

Gary,

Releasing 590-596, I think it's better to add it to the IB5000 server. When I get 596-600 done ( tomorrow at 50 %) I'll move all cores to llrnet. Thank you.

BTW, 555-560 is still missing and I think we have 15 days left to complete drive 3. Final push?

Edit: Almost forgetting, you should also add some work from Drive 1, IB5000 should not dry with drive 3.

Carlos

[quote=em99010pepe;147894]Gary,

Releasing 590-596, I think it's better to add it to the IB5000 server. When I get 596-600 done ( tomorrow at 50 %) I'll move all cores to llrnet. Thank you.

BTW, 555-560 is still missing and I think we have 15 days left to complete drive 3. Final push?

Edit: Almost forgetting, you should also add some work from Drive 1, IB5000 should not dry with drive 3.

Carlos[/quote]


1. OK, I'll send 590-596 to IronBits in the next day or two.

2. 555-560 is already in the server after 560-590. (lol)

3. I got my new mobos today, you should see a serious increase in testing starting early morning Weds. your time. (Increase from 4 to 6 quads on the port.)

4. It's OK to let port 5000 run dry. We'll just need to shift all of our resources to ports 400 and 443 to finish up the 1st drive. When all k's are at n=600K, we'll reactivate it. David, please leave it intact after it dries. We may use it on a rally or 2 on the 1st drive.

There was a discussion in one of the threads here about how to process n>600K. It was decided to leave k=300-400 as is but to add all k's once this drive is finished. Because of the immense amount of work for n=600K-1M, we discussed having separate drives and servers for k=400-600, 600-800, and 800-1001. Since we already have ports 400 and 5000, it'll just be a net add of 1 server. Port 443 can be left as a 'roaving' server for rallies and to put on the drives as needed.

Based on that, here's the way I see it in the future for servers processing n=600K-1M:
k=300-400; left for manual reservations on all k's as is
k=400-600; port 400
k=600-800; (new) port 600
k=800-1001; port 5000

Port 443 can be used to help out on any effort and with rallies. When we do rallies, any port of people's choosing can be used. Since lower n-ranges LLR faster, that will encourage people to pick out the server that is at the lowest searched range and hence 'catch up' that drive with the others so to speak.

Anyone...thoughts, concerns, etc.?


Gary

reserving n=590K-596K for port 5000

I prefer to keep C443 online with work from 300<k<400. That's the range I want to process in the future or I can dedicate my cores to individual-k efforts.

Carlo

[quote=em99010pepe;148007]I prefer to keep C443 online with work from 300<k<400. That's the range I want to process in the future or I can dedicate my cores to individual-k efforts.

Carlo[/quote]


OK, whatever works. We'll play it by ear as we get closer. The idea is still to leave k=300-400 for individual-k reservations. If you want to load a specific k or up to ~5 k's in port 443, that works fine.

David,

I had a PM exchange with Max. We may not need any new servers. He has already set up a server on one of my quads and may set up another if needed. We can use those for the additional drives that we will have. That said, I don't know how 'robust' my servers would be. Yours have been shown to be very able to handle what appears to be upwards of 100 cores or more, which is what we need.

Note that this may all change but I want everyone to be aware of what may be around the corner.


Gary

[quote=gd_barnes;148012]OK, whatever works. We'll play it by ear as we get closer. The idea is still to leave k=300-400 for individual-k reservations. If you want to load a specific k or up to ~5 k's in port 443, that works fine.

[/quote]

That would be a good idea. After the end of Drive 1 we go back to this conversation. Are your two new quads already online?

[quote=em99010pepe;148015]That would be a good idea. After the end of Drive 1 we go back to this conversation. Are your two new quads already online?[/quote]


Yep. My 2 repaired quads (new mobos) went online ~noon GMT today (6 total) and are smoking those port 5000 pairs now. :smile: ETA on this drive should be prior to Nov. 15th now. That should still give us a possible chance to complete the 1st drive by year end, which would be a huge accomplishment after taking 7 weeks out for the 4th drive.


Gary