3 years trend
 

I have been saving the classic colorful stats report (up to 79.3M) for 3 years now. Here is a summary from Oct 25 each year:

[CODE]
Year Pr.# Factored Two LL One LL Unknown Expect P-90 Yrs Difference TwoLL Min OneLL Min
2005 42 2,738,224 353,153 314,720 1,224,774 2.640 24,026,650 --------- 11,145,000* 16,693,000*
2006 43 2,768,958 412,842 348,590 1,100,479 2.270 23,131,200 895,450 14,001,400 18,000,900
2007 44 2,791,134 460,066 386,008 993,661 1.970 22,213,533 917,667 15,639,000 18,816,700
2008 46 2,819,097 489,818 426,544 895,410 1.747 21,139,962 1,073,571 17,001,269 22,512,443
[/CODE]
* 2005 TwoLL Min and OneLL Min are from Dec 25, 2005
In the above range there are a total of 4,630,913 Mersenne numbers.

At this rate one could extrapolate about 12 more years to complete (two LL tests) the remaining 21,139,962 years for this range.

The double checking "wall" appears to be almost 3 years behind the first test.

Nice stats. Thanks! Where are you getting the old colourful stats now?

George posted a special link to the colorful stats and said "don't abuse it" as it beats up the database and takes ~30 seconds to run.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;146836]George posted a special link to the colorful stats and said "don't abuse it" as it beats up the database and takes ~30 seconds to run.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=10420[/url]

Thanks. Well using it once a year is okay then eh?

4 years of progress...good news!!
 

I have been saving the classic colorful stats report (up to 79.3M) for 4 years now. Here is a summary from Oct 25 each year:

* 2005 TwoLL Min and OneLL Min are from Dec 25, 2005
In the above range there are a total of 4,630,913 Mersenne numbers.

[B]Good news: If you look at the Difference column you will notice a big jump in the last year ... about a 45% increase in P-90 years completed.[/B]
[CODE]
Year Pr.# Factored Two LL One LL Unknown Expect P-90 Yrs Difference TwoLL Min OneLL Min
2005 42 2,738,224 353,153 314,720 1,224,774 2.64 24,026,650 --------- 11,145,000* 16,693,000*
2006 43 2,768,958 412,842 348,590 1,100,479 2.27 23,131,200 895,450 14,001,400 18,000,900
2007 44 2,791,134 460,066 386,008 993,661 1.97 22,213,533 917,667 15,639,000 18,816,700
2008 46 2,819,097 489,818 426,544 895,410 1.747 21,139,962 1,073,571 17,001,269 22,512,443
2009 47 2,855,510 525,350 460,953 789,056 1.528 19,594,719 1,545,243 18,455,461 27,506,209[/CODE]

Right. It is mainly due to the increased effort in Trial Factoring. The number of factored exponents has risen significantly. On another note, the DCs have systematically been unable to catch up with the first time LLs, and the gap is widening more and more. Note that between 27 and 30M there are very few exponents left to test for the first time, so we can expect it to grow again substantially in the near future

For the six odd years I have been tracking the project the rule of thumb has been that the leading edge of DCs is about half the leading edge of LLs. With the new server there has been a slight shift away from DCs and while they are at 21.9M, LLs are at 48.2M.

[quote=garo;193975]For the six odd years I have been tracking the project the rule of thumb has been that the leading edge of DCs is about half the leading edge of LLs. With the new server there has been a slight shift away from DCs and while they are at 21.9M, LLs are at 48.2M.[/quote]
According to
[URL]http://mersenne.org/report_classic/[/URL]

in the range 20.4M to 25.35M. 48000 have been double checked and
59000 tested once.

In the range 40.25M to 50M, 95000 have been tested and 115000 haven't.

I would say that the "rule of thumb" is holding up well.
With the philosophy of giving LL employment to slower
machines, long may this continue!

David

I always looked at what was being handed out. Currently we are handing out 22Ms for DC and 48Ms for LL. LLs have always had a much longer tail and my rule of thumb took that into account.

[quote=garo;194070]I always looked at what was being handed out. Currently we are handing out 22Ms for DC and 48Ms for LL. LLs have always had a much longer tail and my rule of thumb took that into account.[/quote]
I think you mean DIDN'T take that into account.

I am at last getting to grips with the user-hostile
V5 primenet summary. I'm curious to know why 4000
DCs in the 23-24M range have been completed, and yet only
32 are currently allocated.