Max, GB4000 may have had a slight problem.

Earlier today I posted finding a confirmed prime 861*2^572599-1.

It has not posted yet on your stats page or on the Primes found page.

I did find it on yesterday's log just before the daily cleanup.


user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:43:14]
615*2^572587-1 is not prime. Res64: B6F5C537D8023AC6 Time : 449.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:43:18]
619*2^572587-1 is not prime. Res64: D60DBED8F4928B9D Time : 449.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:45:47]
861*2^572559-1 is prime! Time : 6796.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:45:49]
895*2^572559-1 is not prime. Res64: 6C90AA8402FC1737 Time : 6798.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:45:56]
713*2^572546-1 is not prime. Res64: 58FD9F95322C534D Time : 10028.0 sec.

[quote=MyDogBuster;151284]Max, GB4000 may have had a slight problem.

Earlier today I posted finding a confirmed prime 861*2^572599-1.

It has not posted yet on your stats page or on the Primes found page.

I did find it on yesterday's log just before the daily cleanup.


user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:43:14]
615*2^572587-1 is not prime. Res64: B6F5C537D8023AC6 Time : 449.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:43:18]
619*2^572587-1 is not prime. Res64: D60DBED8F4928B9D Time : 449.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:45:47]
861*2^572559-1 is prime! Time : 6796.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:45:49]
895*2^572559-1 is not prime. Res64: 6C90AA8402FC1737 Time : 6798.0 sec.
user=MyDogBuster
[2008-11-29 06:45:56]
713*2^572546-1 is not prime. Res64: 58FD9F95322C534D Time : 10028.0 sec.[/quote]
Ah-ha! I think I know what caused that problem. The copy-off script runs at 6:59 AM CST daily, and the status page script (which handles keeping track of primes) runs every 15 minutes. However, the way it's set up, when it does its run for 7:00 AM (actually, it runs at 7:01 AM), it runs *after* the copy-off script has essentially blanked out the files it works with. Hence, it will miss any prime that just happens to be found between 6:45 AM and 6:59 AM.

I'll go and fix this shortly so that the copy-off script doesn't run until *after* the status page script has had a chance to run. :smile: I'll also retroactively add the missed prime into the recurring log of primes.

[quote=mdettweiler;151286]Ah-ha! I think I know what caused that problem. The copy-off script runs at 6:59 AM CST daily, and the status page script (which handles keeping track of primes) runs every 15 minutes. However, the way it's set up, when it does its run for 7:00 AM (actually, it runs at 7:01 AM), it runs *after* the copy-off script has essentially blanked out the files it works with. Hence, it will miss any prime that just happens to be found between 6:45 AM and 6:59 AM.

I'll go and fix this shortly so that the copy-off script doesn't run until *after* the status page script has had a chance to run. :smile: I'll also retroactively add the missed prime into the recurring log of primes.[/quote]
Okay, I've fixed the crontab so that the status page script runs at every :00, :15, and :45 of every hour, and the copy-off script runs at 7:01 AM. That should close the gap. I'll fix the primes list shortly...

[QUOTE]Okay, I've fixed the crontab so that the status page script runs at every :00, :15, and :45 of every hour, and the copy-off script runs at 7:01 AM. That should close the gap. I'll fix the primes list shortly...
[/QUOTE]

Nice job. I figured it had something to do with the turnover. I just didn't want anyone to miss a prime. Aren't 'puters fun?

C443 currently processing at n= [COLOR=#0000ff]~577.21K[/COLOR]

Max,

Please load some more pairs in port 4000 within a day or so. I think we had calculated that Ian/you were processing 4200 pairs/day there so loading ~30000 pairs or an n=3K range, which would take 7-8 days, would be a good amount for now.

We should probably also send a file to David for port 400 within 1-2 days too. At about 8000 pairs/day, we could send about an n=5K file on it for the time being.


Gary

[quote=gd_barnes;151761]Max,

Please load some more pairs in port 4000 within a day or so. I think we had calculated that Ian/you were processing 4200 pairs/day there so loading ~30000 pairs or an n=3K range, which would take 7-8 days, would be a good amount for now.

We should probably also send a file to David for port 400 within 1-2 days too. At about 8000 pairs/day, we could send about an n=5K file on it for the time being.


Gary[/quote]
Okay, yep. I'll do that within the next few hours. :smile:

Will C443 get a stats page as there ins one for IB400/G4000?

I've given him lots of code, but haven't heard back from Carlos and, I'm not sure he has a web presence.
I can work something up over here for him, it will just be delayed by at least a day's worth of work.

Max,

I noticed that [URL]http://nplb-gb1.no-ip.org/llrnet/[/URL] is down at the moment so not only can we not view the status of port 4000, I can't access any of my machines remotely. I hope the machine that the server is on is not down. I checked my k/n pairs per hour on port 400 and it appears that there might have been a drop of one quad a few hours ago...Or it could be just some processing glitch in something. I'm not sure. (BTW, I added 2 more cores to port 4000 on Thurs. afternoon after my Riesel base 256 effort finished early Thurs. morning.)

I think I have the temps regulated pretty well on my machines now but unfortunately "crunchford", the machine that runs the server, is still one of the warmer running ones. (~70-71 C I think.) You might remember me mentioning that it was not one of the best choices for the server.

When you get a chance this morning, can you check things and make sure that you can get back on the above link and that port 4000 is working OK? I likely will be on next around 1 PM CST. (7 PM GMT)

Ian, you might also check and make sure you're still processing work on port 4000.


Thanks,
Gary

G4000 has been down for the last 5 hours.