[QUOTE=Batalov;296877]I haven't thought of that, but no, not the 3366 - I don't have enough compute power to realistically move it.



P.S. As long as you're writing an update: From some latest runs, have a look how [URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=937656"]937656[/URL] disappointed (>3600 lines added though). There's some life in 516072 yet.[/QUOTE]OK......just don't get tempted, then. That first step is [I]just[/I] a c134 :razz:

[QUOTE=schickel;296874]No, because look at the start of 3366:[code] 0 . 3366 = 2 * 3^2 * 11 * 17
1 . 5058 = 2 * 3^2 * 281
2 . [COLOR="Red"]5940[/COLOR] = 2^2 * 3^3 * 5 * 11
3 . 14220 = 2^2 * 3^2 * 5 * 79[/code][/QUOTE]
Whoops :blush: Didn't read Batalov's first post close enough.
[QUOTE=schickel;296875]So, do you want to put a reservation on 3366? I was about to email Christophe with an update on 4788, so I can include the news about the merge and a reservation request for you......3366 is an interesting one, since it's in the high 160s but not controlled by a driver; there's not very many of them up that high.....[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=schickel;296878]OK......just don't get tempted, then. That first step is [I]just[/I] a c134 :razz:[/QUOTE]If nobody minds, I'd be willing to reserve it; doing that NFS job will take a few days, but then again, most lines are smoother than that; if it hits a driver then I'd drop it.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;296879]If nobody minds, I'd be willing to reserve it; doing that NFS job will take a few days, but then again, most lines are smoother than that; if it hits a driver then I'd drop it.[/QUOTE]Well, how about this: chances are that in the next few lines there is going to be one that splits with 2 large primes ([TEX]p_{84}[/TEX]-smooth :rofl:); if that happens, it's going to be a chore to factor the c16x, could we make this another community sequence?

We could be doing ECM pre-testing on one or the other of 3366 or 4788 while the other is being split with NFS......

[QUOTE=Batalov;296877]P.S. As long as you're writing an update: From some latest runs, have a look how [URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=937656"]937656[/URL] disappointed (>3600 lines added though). There's some life in 516072 yet.[/QUOTE]I should actually do an update on the reservation thread. I started to (I pulled a status on everything), then got side-tracked by tax filing time. (I have a bad habit of waiting til the last minute, since I always end up owing a little.....)

I'll do something either tonight or tomorrow......

99240
 

99240 terminated after an [URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=99240"]exciting battle[/URL].

:maybeso::wacky::skiing::philmoore::victor::paul::george::wblipp::chalsall::joe o::et_:

[QUOTE=Batalov;304260]99240 terminated after an [URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=99240"]exciting battle[/URL].

:maybeso::wacky::skiing::philmoore::victor::paul::george::wblipp::chalsall::joe o::et_:[/QUOTE]Whew! It's been a bit of a dry spell; I thought maybe we were losing our touch.....also nice is that it's <100k!
[QUOTE=Batalov;304118]I'll kick around 99240 (football is over, so I'll practice on a tin can).[/QUOTE]Funny...when I checked my status file I figured you had picked it up from the 2^2 * 3 thread. My file showed:[code] 99240 716. sz 114 2^2 * 3^2[/code][quote]It seems to be farther away than the status in five.txt.[/quote]Yeah, I keep meaning to sit down and check the DB vs the five.txt file and keep getting side-tracked.....

What is five.txt?

PS I'm pretty sure your status file is in fact what the DB had, as of Monday, and presumably up to a few hours ago when Batalov submitted the work.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;304266]What is five.txt?[/quote]It is/was a file that Clifford posted on his page showing his local status (his main area of interest was the sequences with 5 digit leaders).

Sometimes he had work shown as being done that was not uploaded to the DB. (He did all of his work alone/locally and did not upload as frequently as we MFites do.) For example, his last file showed this:[code] 99240 602. 2^2 * 3 * 7 C102 sz 105[/code]I'm sure the aliquot workers extended 99240, but, as noted, there are some that were/are shown as being farther along than the work in the DB....

I'll attach the "current" five.txt to save you the trouble of searching for it.

---
[SIZE="1"][Note for readers from the future: if there's no five.txt attached, just remember: [I]These aren't the sequences you're looking for <wave>. [/I]][/SIZE]

[QUOTE=Dubslow;304266]PS I'm pretty sure your status file is in fact what the DB had, as of Monday, and presumably up to a few hours ago when Batalov submitted the work.[/QUOTE]
Indeed, I changed my factordb-updating tactics on downdrivers from "teasers" (leave a downdirver hanging) to "mum's the word" after the April thing. 99240 had not one but half a dozen downdrivers with cliffhangers; I had not teased even a single one.

"It's sad, but this is what accountancy does to people." [FONT=Times New Roman]©[/FONT]

My only reserved "fiver" shows:

[CODE]95280 (1602: C139= D4*3^2*5*7^2*C133) -- D4++; tQ; NFS: 0.293; 2012-05-19
[/CODE]
which is about 300 terms further then the status shown in the file (don't pay attention to the things at the end, mainly they say that the C133 is on NFS stage and it has already 293k relations and last time it was worked is May 19. With this age it should be reported to DB too.

[QUOTE=LaurV;304281]My only reserved "fiver" shows:

[CODE]95280 (1602: C139= D4*3^2*5*7^2*C133) -- D4++; tQ; NFS: 0.293; 2012-05-19
[/CODE]
which is about 300 terms further then the status shown in the file (don't pay attention to the things at the end, mainly they say that the C133 is on NFS stage and it has already 293k relations and last time it was worked is May 19. With this age it should be reported to DB too.[/QUOTE]

The DB agrees with that post. Is it you or Clifford who brought it up to that point?