06:19:18 WARNING mfaliquot.application:593: Found merges!
06:19:18 WARNING mfaliquot.application:595: The seq(s) 1506036 seem(s) to have merged with 688422

The seq(s) 351930 seem(s) to have merged with 21768

This hasn't happened in the main table yet, because the latter sequence hasn't been updated since December; I noticed it in the last few hours in the course of my testing of the new reserved-seqs-min-update-frequency stuff.

Worth noting that even so, the latter would be updated under the current system within the next week, so it would not have gone unnoticed for much longer.

1975374 terminates.

1162896 terminates

Pretty sure that yafu@home has found a merge for 1055730 -- not sure what it merges into though.

Edit: It's possible that it merged into some 9 digit sequence that someone is working on. The line preceding the current one dates to last November (and all sequences have been updated as recently as December), yet I am unable to find any such merger within the current batch of seqs < 2e6.

However, I can state definitively that yafu@home has discovered that 1191114 merges with 3876, as well as that 1123140 merges with 74448. Great work!

yafu@home has also discovered that 1116976 merges with 1134

yafu@home has worked out that 1268784, 1273692 and 1326528 all terminate

[QUOTE=Dubslow;479806]Pretty sure that yafu@home has found a merge for 1055730 -- not sure what it merges into though.

Edit: It's possible that it merged into some 9 digit sequence that someone is working on. The line preceding the current one dates to last November (and all sequences have been updated as recently as December), yet I am unable to find any such merger within the current batch of seqs < 2e6.[/QUOTE]
That seems to be one of my [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=3148740&action=last20&fr=2520&to=2625"]very old <10M work[/URL] (about 2011 or so). Interesting. At the time I worked those sequences to 80 digits or so, therefore I didn't go "over the peak" of 1055730 to identify the merge (the peak, I see now, had 125 digits)

[QUOTE=LaurV;480047]That seems to be one of my [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=3148740&action=last20&fr=2520&to=2625"]very old <10M work[/URL] (about 2011 or so). Interesting. At the time I worked those sequences to 80 digits or so, therefore I didn't go "over the peak" of 1055730 to identify the merge (the peak, I see now, had 125 digits)[/QUOTE]

[URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=1055730&action=range&fr=3100&to=3129"]Index 3110[/URL] dates to "November 10, 2017", and has size 101. It was evidently not a part of the standard 0-2M work, at least not until 1055730 merged. I admit I didn't dig around in the 9 digit trough of 1055730 to find a smaller antecedent :smile: pretty cool that you found at least the one.

Perhaps it moved beyond 80 digits to 101 digits merely on the back of the [URL="http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=22943"]database elves[/URL]?

[QUOTE=Dubslow;480053]Perhaps it moved beyond 80 digits to 101 digits merely on the back of the [URL="http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=22943"]database elves[/URL]?[/QUOTE]
Yes, most probably. I didn't push for 10M above 70-80 digits. All that is elves work, unless somebody else played with it. I still have the DB to 5M and to 10M if the blue page ever wants to extend itself higher than 2M.