Prime95 version 25.7
 

[B]THIS IS A BETA VERSION - USE WITH CAUTION[/B]

Version of 25.7 is now available.

If you are running version 25.6 you can install the new version on top of the old version. If you were using version 25.6 to talk to the v4 server, then you will need to add the line "UseV4=1" at the front of prime.txt (if it isn't already there).

Steps to install version 25.7
---------------------------

1) DO NOT INSTALL OVER VERSION 24. If you have problems, you want to be able to revert to testing using version 24.
2) Create a new directory, download version 25.7 from the links below, unzip into this new directory.
3) Run version 25.7. Follow the link in the dialog box to create a userid.
4) Find problems. Report them to me.

Links to 25.7 versions
---------------------
Windows 32-bit - [url]ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v257.zip[/url]
Linux - [url]ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/mprime257.tar.gz[/url]
Linux 64-bit - [url]ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/mprime257-linux64.tar.gz[/url]
Windows 64-bit - [url]ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p64v257.zip[/url]
Mac OS X - [url]ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/mprime257-MacOSX.tar.gz[/url]

What's new
-----------------

This is primarily a bug fix release. Several small fixes have accumulated over the months.

The main new feature is a rewrite of the memory allocation scheme. Hopefully, available memory is allocated more intelligently among multiple workers with fewer restarts. There are more undoc.txt items for controlling prime95 in unusually situations (PauseWhileRunning, LowMemWhileRunning, Memory).

The "Time=" feature of version 24 is officially dead. There is a new during/else syntax that only works with a few prime.txt and local.txt options. If you have a compelling reason for supporting during/else on another option, let me know.

The Mac OS X version should work on OS X 10.4 but I cannot test that. If anyone has access to such a system, I'd appreciate a quick test.

If anyone has any idea how to create a staticly linked Linux version, I'd be grateful for the help. Using -lstatic whines that using gethostname (and others) means it cannot be linked staticly.

Version 25.7 sources are available too.

[quote=Prime95;144726][B]THIS IS A BETA VERSION - USE WITH CAUTION[/B][/quote]
Compare to 25.6's
[quote=Prime95;121281]THIS IS A PRE-BETA VERSION - NOT FOR EVERYDAY USE[/quote]
So is that a hint that it's getting more stable and closer to release, or are you just happening to use a different wording? :smile:

[QUOTE=Mini-Geek;144729]
So is that a hint that it's getting more stable and closer to release, or are you just happening to use a different wording? :smile:[/QUOTE]

Don't read too much into that! Since many are using it every day without problems, I thought it better to reduce the level of warning.

Tried running the Windwos 32-bit version and got the following errors

[Oct 7 16:27] Updating computer information on the server
[Oct 7 16:27] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=a25d8726f0c63524fdfc4cffa33b40d5&hg=878e4f43e2415578fd25513dfb87c2ae&wg=cc6e171616a0[/url]
[Oct 7 16:27] RESPONSE:
[Oct 7 16:27] pnErrorResult=9
[Oct 7 16:27] pnErrorDetail=Untrusted program versions currently excluded by PrimeNet
[Oct 7 16:27] ==END==
[Oct 7 16:27]
[Oct 7 16:27] PrimeNet error 9: Access denied
[Oct 7 16:27] Untrusted program versions currently excluded by PrimeNet
[Oct 7 16:27] Visit [url]http://mersenneforum.org[/url] for help.
[Oct 7 16:27] Will try contacting server again in 15 minutes.

Found a problem with memory allocation:[code][Oct 7 19:13] Worker starting
[Oct 7 19:13] Setting affinity to run worker on any logical CPU.
[Oct 7 19:13] Using FFT length 96K
[Oct 7 19:13] ECM on M1836271: curve #2 with s=1768286443529228, B1=50000, B2=5000000
[Oct 7 19:13] Using 2009MB of memory in stage 2.
[Oct 7 19:13] Stage 2 init complete. 18570 transforms, 2 modular inverses. Time: 33.027 sec.
[Oct 7 19:14] Out of memory!
[Oct 7 19:14] Worker stopped.[/code]Identical failure on both 32- and 64-bit Windows versions. System is Vista64 with 4GB physical RAM, Prime95 started with 1.0GB RAM in use; RAM use goes up to ~2.75GB and then fails (stage2 init seems to take about 1GB of RAM, the other 750GB is allocated post-init but it fails somewhere in that section. I'm not sure if a more verbose debug level would reveal anything?

Most features from my [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=121318&postcount=7]initial v25.6 feature request post[/url] have been addressed (thanks George! :grin:), these are the remaining ones:[list][*]When doing multi-threaded ECM it shows "Using FFT length 20K, 2 threads", but for single-threaded it just says "Using FFT length 20K". Can you make it explicity say "Using FFT length 20K, 1 thread", please?[*]ability to specify more than one type of worktype preference; for example I'd choose to any of TF, ECM or P-1. Ideally you could set a percentage distribution between the worktypes (e.g. spend 50% of time on TF, 30% on ECM and 20% on P-1) or have a "whatever-makes-most-sense" checkbox to auto-distribute the work among the selected types (taking into account how many real and hyperthreaded cores are in the current system, etc).[*]When starting stage2 could Prime95 print a message to the effect of "max efficiency needs <1234>MB of RAM; <768>MB available; using <620>MB"[*]If one thread is idle because it has run out of work to do that doesn't require a lot of RAM, see if it can borrow or steal a worktodo entry from another thread. For example, if thread #1 is doing P-1 work, but it's done all the stage1 work it can for now but needs to wait until more memory is available, it should be able to look at the queued work for other threads and steal (or borrow) low memory work (TF, P-1 stage 1, LL, etc) to do while it waits for more memory to be available.[*]I'd like to see all worktodo automagically assigned to available CPUs (unless the user has explicitly requested that certain cores only do certain work). There's no reason for core[1] to be idle when workdoto[2] has work waiting.
An extension to the above: If one (or more) cores are idle, and another core is working on something that can reasonably exploit more multithreading, respawn the other work with the appropriate number of threads to fully utilize the CPU. I'm currently doing a hack version of this: I have a dual-core CPU running TF-LMH on one core and LL on the other. Problem is that every now and then the server goes down and I can't get any work for the TF thread to do. Normally that would mean one core idle for hours (or days), but I have the LL set to run in 2 threads. Perhaps it's not ideal when TF has work (I'm not sure the of exact inefficiency ratio) but overall my throughput is definitely higher due to capturing all the otherwise-idle time on the TF core.[/list]

[QUOTE=harlee;144771]Tried running the Windwos 32-bit version and got the following errors
[Oct 7 16:27] pnErrorResult=9.[/QUOTE]

Fixed. The program is supposed to be self-registering on the server. However, Scott apparently allows this only if I run the client. Anyway, v25.7 build 3 is now registered with the server for all 5 ports.

Well, I've just created an account at mersenne.org and am running the 64-bit windows version of Prime95 25.7. I've done some work with Prime95 25.6 64-bit and that is saved in results.txt. I just told it to connect to the primenet servers and it looks like it got an LL test to do. However, in the "worker #1" window it is talking about doing a P-1 test. Is anything wrong here? Here are the outputs: (also, at the bottom you'll see I've selected 5 threads, but it looks like it is only using 4)

<Communication thread - Inactive>
[Main thread Oct 7 19:22] Mersenne number primality test program version 25.7
[Main thread Oct 7 19:27] Starting worker.
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&hg=dd731db7b8af4acfb7aea6071d34af06&wg=[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorResult=0
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorDetail=SUCCESS
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] u=WraithX
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] un=WraithX
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] cn=
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] od=0
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] ==END==
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Exchanging program options with server
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=po&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&nw=1&w=0&Priority=1&DaysOfWork=5&DayMem[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorResult=0
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorDetail=SUCCESS
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] od=1
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] ==END==
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Getting assignment from server
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=ga&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&c=0&ss=22517&sh=2A779F7271ED2973BD9E904[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorResult=0
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorDetail=Server assigned Lucas Lehmer primality test work.
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] k=3363D04DC68C6DEF90C523A2F197144D
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] A=1
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] b=2
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] n=46112389
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] c=-1
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] w=100
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] sf=68
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] p1=0
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] ==END==
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] PrimeNet success code with additional info:
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Server assigned Lucas Lehmer primality test work.
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Got assignment 3363D04DC68C6DEF90C523A2F197144D: LL M46112389
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Sending expected completion date for M46112389: Oct 25 2008
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=ap&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&k=3363D04DC68C6DEF90C523A2F197144D&c=0&[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorResult=0
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] pnErrorDetail=SUCCESS
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] ==END==
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27]
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Done communicating with server.


<Worker #1 - 0.00% of M46112389 P-1 stage 1>
[Oct 7 19:27] Worker starting
[Oct 7 19:27] Setting affinity to run worker on any logical CPU.
[Oct 7 19:27] No work to do at the present time. Waiting.
[Oct 7 19:27] Resuming.
[Oct 7 19:27] Optimal P-1 factoring of M46112389 using up to 2048MB of memory.
[Oct 7 19:27] Assuming no factors below 2^68 and 2 primality tests saved if a factor is found.
[Oct 7 19:27] Optimal bounds are B1=560000, B2=16520000
[Oct 7 19:27] Chance of finding a factor is an estimated 6.53%
[Oct 7 19:27] Setting affinity to run helper thread 1 on any logical CPU.
[Oct 7 19:27] Setting affinity to run helper thread 2 on any logical CPU.
[Oct 7 19:27] Setting affinity to run helper thread 3 on any logical CPU.
[Oct 7 19:27] Using FFT length 2560K, 5 threads
[Oct 7 19:27] Setting affinity to run helper thread 4 on any logical CPU.
[Oct 7 19:35] M46112389 stage 1 is 1.23% complete. Time: 497.406 sec.

[QUOTE=WraithX;144809]Well, I've just created an account at mersenne.org and am running the 64-bit windows version of Prime95 25.7. I've done some work with Prime95 25.6 64-bit and that is saved in results.txt. I just told it to connect to the primenet servers and it looks like it got an LL test to do. However, in the "worker #1" window it is talking about doing a P-1 test. Is anything wrong here? [/QUOTE]

That all looked good. Workers always use 1 thread. Since you selected multithreading using 5 threads you get the 1 worker thread and 4 helper threads.

[QUOTE=WraithX;144809]...looks like it got an LL test to do. However, in the "worker #1" window it is talking about doing a P-1 test. Is anything wrong here?[/QUOTE]Sounds normal. Testing normally follows the sequence:[LIST=1][*]trial factoring (up to around 2^68)[*]P-1 factoring[*]LL testing[*]LL double-check (not by you, by someone else at a later date)[/LIST]

[QUOTE=Prime95;144813]That all looked good. Workers always use 1 thread. Since you selected multithreading using 5 threads you get the 1 worker thread and 4 helper threads.[/QUOTE]

Ah, ok, thank you. Since this was my first time working on an exponent, I thought it strange that I was given an LL test and it started doing P-1.

BTW, is there a way to tell it to stop working (not get additional assignments) once it has finished working on the current assignment?

[quote=WraithX;144816]Ah, ok, thank you. Since this was my first time working on an exponent, I thought it strange that I was given an LL test and it started doing P-1.

BTW, is there a way to tell it to stop working (not get additional assignments) once it has finished working on the current assignment?[/quote]
Advanced > Quit GIMPS
then select the right option to finish your current work and then stop.

[QUOTE=Mini-Geek;144817]Advanced > Quit GIMPS
then select the right option to finish your current work and then stop.[/QUOTE]

What happens if I set, under Preferences..., "Days of work to queue up" equal to zero? Will that still try to queue up work after the current job is done? I'm not looking to "Quit GIMPS"/have my computer removed from the server. I'd just like to decide what I want to spend my resources on once this test is done.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;144806]If one (or more) cores are idle, and another core is working on something that can reasonably exploit more multithreading, respawn the other work with the appropriate number of threads to fully utilize the CPU.[/QUOTE]To illustrate, right now only 3 of 4 cores are being used on my machine:
#1 = ECM, now idle
#2,3 = LL, 2 threads
#4 = P-1

The P-1 worker is using all available RAM, so ECM eventually ran out of stage-1 work, so it's sitting idle until #4 finishes stage2. It would be more productive to either:
a) respawn #2,3 as 3-threaded or respawn #4 as 2-threaded
b) let #1 start working on some other low-memory task from another worker (stage1 of the next P-1, or start on the next LL test, etc).

I suspect that option (b) is a more efficient use of the CPU, multi-threaded workers tend to have far less than 100% efficient use of additional threads, especially past 2-threaded.

Im running Ubuntu Hardy x64 bit.

not sure if this is what is supposed to happen but when first running the program, it seems to ask twice for the memory limits. It first asks for the limits, and then says 8mb of memory is not enough, asks me for the mem limits again and then gets them right.

Secondly, if I close the prime95 process (by typing 17 i think) and then try to run it again, I dont get the console output I get when I run it the first time.

Also when asking for the priority at which I want t run, it gives bounds from 1 - 10. On Linux though I believe its actually called the "nice" value and functions differently than in windows. Perhaps you could look into this.

Is there any migration plan for those on 24.x? I have 4 separate copies of 24.x running on my quad core. When I move to 25.7, is there any easy way to transfer this work over? I wouldn't want to end up downloading 4 new primes to test by mistake.

[quote=adminc;144831]Secondly, if I close the prime95 process (by typing 17 i think) and then try to run it again, I dont get the console output I get when I run it the first time.[/quote]

mprime produces no screen output unless told to do so, once it is configured.

"./mprime -d" gives just the output with no menus (you'll have to Ctrl-C it);
"./mprime -m" gives the menus as well.

STH
Carsten

feature:
It nicely shows e.g. " (using 1234MB)" at the end of P-1 worker window titles; can this be replicated for ECM workers, please? (I think that's the only 2 that use large emounts of RAM, right?)

bug:
The whole anything-more-than-1800MB allocated problem (runs out of memory, even though memory is available, when set to >1800MB) from the v25.6 thread seems to still be present, please let me know how I can provide more useful feedback.

Not sure if this is supposed to happen, but it seems as though one thread goes lightning fast while the other is super slow.

Specs: Ubuntu Hardy x64
Core 2 duo@ 2.33Ghz

One thread takes about 1,000 seconds for each P-1 output, while the other takes approx 13,000 seconds.

Also, when setting up initially, p95 asks for the memory bounds twice:

It asks for day memory, then night memory, and says 8MB is not enough, and then asks for more memory. The second time I set the memory. it takes.

If I can provide any more info please tell me.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;144849]The whole anything-more-than-1800MB allocated problem[/QUOTE]It's having problems now even when set to 1800MB:[code][Oct 8 06:33] Restarting worker with new memory settings.
[Oct 8 06:33] Optimal P-1 factoring of M46061153 using up to 1800MB of memory.
[Oct 8 06:33] Assuming no factors below 2^68 and 2 primality tests saved if a factor is found.
[Oct 8 06:33] Optimal bounds are B1=560000, B2=16660000
[Oct 8 06:33] Chance of finding a factor is an estimated 6.54%
[Oct 8 06:33] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 8 06:33] Available memory is 1776MB.
[Oct 8 06:33] Using 1765MB of memory. Processing 79 relative primes (316 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 8 06:34] Memory allocation error. Trying again using less memory.
[Oct 8 06:34] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 8 06:34] Available memory is 1420MB.
[Oct 8 06:34] Using 1417MB of memory. Processing 62 relative primes (316 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 8 06:34] Memory allocation error. Trying again using less memory.
[Oct 8 06:34] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 8 06:34] Available memory is 1136MB.
[Oct 8 06:34] Using 1130MB of memory. Processing 48 relative primes (316 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 8 06:35] Memory allocation error. Trying again using less memory.
[Oct 8 06:35] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 8 06:35] Available memory is 909MB.
[Oct 8 06:35] Using 905MB of memory. Processing 37 relative primes (316 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 8 06:36] Memory allocation error. Trying again using less memory.
[Oct 8 06:36] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 8 06:36] Available memory is 727MB.
[Oct 8 06:36] Using 721MB of memory. Processing 28 relative primes (316 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 8 06:36] Memory allocation error. Trying again using less memory.
[Oct 8 06:36] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 8 06:36] Available memory is 581MB.
[Oct 8 06:36] Using 578MB of memory. Processing 21 relative primes (316 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 8 06:38] M46061153 stage 2 is 71.71% complete.
[Oct 8 07:33] Available memory is 581MB.
[Oct 8 07:33] Using 578MB of memory. Processing 21 relative primes (337 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 8 08:32] Available memory is 581MB.
[Oct 8 08:32] Using 578MB of memory. Processing 21 relative primes (358 of 480 already processed).[/code]

[QUOTE=db597;144834]Is there any migration plan for those on 24.x? [/QUOTE]

Not yet. Most people should continue using 24.x.

[QUOTE=WraithX;144816]BTW, is there a way to tell it to stop working (not get additional assignments) once it has finished working on the current assignment?[/QUOTE]

Yes, in prime.txt add the line:
MaxExponents=0
or change the number if the line allready exist, then restart prime95. Now prime95 will finish your current work in worktodo.txt and then stop.

I have a 4 core machine, and am running a seperate test in each core. The worker window numbers the CPU's 0, 1, 2, and 3, but the Worker thread settings window numbers them 1, 2, 3, and 4. Not a big deal but is a little confusing.

This is because in Windows cpu's are numbered from 0 and up. In Windows Task Manager in the Processes tab if you rightclick on a process and choose "Set Affinity" you can see they are called CPU 0, CPU 1, CPU 2, CPU 3 on a quad core.

[quote=ATH;144867]This is because in Windows cpu's are numbered from 0 and up. In Windows Task Manager in the Processes tab if you rightclick on a process and choose "Set Affinity" you can see they are called CPU 0, CPU 1, CPU 2, CPU 3 on a quad core.[/quote]


I realize that. All I was saying is that it should be consistant, whether it is 1234 or 0123, it should be the same in both places.

[QUOTE=Bent;144878]...it should be consistant, whether it is 1234 or 0123, it should be the same in both places.[/QUOTE]

I have sympathy for your view, but I'm inclined to leave it as is. Numbering worker windows from zero is just silly from a human user interface point of view. Humans number things from one. If I change the CPU numbering to 1 to 4, it will be inconsistent with the OS which numbers them from 0 to 3.

Also, if you ran two multithreaded workers would you have the workers numbered 0 and 2 (because they use CPUs 0&1 and 2&3)?

Did anyone see the initial memory setup problem i posted?

[QUOTE=adminc;144831]
not sure if this is what is supposed to happen but when first running the program, it seems to ask twice for the memory limits. It first asks for the limits, and then says 8mb of memory is not enough, asks me for the mem limits again and then gets them right.[/quote]

Mprime has always done this. Actually it doesn't say 8MB is not enough, it says are you sure you want to leave the settings at the minimum.

[quote]
Also when asking for the priority at which I want t run, it gives bounds from 1 - 10. On Linux though I believe its actually called the "nice" value and functions differently than in windows. Perhaps you could look into this.[/QUOTE]

The program's 1 - 10 is translated into Linux's 0 to 19 (or is it -19 to 0). This keeps it consistent with the Windows program's numbering. Anyway, leave it set to 1.

George, any idea on when the next stable version will be released?

[quote=Prime95;144889]Mprime has always done this. Actually it doesn't say 8MB is not enough, it says are you sure you want to leave the settings at the minimum.



The program's 1 - 10 is translated into Linux's 0 to 19 (or is it -19 to 0). This keeps it consistent with the Windows program's numbering. Anyway, leave it set to 1.[/quote]


The reason I posted this, is because the nice value didnt actually change for me even when I set the priority to 1.

(the nice stayed at 0)

[QUOTE=adminc;144895]The reason I posted this, is because the nice value didnt actually change for me even when I set the priority to 1.

(the nice stayed at 0)[/QUOTE]

You need to check the priority of the worker threads. The main UI thread and the communications thread are not affected by the priority setting.

[QUOTE=adminc;144882]Did anyone see the initial memory setup problem i posted?[/QUOTE]

My bad. You were correct - the software is asking the 8MB question even if you initially set memory to a larger value. It will be fixed in the next update.

OK, now that P-1 is done on the number I was assigned earlier, I am seeing the following error:

[Main thread Oct 7 19:22] Mersenne number primality test program version 25.7
[Main thread Oct 7 19:27] Starting worker.
<...snip original successful server comms...>
[Comm thread Oct 7 19:27] Done communicating with server.
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&hg=dd731db7b8af4acfb7aea6071d34af06&wg=[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Visit [url]http://mersenneforum.org[/url] for help.
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Will try contacting server again in 70 minutes.
[Comm thread Oct 8 20:37] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Oct 8 20:37] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&hg=dd731db7b8af4acfb7aea6071d34af06&wg=[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 8 20:37] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 20:37] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 20:37] Visit [url]http://mersenneforum.org[/url] for help.
[Comm thread Oct 8 20:37] Will try contacting server again in 70 minutes.
[Comm thread Oct 8 21:47] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Oct 8 21:47] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&hg=dd731db7b8af4acfb7aea6071d34af06&wg=[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 8 21:47] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 21:47] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 21:47] Visit [url]http://mersenneforum.org[/url] for help.
[Comm thread Oct 8 21:47] Will try contacting server again in 70 minutes.


Is any additional info needed to help diagnose this problem?

[quote=WraithX;144911][Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] URL: [URL]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=e9a62e8cdeb42af4cfabb1c636f543ad&hg=dd731db7b8af4acfb7aea6071d34af06&wg=[/URL]
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Visit [URL]http://mersenneforum.org[/URL] for help.
[Comm thread Oct 8 19:27] Will try contacting server again in 70 minutes.[/quote]

See:

[quote=Uncwilly;144901]It seems that there is an outage on the V5 server. No response from my browser or Prime95.[/quote]

Minor items

1. Help | Help Topics produces "failed to launch help".
2. Edit | Copy ... does nothing

I have discovered an asymmetry in how priorities are handled. This may be expected behaviour but I thought I'd report it just in case. Long winded explanation follows.

I have a quad core system running XP. I have configured 4 workers all doing Trial Factoring, CPU Affinity set to "Smart Assignment", default priority 1. Prime95 25.7 is running as a service from bootup.

Periodically I run other factoring programs like (msieve -p) or (ecm -n), each launched with their low/idle priority switch. This results in an even load on whichever core is used, both the respective Prime95 worker and the factoring program getting an even slice. Upon completion of the factoring job, the cpu is returned back to the worker. This arrangement works well.

However, if I stop and restart Prime95 while these factor programs are running, I find that the 4 workers are assigned to the 4 cores but those workers assigned to cores where the factoring programs are running do no work. Restarting the factoring programs while Prime95 is running restores the even sharing.

[QUOTE=tmorrow;144922]2. Edit | Copy ... does nothing[/QUOTE]Works for me -- it copies the current child window's contents to the clipboard (same as Ctrl+C).

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;144925]Works for me -- it copies the current child window's contents to the clipboard (same as Ctrl+C).[/QUOTE]

Ok, I didn't know how it worked. I've tried it and it works fine. It seems that newlines are converted into 2 spaces so all the output is on one large line, is that expected?

[QUOTE=tmorrow;144927]It seems that newlines are converted into 2 spaces so all the output is on one large line, is that expected?[/QUOTE]That's not quite it -- the text is copied with a UNIX-style newline (LF -- 0x0A), which if you paste into most Windows-based text editors (which expect newlines to be represented by ([url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newline]CRLF[/url] -- 0x0D0A)) is not recognized as a valid line-separator character and is therefore treated as whitespace.

But yes, it would be more convenient if George could tweak it so that the text is copied with CRLF linebreaks, please? :)

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;144930] it would be more convenient if George could tweak it so that the text is copied with CRLF linebreaks, please? :)[/QUOTE]

Will do. Next build will also change the menu choice to "Copy Window".

I'm using the V4 server. In the last 24 hours I've been receiving several errors:

[Comm thread Oct 10 07:39] Unexpected CURL library error: couldn't connect to host

Is this a server-side issue?

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;144806][LIST][*]If one thread is idle because it has run out of work to do that doesn't require a lot of RAM, see if it can borrow or steal a worktodo entry from another thread. For example, if thread #1 is doing P-1 work, but it's done all the stage1 work it can for now but needs to wait until more memory is available, it should be able to look at the queued work for other threads and steal (or borrow) low memory work (TF, P-1 stage 1, LL, etc) to do while it waits for more memory to be available.[*]I'd like to see all worktodo automagically assigned to available CPUs (unless the user has explicitly requested that certain cores only do certain work). There's no reason for core[1] to be idle when workdoto[2] has work waiting.
An extension to the above: If one (or more) cores are idle, and another core is working on something that can reasonably exploit more multithreading, respawn the other work with the appropriate number of threads to fully utilize the CPU. I'm currently doing a hack version of this: I have a dual-core CPU running TF-LMH on one core and LL on the other. Problem is that every now and then the server goes down and I can't get any work for the TF thread to do. Normally that would mean one core idle for hours (or days), but I have the LL set to run in 2 threads. Perhaps it's not ideal when TF has work (I'm not sure the of exact inefficiency ratio) but overall my throughput is definitely higher due to capturing all the otherwise-idle time on the TF core.[/list][/QUOTE]If the v5 server stays incommunicado, I will do that on some of my machines. On others I may raise the TF bit level on expos 2 or 3 notches. Also, I will then start taking data in hand and start making more high usage entries.

[QUOTE=tmorrow;144977]this a server-side issue?[/QUOTE][url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/member.php?find=lastposter&t=5758]Yes[/url] (server appears to have been down for around 24 hours now).

Has anyone tried 25.7 on a laptop? Does it stop properly when on battery? Does it resume properly? Is hibernation ever a problem?

Dop? hem? s p? proes obes a 25.7 s tiopt 25.7 heryon ronyoesum? at prn ony? atoeveny? a pred Doe p iteroptit Dop? obapttoperopronas Doberlaprles iba at 25.7 prly? em? beres proeried onesterla at prlan white a bly? 25.7 on Is t Ha prly? trlerit 25.7 esumes whit Hasteroprlatesumesum? pes Dopronerlattopes a tibes ioproprlaprnyopes teron 25.7 top Haties itopr ly? opron here atern 25.7 ier ten em? itonat p? pe ly? bly Dop? lerne Is itonesumes pry? ly? ierlem? attit Doprern Ha r bled he pr ied p? s ly i

[quote=James Heinrich;144996][URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/member.php?find=lastposter&t=5758"]Yes[/URL] (server appears to have been down for around 24 hours now).[/quote]It's up again now.

[quote=Xyzzy;145090]Dop? hem? s p? proes obes a 25.7 s tiopt 25.7 heryon ronyoesum? at prn ony? atoeveny? a pred Doe p iteroptit Dop?

< snip >

Is itonesumes pry? ly? ierlem? attit Doprern Ha r bled he pr ied p? s ly i[/quote]? ?

[quote=Prime95;145088]Has anyone tried 25.7 on a laptop? Does it stop properly when on battery? Does it resume properly? Is hibernation ever a problem?[/quote]


Yes I am running it on a laptop (32bit windows) and it does properly stop and resume when i remove the power.

Hibernation and sleep are not a problem.

safe to replace 24.14 w/ 25.7 for factoring?
 

I have a dual-core laptop that is rarely on, so I'm using it for trial factoring instead of doing Lucas-Lehmer tests. I'm running two instances of Prime95 24.14, but having to manage two copies is a bit of a pain.

1. I'm wondering if it is safe to replace 24.14 with 25.7, for two reasons:

a. Trial factoring is much more parallelizable than Lucas-Lehmer tests and is less likely to cause errors on untested code.

b. Trial factoring is also more stable, and does not require the self-tests.

2. Also, if I switch to 25.7, will Prime95 automatically detect the files generated by the second copy of Prime95, or will I have to manually merge them into the original files?

[QUOTE=ixfd64;145133]

1. I'm wondering if it is safe to replace 24.14 with 25.7, for two reasons:

a. Trial factoring is much more parallelizable than Lucas-Lehmer tests and is less likely to cause errors on untested code.

b. Trial factoring is also more stable, and does not require the self-tests.

2. Also, if I switch to 25.7, will Prime95 automatically detect the files generated by the second copy of Prime95, or will I have to manually merge them into the original files?[/QUOTE]

It is safe to use 25.7 instead of 24.14. However, you cannot simply replace 24.14 and expect version 25.7 to pick up where 24.14 left off. I haven't written any upgrade instructions. You will have to manually merge your two worktodo files.

Thanks for the information.

By the way, you should change Prime95 such that it checks for "UseV4=1" in prime.ini instead of prime.txt. Parameter switches usually belong in INI files, you know? :smile:

[QUOTE=ixfd64;145149]
By the way, you should change Prime95 such that it checks for "UseV4=1" in prime.ini instead of prime.txt. Parameter switches usually belong in INI files, you know? :smile:[/QUOTE]

You can thank Windows for prime95 abandoning INI files. I've received a ton of complaints that users have invoked a Windows restore feature (to undo a driver or program install or recover from some other problem) only to find that prime.ini and/or worktodo.ini was rolled back to some old date. They end up retesting an exponent, losing an assignment, or having to restore their preferences. Way to go MS.

Speaking of MS, yesterday I had to install a floppy drive on a machine to run Windows XP x64 setup. A floppy!? MS sells an OS that requires obsolete hardware to run the setup program. Anyway, I'm in an anti-MS mood today.

How about abandoning .ini files altogether? For example, the next version of Prime95 could use local.txt instead of local.ini, primecfg.txt instead of prime.ini and worktodo.txt instead of worktodo.ini.

I just found out that Prime95 25.7 already uses text files instead of .ini files. I guess my previous suggestion was redundant.

[QUOTE=Prime95;145156]Speaking of MS, yesterday I had to install a floppy drive on a machine to run Windows XP x64 setup. A floppy!? MS sells an OS that requires obsolete hardware to run the setup program.[/QUOTE]To clarify, in 2001 MS sold an OS that required obsolete hardware; they stopped supporting it in 2005... Their current 64-bit OS (Vista) can install drivers off assorted sources (floppy, CD, USB, etc).
:cool:

How about replacing all that .ini nonsense with an XML file?

[code]<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<sections>
<comment>Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search</comment>
<section name="local.ini">
<item key="OldCpuSpeed" value="2398" />
<item key="ComputerGUID" value="xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" />
<item key="ComputerID" value="xxxxx" />
<item key="DayMemory" value="1024" />
<item key="NightMemory" value="1024" />
<item key="DayStartTime" value="450" />
<item key="DayEndTime" value="1410" />
<item key="Affinity" value="100" />
<item key="ThreadsPerTest" value="4" />
<item key="LastEndDatesSent" value="1223559356" />
<item key="RollingHash" value="347781287" />
<item key="RollingStartTime" value="1223574734" />
<item key="RollingCompleteTime" value="164381" />
<item key="RollingAverage" value="1030" />
<item key="Pid" value="0" />
<item key="WorkerThreads" value="1" />
</section>
<section name="prime.ini">
<item key="V24OptionsConverted" value="yes" />
<item key="SendAllFactorData" value="yes" />
<item key="StressTester" value="no" />
<item key="UsePrimenet" value="yes" />
<item key="DialUp" value="no" />
<item key="UserID" value="xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" />
<item key="UserPWD" value="xxx" />
<item key="UserName" value="xxxxxxxxxxxx" />
<item key="AskedAboutMemory" value="yes" />
<item key="WorkPreference" value="101" />
<item key="OutputIterations" value="10000" />
<item key="ResultsFileIterations" value="999999999" />
<item key="DiskWriteTime" value="30" />
<item key="NetworkRetryTime" value="2" />
<item key="NetworkRetryTime2" value="70" />
<item key="DaysOfWork" value="7" />
<item key="DaysBetweenCheckins" value="1" />
<item key="TwoBackupFiles" value="yes" />
<item key="SilentVictory" value="no" />
<item key="MergeWindows" value="4" />
<item key="Windows95Service" value="yes" />
</section>
<section name="worktodo.ini">
<item key="DoubleCheck" value="0000000000000000000000000xxxxxxx,xxxxxxxx,xx,x" />
<item key="DoubleCheck" value="0000000000000000000000000xxxxxxx,xxxxxxxx,xx,x" />
<item key="DoubleCheck" value="0000000000000000000000000xxxxxxx,xxxxxxxx,xx,x" />
<item key="DoubleCheck" value="0000000000000000000000000xxxxxxx,xxxxxxxx,xx,x" />
</section>
</sections>
</xml>[/code]

OK, I may have found a bug with version 25.7.

I allocated 32 MB of memory for daytime and nighttime use, and Prime95 still complained about getting only 8 MB.

Edit: There seems to be another major problem. I added "UseV4=1" to the prime.txt file, but it gets removed every time I run Prime95.

It's a good thing I didn't replace version 24.14 with 25.7 yet.

[QUOTE=ixfd64;145164]OK, I may have found a bug with version 25.7.

I allocated 32 MB of memory for daytime and nighttime use, and Prime95 still complained about getting only 8 MB.

Edit: There seems to be another major problem. I added "UseV4=1" to the prime.txt file, but it gets removed every time I run Prime95.

It's a good thing I didn't replace version 24.14 with 25.7 yet.[/QUOTE]

If you are running Vista, install Prime95 somewhere other than Program Files. If not Vista, maybe it is a permissions problem; it looks like the revised files are not being written.

I'm running Vista on that computer, but I'm not using the Program Files folder.

For some reaosn, Prime95 still thinks I'm using v5.

[QUOTE=ixfd64;145164]I allocated 32 MB of memory for daytime and nighttime use, and Prime95 still complained about getting only 8 MB.
[/QUOTE]

Already been noticed, will be fixed in next release (post #33).

[quote=Prime95;145088]Has anyone tried 25.7 on a laptop? Does it stop properly when on battery? Does it resume properly? Is hibernation ever a problem?[/quote]
I've tried on one laptop running Ubuntu 8.04 and on my Eee PC901, and mprime does not stop when on battery. Hibernation is not a problem.

If you want to handle ACPI in Linux, please have a look at thermal management as well. I'd like mprime to throttle down when the CPU temperature gets within one or two K from the critical point where the computer slows down or suspends to protect itself, or even an option to keep the CPU at a configurable temperature by dymaically changing the throttling value. This is useful to keep fan noise on workstations at an acceptable level.

Still having big problems with Prime95 having memory allocation errors and paring itself down to ~500MB for P-1 (even though 2GB+ is available).

Also, I think I mentioned it before, but it would be useful to have menu option (both main window menu and system tray icon menu) to temporarily restrict to low-memory mode. The LowMemWhileRunning setting is great, but every now and then I may run into a program or situation that wasn't pre-configured for low-mem, but I want to force low-mem mode.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;145177]Still having big problems with Prime95 having memory allocation errors and paring itself down to ~500MB for P-1 [/QUOTE]

64-bit Windows, right? If so, try getting 25.7 build 4 (same URL) and see if the problem goes away.

[QUOTE=Prime95;145187]64-bit Windows, right? If so, try getting 25.7 build 4 (same URL) and see if the problem goes away.[/QUOTE]

Never mind. What looked promising has started to fail. I really don't know what's going on. I call malloc and get a NULL back when I'm well below the system's physical memory according to task manager.

[QUOTE=Prime95;145187]64-bit Windows, right? If so, try getting 25.7 build 4 (same URL) and see if the problem goes away.[/QUOTE]Problem doesn't go away :sad:
See attachment. Set Prime95 to allow up to 2400MB. Used memory before starting was 1.22GB, the peak cutoff point was 3.05GB for both failed attempts. After this I reset the settings to use 1800MB, Prime95 elected to use 1765MB which put the system memory usage (according to Task Manager) at 3.09GB and it's running just fine.

[i]edit:[/i]
[QUOTE=Prime95;145196]Never mind. What looked promising has started to fail. I really don't know what's going on. I call malloc and get a NULL back when I'm well below the system's physical memory according to task manager.[/QUOTE]Aha! So I'm not crazy! :grin:
Doesn't help you, but I feel less dumb now :cool:

[QUOTE=Prime95;145196]Never mind. What looked promising has started to fail. I really don't know what's going on. I call malloc and get a NULL back when I'm well below the system's physical memory according to task manager.[/QUOTE]Could it be a fragmentation problem? I'm just saying because I have experienced this in the past. The OS was unable to find any contiguous memory segment large enough to satisfy my request. The only solutions I found were to either deallocate the offending bits of memory strewn about the address space or to quit and restart the process.

Small observation: Prime95 notes:[quote][Main thread Oct 12 19:41] Entering a period of low memory usage because WHATEVER.EXE is running.[/quote]but it never mentions at what point the period of low memory usage stops; it might be useful to say:[quote][Main thread Oct 12 19:42] Ending period of low memory usage[/QUOTE]once all the possible LowMemWhileRunning conditions are lifted.

[QUOTE=retina;145204]Could it be a fragmentation problem? I'm just saying because I have experienced this in the past. The OS was unable to find any contiguous memory segment large enough to satisfy my request. The only solutions I found were to either deallocate the offending bits of memory strewn about the address space or to quit and restart the process.[/QUOTE]I forgot to mention that some DLL's can use memory in low the address space also. Check the registry key: HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Windows\Appinit_Dlls

Usually software that likes to monitor for special keystrokes will inject a DLL using this method and it can mess with the address space allocation.

Is there a command line version of this for windows?

[QUOTE=adminc;145234]Is there a command line version of this for windows?[/QUOTE]

:rtfm:

[quote=Uncwilly;145242]:rtfm:[/quote]

I looked through the readme file and there was nothing. The readme file appears to be the exact same one shipped with v24.

error updating computer information
 

I have 4 machines running 25.7: an OSX 10.4, and 3 XP machines.

My last XP machine I installed gave the following error when updating computer information:

[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] Updating computer information on the server
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] URL: [url]http://v5.mersenne.org/v5server/?v=0.95&px=GIMPS&t=uc&g=0e8fc7f4a16e485bb69db45659e296cc&hg=879d525368856e7f94301fe965fba91c&wg[/url]
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] RESPONSE:
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] pnErrorResult=7
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] pnErrorDetail=parameter f: Invalid string length: 0
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] ==END==
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27]
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] PrimeNet error 7: Invalid parameter
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] parameter f: Invalid string length: 0
[Comm thread Oct 13 18:27] Visit [url]http://mersenneforum.org[/url] for help.

I'm not sure what the issue is since my other machines installed and are running/updating with the server without any issues. It may be that my last machine is the slowest, a 400Mhz Dell Latitude (no big loss if it doesn't work). Any information would be appreciated. Since I'm a noob here, flame away if I missed something obvious... :smile:

[QUOTE=adminc;145275]I looked through the readme file and there was nothing. The readme file appears to be the exact same one shipped with v24.[/QUOTE]Did you look at the help? There is a section on commandline arguements.

[quote=Uncwilly;145286]Did you look at the help? There is a section on commandline arguements.[/quote]


I would ask you if you have looked at help:

[quote="Prime95"]Failed to launch help.[/quote]

[QUOTE=heyba_manba;145278]It may be that my last machine is the slowest, a 400Mhz Dell Latitude (no big loss if it doesn't work). Any information would be appreciated. Since I'm a noob here, flame away if I missed something obvious... :smile:[/QUOTE]

Prime95 is having trouble sending the cpu features. If you do Options/CPU does it display anything along the lines of "RDTSC,CMOV,etc.". If so, what is the exact string.

[QUOTE=adminc;145287]I would ask you if you have looked at help:[/QUOTE]
I just pulled up the help on my machine. The problem that you are having is windows not supporting older help files. You can fix the windows problem then you can read the help.

[QUOTE=Prime95;145288]Prime95 is having trouble sending the cpu features. If you do Options/CPU does it display anything along the lines of "RDTSC,CMOV,etc.". If so, what is the exact string.[/QUOTE]

CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, MMX

Prime95 claims the CPU is a Celeron, but it is a Mobile PII.

I rebooted (yet again) since I wasn't sure what the CPU is and looked in the BIOS to find out. There were some Windows updates pending, after that installation and finishing rebooting, it at least talks to the server now. At this point I'll assume it was some windows problem and not Prime95.

I don't know if it matters that Prime95 thinks it is a Celeron or not. It does have the correct cache sizes. It is at least working now so I'm happy :smile:

[QUOTE=heyba_manba;145299]I don't know if it matters that Prime95 thinks it is a Celeron or not. It does have the correct cache sizes. It is at least working now so I'm happy :smile:[/QUOTE]

Celeron vs. Mobile PII makes no difference. I fixed the server to accept empty CPU features string (RDTSC, CMOV, and MMX are not sent to the server).

[QUOTE=Prime95;145301]Celeron vs. Mobile PII makes no difference. I fixed the server to accept empty CPU features string (RDTSC, CMOV, and MMX are not sent to the server).[/QUOTE]

Thanks! I may end up using some more low end machines at some point, so it's nice to know they'll be ok.

[quote=adminc;145275]I looked through the readme file and there was nothing. The readme file appears to be the exact same one shipped with v24.[/quote]My copy of the v24 readme.txt has

[code]COMMAND LINE ARGUMENTS
----------------------
-An This is used to run two or more copies of prime95
from the same directory. Using this command line argument
causes prime95 to use a different set of filenames for the
INI files, the results file, the log file, and the spool file.
Just use a different value of n for each copy of
prime95.exe you start.
-t Run the torture test. Same as Options/Torture Test.
-Wdirectory This tells prime95 to find all its files in a different
directory than the executable.
[/code]

For the first time I'm running 4 LL's at once, one on each core of my quad Q9450. I find that Prime95 is slowing down other programs and games, never felt that before, not sure if its the 4 LL's or some bug.

I run at priority 1 in v25.7 build3 64bit on XP 64bit but in Windows Task Manager is says Priority Normal, but I think prime95 always said that without actually running at normal? I play mmorpg and I feel it "lags" more than normal and when I shut down Prime95 it gets better.

[quote=ATH;145758]For the first time I'm running 4 LL's at once, one on each core of my quad Q9450. I find that Prime95 is slowing down other programs and games, never felt that before, not sure if its the 4 LL's or some bug.

I run at priority 1 in v25.7 build3 64bit on XP 64bit but in Windows Task Manager is says Priority Normal, but I think prime95 always said that without actually running at normal? I play mmorpg and I feel it "lags" more than normal and when I shut down Prime95 it gets better.[/quote]
i used to get that before i upgraded my pc
i had a Athlon 64 3800+ and DDR 333 memory and running llr(very similar to LL tests) made the everything respond slow
i now have a Q6600 with DDR2 1066 memory and it runs fine with 4 llr tests running
i think that priorities apply to cpu time but not memory access time and that is the problem we have experienced

what speed memory do u have

Yeah, what henryzz suggested is the only thing I can really think of, and it'd make perfect sense. If memory bandwidth is bottlenecking prime95 (as I've heard is the main bottleneck slowing down quad core machines), I'd be surprised if that didn't slow down other tasks on the computer by some amount.

I admit I've noticed a similar effect (Q6600, DDR2-800, Vista64) with 4 independant test running. A quick-&-dirty solution was to run at least one of the workers multi-threaded, which is slightly inefficient such that my overall CPU usage is generally in the 95-98% range, but provides zero interferance with any other running programs.

[QUOTE=henryzz;145760]what speed memory do u have[/QUOTE]

2 x 2GB PC2-6400, I think they are 400 Mhz?

I request an option to pause only 1 thread then, that would solve my problem while gaming.

Stopping one Thread
 

I have a work around for stopping one thread that involves copying Prime 95 any version to another directory and running it from there. Be sure you don't set the affinity of a thread to the same CPU as another instance. The second instance does not start at boot-up "error creating service" message appears if tried.

A second instance can also work around the limit of memory available to Prime 95 for ECM and other memory hungry applications. This will not give more memory to one instance but will make it possible to do two ECMs with maximum memory at the same time. At present I have only 2GB on My Quad core and can't really give more than 1536 MB to Prime 95 so don't have the problem you guys are experiencing.

In the bench mark thread I will be posting the timing results of various CPU/Thread LLTest combinations. Perhaps someone would like to try the same with Factoring. It may be worth while to have a look at it.

nelson

P.S. There is a way to stop one thread without all this fuss but it's so messy I won't be posting it here or anywhere else for that matter. I leave it to those who have some idea how Prime95 works to figure out. And when you have you won't want to do it anyway!!

wnp

[quote=Nelson;145775] ...
In the bench mark thread I will be posting the timing results of various CPU/Thread LLTest combinations. Perhaps someone would like to try the same with Factoring. It may be worth while to have a look at it.

nelson
...
wnp[/quote]

Here it is:

[URL]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=145777&postcount=362[/URL]

P.S.
@ ATH,

James has already requested such a feature numerous times already and it would be quite useful like the old PauseWhileRunning feature of previous versions. I don't want to stop everything either. There are however difficulties with threads that don't exist with a complete application.

wnp

[QUOTE=ATH;145770]2 x 2GB PC2-6400, I think they are 400 Mhz?[/QUOTE]PC2-6400 is 800MHz DDR (technically it is running at 400MHz, but would almost always be expressed at the effective rate of 800MHz).
[QUOTE=ATH;145770]I request an option to pause only 1 thread then, that would solve my problem while gaming.[/QUOTE]You have two methods available as of v25.7:
a) Test | Stop... then uncheck the "stop all workers" checkbox and you'll only stop worker #1 (or whatever workernumber you put in there).
b) Check out the [i]PauseWhileRunning[/i] (also [i]LowMemWhileRunning[/i]) options in prime.txt, as documented in undoc.txt -- it can now pause a specific number of workers when a specified program is running.

[quote=ATH;145770]2 x 2GB PC2-6400, I think they are 400 Mhz?

I request an option to pause only 1 thread then, that would solve my problem while gaming.[/quote]
mine is 2 x 1GB PC2-8500 1066mhz in dual channel mode it seams from what people have posted that that is the minimum speed for perfect speed
i am using vista ultimate so i would that to increase the needed speed so my advice would be dont get below PC2-8500 as my 2x1GB cost about £35(60 US Dollars currently) which for most people if you are geting a quad should be affordable

George,
Is there any problem with having the same account name and team name. I had created an account by the name Team_Prime_Rib last year but now that teams are here I have created a team of the same name. Will this cause any problems on the server side for you or Scott? If it is a problem, you could rename the user account name to "garo". Thanks.

[quote=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_number#Minor_results]The only even perfect number of the form [I]x[/I]3 + 1 is 28 (Makowski 1962).[/quote]
is this proved or is just for known even perfect numbers
could this be used in eliminating possible exponents for mersenne primes

I'd have to look up the original paper to be sure, but I have a feeling the proof shows that any number of the form (2^(n-1))(2^n-1) can't be in the form x^3+1 (except for n=1,3), which means it wouldn't help us distinguish between mersenne primes and mersenne composites. Numerical evidence for the first few thousand integers seems to confirm this.

[QUOTE=garo;145828]George,
Is there any problem with having the same account name and team name. I had created an account by the name Team_Prime_Rib last year but now that teams are here I have created a team of the same name. Will this cause any problems on the server side for you or Scott? If it is a problem, you could rename the user account name to "garo". Thanks.[/QUOTE]

I don't think that's a problem. Contact Scott if it does not work

It is working without any trouble.

Also, is it possible for a team owner to see the list of team members? There does not seem to be any way to see who the team members are or what exponents are assigned to them. Just a list of computers that are working for the team.

Got a "Memory allocation error" when starting P-1 stage 2. Just stopping and restarting the worker thread seemed to have fixed the problem as the memory settings didn't change (1792MB for day and night).

Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.60GHz
CPU speed: 2593.61 MHz, with hyperthreading
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, Prefetch, MMX, SSE, SSE2
L1 cache size: 8 KB
L2 cache size: 512 KB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 128 bytes
TLBS: 64

I have 2.5 GB of memory.

[Oct 23 07:41] M46233877 stage 1 is 99.90% complete. Time: 990.865 sec.
[Oct 23 07:43] M46233877 stage 1 complete. 1601568 transforms. Time: 81747.478 sec.
[Oct 23 07:43] Starting stage 1 GCD - please be patient.
[Oct 23 07:47] Stage 1 GCD complete. Time: 231.538 sec.
[Oct 23 07:47] Using 1785MB of memory. Processing 80 relative primes (0 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 23 07:49] Memory allocation error. Trying again using less memory.
[Oct 23 07:49] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 23 07:49] Using 1417MB of memory. Processing 62 relative primes (0 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 23 07:52] M46233877 stage 2 is 0.00% complete.
[Oct 23 08:12] M46233877 stage 2 is 1.05% complete. Time: 1238.711 sec.
<snip>
[Oct 23 15:47] M46233877 stage 2 is 24.02% complete. Time: 1244.685 sec.
[Oct 23 16:06] Worker stopped.
[Oct 23 16:06] Worker starting
[Oct 23 16:06] Setting affinity to run worker on logical CPUs 0,1
[Oct 23 16:06] Optimal P-1 factoring of M46233877 using up to 1792MB of memory.
[Oct 23 16:06] Assuming no factors below 2^68 and 2 primality tests saved if a factor is found.
[Oct 23 16:07] Optimal bounds are B1=555000, B2=16650000
[Oct 23 16:07] Chance of finding a factor is an estimated 6.53%
[Oct 23 16:07] Using FFT length 2560K
[Oct 23 16:07] Using 1785MB of memory. Processing 80 relative primes (62 of 480 already processed).
[Oct 23 16:10] M46233877 stage 2 is 24.99% complete.

[QUOTE=ATH;145770]2 x 2GB PC2-6400, I think they are 400 Mhz?

I request an option to pause only 1 thread then, that would solve my problem while gaming.[/QUOTE]

Folks, you just can't run P95 while running 3D games. 3D games are very intensive users of memory bandwidth, and there will be severe contention for those resources between the game and P95, P95's idle priority notwithstanding.

This happens because your game is GPU intensive but CPU lighter, while P95 is the opposite. BOTH, however, want gobs of memory, and that's your bottleneck.

If you want to frag, you have to stop P95. That's just how it is.

Jester

if anyone can please archive this thread or put the page in diff pages so it doesnt take forever to load (and delete this post)...ty

[quote=starrynte;146336]if anyone can please archive this thread or put the page in diff pages so it doesnt take forever to load (and delete this post)...ty[/quote]
[url]http://www.mersenneforum.org/profile.php?do=editoptions[/url]
Near the middle, "Number of Posts to Show Per Page". Set it to whatever you want (something low, probably).