[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;130930]After more sieving I was only able to bring the matrix down to 8.4M rows.
Windows still refuses to allocate enough space to solve it.

Can anyone help? I can send the final matrix, or the final filtered
data, or the raw data with singletons & dups removed.
[/QUOTE]
Can you make the filtering binary large-address-aware, using some kind of linker switch in Visual Studio? Doing that and rebooting in /3gb mode will give 3GB of VM space, though that still may not be sufficient for such a big job if you only have 2GB of physical memory.

[QUOTE=jasonp;130959]Can you make the filtering binary large-address-aware, using some kind of linker switch in Visual Studio? Doing that and rebooting in /3gb mode will give 3GB of VM space, though that still may not be sufficient for such a big job if you only have 2GB of physical memory.[/QUOTE]

I am using VC++ 6.0 and it does not seem to recognize the 3G switch.

And the machine only has 2GB anyway......

[QUOTE=xilman;130932]I can do it. I'll contact you by email to arrange details.


Paul[/QUOTE]The data arrived today but not the polynomial file. I've already sent email but if need be I can probably reverse engineer a compatible poly file. It's not that there aren't many plausible alternatives.

4*(2^129)^6+1 is the obvious one, with the reciprocal a close second.


Paul

[QUOTE=xilman;131692]The data arrived today but not the polynomial file. I've already sent email but if need be I can probably reverse engineer a compatible poly file. It's not that there are many plausible alternatives.

4*(2^129)^6+1 is the obvious one, with the reciprocal a close second.[/QUOTE]It was the obvious one. Filtering now started, and I hope the first pass will finish overnight.

Paul

[QUOTE=xilman;131692]The data arrived today but not the polynomial file. I've already sent email but if need be I can probably reverse engineer a compatible poly file. It's not that there aren't many plausible alternatives.

4*(2^129)^6+1 is the obvious one, with the reciprocal a close second.


Paul[/QUOTE]

I put a file called 'polyfile' on the disk. Didn't you see it?
The poly was indeed 4x^6 + 1. (yech!)

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;131739]I put a file called 'polyfile' on the disk. Didn't you see it?
The poly was indeed 4x^6 + 1. (yech!)[/QUOTE]nope, no such file on any of the disks. No matter, I've already built one [i]ab initio[/i] and the post-processing is well underway.

Paul