[QUOTE=LaurV;269205]Thanks for clarifying it. Now it makes more sense. The link I still can't access but it could be something with the company's firewall. Maybe they saw my last days activity, they didn't know what is it, and cut me off.

@yoyo
Sorry I got fussy. One of those days...[/QUOTE]It could have something to do with the domain. Try substituting [noparse]factordb.com[/noparse] for [noparse]factorization.ath.cx[/noparse] in the connection string.
[QUOTE=yoyo;269234]I just run the Perlscript over night on 2 cores. Now the smallest composite with unknown factor has 82 digits.[/quote]I wondered who was doing so much work.....[quote][B]If anybody is interested I can also provide a binary, than you don't need a Perl installation on your Windows.[/B]
yoyo[/QUOTE]Maybe this is the better solution for you, LaurV....

[QUOTE=schickel;269245]
I wondered who was doing so much work.....[/QUOTE]

My Core2 was also running last night and have done a lot of 82digit numbers.
I will start it tonight again using this script [URL]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=230762&postcount=894[/URL]

\/\/°\/\/

[B]Trial Factoring is sometimes missed.[/B]

I've been browsing through the PRPs, helping the database find N-1 and N+1 proofs. Usually the help I provide is to show factorizations the database didn't find on its own. The most severe of these seems to be a failure to trial factor. I've left one example unhelped to show the problem.

[URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/index.php?id=1100000000003937045"](19+2557#)/19[/URL] has a simple N-1 proof because N-1 is 2557#/19. The trial factoring should completely factor this, but it does not. It's easy to manually enter factors (based on other examples, 1000#/19 followed by 2000#/19 will probably result in a complete factorization). But shouldn't the trial factoring have taken care of this?

try increases

cmd,

The small factors of 7 and 8 digits were probably already known before you reported the the two factors of 1082 digits. The database removed these factors from the C1082s, resulting in the C1066 and C1076.

try increases next
 

[QUOTE=wblipp;269367]cmd,

The small factors of 7 and 8 digits were probably already known before you reported the the two factors of 1082 digits. The database removed these factors from the C1082s, resulting in the C1066 and C1076.[/QUOTE]


_[COLOR="SandyBrown"]|[/COLOR]_[COLOR="Blue"]|[/COLOR]_|_|_|_
_:_^_|_|_|_

Pr[COLOR="SandyBrown"]-[/COLOR]p [COLOR="Blue"]Pr[/COLOR][COLOR="SandyBrown"]-[/COLOR]?


[B][I][COLOR="Blue"]
ps : ( We apologize for the fact to show c1082
We sometimes use the left to make a joke of "trick" (our old habits) ... next post mirror horizontally and look good for prp1083 )[/COLOR][/I][/B]

Currently my uploading script is pushing my results for 90 digit composites. Before I started uploading, the composites distribution listed over 7500 such composites... :smile:

...factorization.ath.cx...?showid=1100000000003937045

len(1083)

<<<<

you know, cmd, you make no sense. the only problem i see there is that it is mirrored and upside down, wich is caused by you.

[QUOTE=firejuggler;269385]you know, cmd, you make no sense. the only problem i see there is that it is mirrored and upside down, wich is caused by you.[/QUOTE]

"Lark's brother" often make use of mirror ...
You should also use fishing line behind you to remove your pants, but the first 'Remember to remove "the fish"

|°|