[QUOTE=gd_barnes;408066]Mark, I am concerned about the continual corrections to srbsieve that I am seeing in the "Testing new Ranges for Sierpinski/Riesel" thread. We cannot "test in production" on this project. We need independent parallel tests run on many different bases before bases are submitted for work here. I am not convinced that that is happening. (I did it myself on base 3 and it looked good.) My question is: Is this an srbsieve issue or are the users not using it properly or do they have possible bad versions of NewPGen, PFGW, LLR, or srsieve in their folder when running the program?[/QUOTE]

The last version before I added the recovery logic is good. They are not sieving properly with newpgen. That is being discussed in the other thread.

Starting R576 from new using the [B]NewBases v4.3[/B] script. CK is 30651.

[QUOTE]Starting R576 from new using the [B]NewBases v4.3[/B] script. CK is 30651. [/QUOTE]

R576 is already at n=25K. Do you mean S576?

[QUOTE=MyDogBuster;408138]R576 is already at n=25K. Do you mean S576?[/QUOTE]

Curses and phooey. Yes, S576. Thankfully it was churning away for <3 hours. I can't edit my original post, so let's say that I'm taking S576 from new with the NewBases script. AFAICS it's the lowest CK unstarted.

[QUOTE=paleseptember;408139]Curses and phooey. Yes, S576. Thankfully it was churning away for <3 hours. I can't edit my original post, so let's say that I'm taking S576 from new with the NewBases script. AFAICS it's the lowest CK unstarted.[/QUOTE]

There are 4 bases with lower CK unstarted but none under base 800. They are: S808, S918, S843, and S927. See [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=201754&postcount=1"]here[/URL].

S737 and S803
 

Reserving S737 and S803 up to 400K

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;408143]... See [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=201754&postcount=1"]here[/URL].[/QUOTE]

Reserving R675 from 2.5K to 25K using file from linked post above.

I have run srsieve for R675 and S576 to 1e9, and am now sieving using sr2sieve to extend that further. Factors at being removed at >1/sec for both bases, so it's got a little way to go.

What is the perceived wisdom for swapping from sieving to primality testing? When the time to find a factor is half the length of a primality test? 20%? 10%? (Edit: I've done some searching on the forum, and have seen some varying suggestions. 70% comes up a few times.)

[QUOTE=paleseptember;408266]
What is the perceived wisdom for swapping from sieving to primality testing? When the time to find a factor is half the length of a primality test? 20%? 10%? (Edit: I've done some searching on the forum, and have seen some varying suggestions. 70% comes up a few times.)[/QUOTE]

I came up with the 70% number (actually 1/sqrt2). That is my estimate for how to find the sample candidate from the sieve to time a primality test for, and then sieve until testing that sample candidate is faster than the sieve removal rate. Ex: If my sieve file goes from 10k to 20k, I test a candidate with exponent 17k (70% of the way from 10k to 20k), and then sieve until my factor rate is equal to the time for that test.

However, that number assumes you're going to test every candidate in the file for primality, which is not the case with CRUS. So, our "average" test is a ways lower in the file than 70%. Halfway is a reasonable estimate, lower if your base produces many primes or your file covers a wide range (2.5k to 25k is pretty wide, a factor of 10).

I would sieve until factor rate is equal to a primality test at about 8k, then test the file from 2.5k to 10k, remove primed k's and exponents below 10k, and then continue to sieve the rest until factor rate is equal to a primality test at around 18k.
Hope this helps!

S808
 

Reserving S808 to n=25K

EDIT: I am testing this using the posted file to n=2500.

S997
 

Reserving S997 to n=25K

S592
 

S592 tested n=2500-25K

400 primes found - 370 remain

Results emailed - Base released

Reserving R792 to n=100k (50-100k) for BOINC

Reserving S533 to n=200k (100-200k) for BOINC

Reserving S1018 as new base with srbsieve, KEP will give me the srbsieve.ini with the right phases. Running up to n=10k, I will create a sievefile for n=10-25k after the run for the future.

S533 tested n=200k (100-200k)

nothing found

Results emailed - Base released

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;408269]I would sieve until factor rate is equal to a primality test at about 8k, then test the file from 2.5k to 10k, remove primed k's and exponents below 10k, and then continue to sieve the rest until factor rate is equal to a primality test at around 18k.
[/QUOTE]

Is there a way with srfile to remove all primed k's from the pfgw-prime.txt at once, or do I need to run -d "k*b^n+1" with a hundred values of k, one-by-one?

[QUOTE=paleseptember;408891]Is there a way with srfile to remove all primed k's from the pfgw-prime.txt at once, or do I need to run -d "k*b^n+1" with a hundred values of k, one-by-one?[/QUOTE]

The value of "n" doesn't matter when using srfile so you can easily write a script to build a bat file to do the removal.

[QUOTE=paleseptember;408891]Is there a way with srfile to remove all primed k's from the pfgw-prime.txt at once, or do I need to run -d "k*b^n+1" with a hundred values of k, one-by-one?[/QUOTE]

Put the filename containing the primes in the quote marks on the srfile command line. Srfile will remove all those sequences, throwing harmless errors if any k's have multiple primes (error says something like "sequence not found in file").
-Curtis

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;408900]Put the filename containing the primes in the quote marks on the srfile command line. Srfile will remove all those sequences, throwing harmless errors if any k's have multiple primes (error says something like "sequence not found in file").
-Curtis[/QUOTE]

Perfect.

Thanks VBCurtis, thanks Rogue, for your prompt replies!

S 810
 

S 810 is done up to 20K
308 K remain
Base released - results emailed

R792 tested n=100k (50-100k)

2 primes found, 11 remain

198*792^74478-1
558*792^84648-1

Results emailed - Base released

[QUOTE=pepi37;409022]S 810 is done up to 20K
308 K remain
Base released - results emailed[/QUOTE]

I don't see anything in this file. I also don't see anything in the file that you Emailed to me.

Here it is again... in zip file
or
[URL="https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8x05u2736g3scc7/AADOoYQQnKHiYsISqoVVDg0sa?dl=0"]http://www.dropbox.com/sh/8x05u2736g3scc7/AADOoYQQnKHiYsISqoVVDg0sa?dl=0[/URL]

S810
 

14K can be removed

691*810^23956+1
1797*810^21556+1
2534*810^23055+1
2631*810^23751+1
3162*810^24809+1
4055*810^24608+1
6632*810^24889+1
7218*810^22716+1
7390*810^20855+1
10362*810^22718+1
11014*810^22052+1
11609*810^23954+1
14361*810^21944+1
14538*810^23122+1

[QUOTE=pepi37;409526]14K can be removed

[/QUOTE]

So is S810 complete to n=25K? Are you releasing it now?

I'm asking because you said that you already released it at n=20K. It also seems strange that there was no k>14538 with a prime for n=20K-25K for a base with a conjecture of k>30000.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;409551]So is S810 complete to n=25K? Are you releasing it now?

I'm asking because you said that you already released it at n=20K. It also seems strange that there was no k>14538 with a prime for n=20K-25K for a base with a conjecture of k>30000.[/QUOTE]

To explain
Since it was my first base , I do I little jump before think everything and say that I reserve base up to 25K. I do split base on 12 cores, and do base [B]until 20K on all cores[/B], but since some cores have less K on their ranges their go upper.
So base is released to 20K, this is just small "cleanup"
I prepare ABCD file up to 50K, and sieving now, but still it is far away from optimal depth :) ( and have 506826 candidates left)

[QUOTE=pepi37;409565]To explain
Since it was my first base , I do I little jump before think everything and say that I reserve base up to 25K. I do split base on 12 cores, and do base [B]until 20K on all cores[/B], but since some cores have less K on their ranges their go upper.
So base is released to 20K, this is just small "cleanup"
I prepare ABCD file up to 50K, and sieving now, but still it is far away from optimal depth :) ( and have 506826 candidates left)[/QUOTE]

You are still not being clear. I do not know what you mean by this is a small "cleanup". My question is are ALL k's on this base COMPLETELY tested to n=25K?

If the answer is yes, then what you are telling me is that there are no primes for k>14538 for n=20K-25K. That seems highly unlikely and I will be forced to doublecheck the range myself.

If all k's have not been tested to n=25K and you cannot tell me which k's have been tested to n=25K, then I do not want to remove the k's for these primes and the n=20K-25K range should be done over.

I am very concerned about this submission at this point. I would rather that you had not posted these latest primes. It has confused the situation.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;409566]You are still not being clear. I do not know what you mean by this is a small "cleanup". My question is are ALL k's on this base COMPLETELY tested to n=25K?

If the answer is yes, then what you are telling me is that there are no primes for k>14538 for n=20K-25K. That seems highly unlikely and I will be forced to doublecheck the range myself.

If all k's have not been tested to n=25K and you cannot tell me which k's have been tested to n=25K, then I do not want to remove the k's for these primes and the n=20K-25K range should be done over.

I am very concerned about this submission at this point. I would rather that you had not posted these latest primes. It has confused the situation.[/QUOTE]

My answer is NO.
Those K ( with those primes) are done to 25K , rest is done to 20K. But if it is easy to you, just delete it: it will be re-discovered soon.
Just dont write that base is done to 25K , because it is not. Base is done to 20K and those 14 K is done to 25K

[QUOTE=pepi37;409567]My answer is NO.
Those K ( with those primes) are done to 25K , rest is done to 20K. But if it is easy to you, just delete it: it will be re-discovered soon.[/QUOTE]

That still doesn't completely answer my question. WHICH k's are complete to n=25K? I'm sure that you searched more k's than you found primes for. Did you search all k<=14538, all k<=15000, all k<=16000. Or did you just search specific k's?

Maybe it would be better if you posted a residue file for all n=20K-25K. But if you searched specific k's and not k-ranges such as k<=15000, then it probably would be better if we just remove those primes.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;409569]That still doesn't completely answer my question. WHICH k's are complete to n=25K?[\QUOTE]

Those 14 K is tested to 25K

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;409569]I'm sure that you searched more k's than you found primes for....[/QUOTE]

Yes, I was searched few more ranges, but since process is over and rest of cores are done range to 20K then I stopped all and delete results.
I sent those 14 primes to you since only that 14 primes is final proof. Anything rest I do , it was not sent to you , because it is not complete.

[QUOTE=pepi37;409571][QUOTE=gd_barnes;409569]That still doesn't completely answer my question. WHICH k's are complete to n=25K?[\QUOTE]

Those 14 K is tested to 25K



Yes, I was searched few more ranges, but since process is over and rest of cores are done range to 20K then I stopped all and delete results.[/QUOTE]

OK I deleted those primes for n>20K, re-added the k's to the pages, and changed the search depth back to n=20K. Of course you would have had to test more than just 14 k's to find 14 primes. If you are creating a sieve file to n=50K, please include all 308 k's remaining for n=20K-50K. Thanks.

Ok, in sieve file is all 308K :)

S797 is tested to n=350k. No primes found for k = 4 (only remaining k). Continuing on to n=400k.

S708
 

Base S 708 finished up to 20K
320 K remain
Base released- result emailed

[QUOTE=pepi37;409958]Base S 708 finished up to 20K
320 K remain
Base released- result emailed[/QUOTE]

How many CPU hours did it take for you to complete S708 to n=20K using srbsieve? :smile:

[QUOTE=KEP;409969]How many CPU hours did it take for you to complete S708 to n=20K using srbsieve? :smile:[/QUOTE]
About 110 hours on 12 cores :)

[QUOTE=pepi37;409970]About 110 hours on 12 cores :)[/QUOTE]

Wow that was a long time :smile:

[QUOTE=KEP;409983]Wow that was a long time :smile:[/QUOTE]
If anything else srbsieve learn how to be patient :)

[QUOTE=KEP;409969]How many CPU hours did it take for you to complete S708 to n=20K using srbsieve? :smile:[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=pepi37;409970]About 110 hours on 12 cores :)[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=KEP;409983]Wow that was a long time :smile:[/QUOTE]

Clarification needed. KEP asked how many CPU hours did it take you. 110 CPU hours would be very fast. That means on 12 cores you would have finished it in < 10 clock hours. If it took a total of 110 clock hours (>4.5 days), that would be 1320 CPU hours, which would still be pretty good but not super fast.

So did it take 110 CPU hours or 110 clock hours?

Second value is correct, , so 3 CPU works 4.5 days = 1320 CPU hours :)

That still seems pretty fast to me. It's nice having everything automated.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;409999]That still seems pretty fast to me. It's nice having everything automated.[/QUOTE]

I5-4670K is eating small primes with FMA3 :)

[QUOTE=pepi37;410018]I5-4670K is eating small primes with FMA3 :)[/QUOTE]
Eating? I thought they come from the other end of the pipeline?
(Sort of rhymes with 'eating')
:shock:

[QUOTE=Batalov;410036]Eating? I thought they come from the other end of the pipeline?
(Sort of rhymes with 'eating')
:shock:[/QUOTE]
I agree with you
There is always some kind of rhymes in words :smile:

R682
 

Reserving R682 to n=25K

Reserving S810 to n=50k (20-50k) for BOINC

R940 completed to n=10000 and released. 257 k remain.

[QUOTE=rogue;410197]R940 completed to n=10000 and released. 257 k remain.[/QUOTE]

Please review this submission. There are multiple problems. It could be that srbsieve was run incorrectly or that the primes or k's remaining files were posted incorrectly in some fashion. The # of k's remaining is off by several hundred, there are hundreds of duplicate primes in the prime file, and the conjecture is included in the k's remaining file. (The Maxk should always be set to the conjecture minus one).

This base is in the recommended bases thread. Please take a look in that thread. I had already searched it for n<=2500 (using the new bases script) and there were 831 k's remaining. In that thread is a file with the 831 k's remaining at n=2500.

Some analysis:

1. In removing all of your duplicate primes, I found that your primes for n<=2500 exaclty match mine. So...there is NO problem at n=2500.

2. All k's remaining are for k>19500. (??)

3. You have only posted 315 primes for n=2500-10K. 831 minus 315 leaves 516 k's remaining at n=10K (vs. 257).

Please balance the primes and k's remaining before reposting. Thank you.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;410246]Please review this submission. There are multiple problems. It could be that srbsieve was run incorrectly or that the primes or k's remaining files were posted incorrectly in some fashion. The # of k's remaining is off by several hundred, there are hundreds of duplicate primes in the prime file, and the conjecture is included in the k's remaining file. (The Maxk should always be set to the conjecture minus one).

This base is in the recommended bases thread. Please take a look in that thread. I had already searched it for n<=2500 (using the new bases script) and there were 831 k's remaining. In that thread is a file with the 831 k's remaining at n=2500.

Some analysis:

1. In removing all of your duplicate primes, I found that your primes for n<=2500 exaclty match mine. So...there is NO problem at n=2500.

2. All k's remaining are for k>19500. (??)

3. You have only posted 315 primes for n=2500-10K. 831 minus 315 leaves 516 k's remaining at n=10K (vs. 257).

Please balance the primes and k's remaining before reposting. Thank you.[/QUOTE]

I don't know why there would be duplicates. I will have to take a look.

I think I know why might happened with the remaining k. My computer was restarted in the middle of processing the range and I tried to piece together the results. I most likely edited the wrong pl_remain.txt file.

[QUOTE=rogue;410262]I don't know why there would be duplicates. I will have to take a look.

I think I know why might happened with the remaining k. My computer was restarted in the middle of processing the range and I tried to piece together the results. I most likely edited the wrong pl_remain.txt file.[/QUOTE]

In reviewing the duplicates, all are for n<=5. You may have copy-and-pasted the same primes twice. When I removed them, everything for n<=2500 matched up with my previous run.

The big issue seems to be the k's remaining file.

I think it would help both of us if you would sort the entire prime file by either n-value or k-value. That's what I get from most of our searchers on new bases. If you do that, I would get a sorted file, which would save me time since I have to do it anyway, and you could easily see duplicates, which would help catch problems like this before posting.

I have an Excel spreadsheet that very quickly parses out the k and n-value for each prime. It makes sorting numerically (instead of alphanumerically) either by k-value or n-value quick and easy. Let me know if you want me to post it.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;410292]In reviewing the duplicates, all are for n<=5. You may have copy-and-pasted the same primes twice. When I removed them, everything for n<=2500 matched up with my previous run.

The big issue seems to be the k's remaining file.

I think it would help both of us if you would sort the entire prime file by either n-value or k-value. That's what I get from most of our searchers on new bases. If you do that, I would get a sorted file, which would save me time since I have to do it anyway, and you could easily see duplicates, which would help catch problems like this before posting.

I have an Excel spreadsheet that very quickly parses out the k and n-value for each prime. It makes sorting numerically (instead of alphanumerically) either by k-value or n-value quick and easy. Let me know if you want me to post it.[/QUOTE]

I have attached the missing 291 k for which there are no primes (yet). In looking at the pl_prime.txt file I suspect that I used ^C early in the run, then started srbsieve again without deleting the pl_*.txt files it created. Based upon what I saw in the file, that makes the most sense.

I assume that you don't need me to resend the pl_prime.txt file.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. Everything is backed up at least once a day (thanks to Time Machine).

[QUOTE=rogue;410296]I have attached the missing 291 k for which there are no primes (yet). In looking at the pl_prime.txt file I suspect that I used ^C early in the run, then started srbsieve again without deleting the pl_*.txt files it created. Based upon what I saw in the file, that makes the most sense.

I assume that you don't need me to resend the pl_prime.txt file.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. Everything is backed up at least once a day (thanks to Time Machine).[/QUOTE]

Did you balance everything?

257 k's remaining that you previously posted for k>19500
291 k's remaining here for k<19500

548 total k's remaining at n=10K

Is that what you are sticking with?

It does not balance with what I have. (See my first response for the # of k's remaining to balance to.) Hint: Here are a few primes shown in your primes file that are also in your remaining file:
480*940^7442-1
1418*940^8834-1
1743*940^8043-1
(plus many more)

As I asked previously, please take a few minutes and balance your files before posting again. If I can't get something that I can trust, I'll have to take the base back into not started status and leave it in the recommended thread. Thank you.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;410302]It does not balance with what I have. (See my first response for the # of k's remaining to balance to.) Hint: Here are a few primes shown in your primes file that are also in your remaining file:
480*940^7442-1
1418*940^8834-1
1743*940^8043-1
(plus many more)[/QUOTE]

Very odd. I'm not certain how that could have happened. I'll take another look

There were 20 k with primes for which were in pl_remain.txt. I cannot find results for 13035 < k < 19952 and 7000 < n < 10000. I will rerun those k. When done I'll send you updated files.

[QUOTE=rogue;410384]There were 20 k with primes for which were in pl_remain.txt. I cannot find results for 13035 < k < 19952 and 7000 < n < 10000. I will rerun those k. When done I'll send you updated files.[/QUOTE]

No. There were a lot more than 20 k with primes that were in pl_remain.txt. My suggestion is to write a script to find them.

I don't see how that I can accept this submission at this point. Perhaps you can convince me otherwise if you will balance the primes and k's remaining.

Since you already tested this range to n=2500, I could just provide a list of primes up to n=10000. I think that would save us both some time.

Now Iam also in the club. I had a power outtage and my srbsieve was running around 500h. How can I manually start the program to get further on the last position?

[QUOTE=rebirther;410476]Now Iam also in the club. I had a power outtage and my srbsieve was running around 500h. How can I manually start the program to get further on the last position?[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately that is easier said than done. I suggest that you complete manually starting at the beginning of the last phase that was fully completed.

[QUOTE=rogue;410478]Unfortunately that is easier said than done. I suggest that you complete manually starting at the beginning of the last phase that was fully completed.[/QUOTE]

I have 15 phases and was at 22% in phase 14, the ckpt looks like:

phase=14
completedStep=4
completedMaxK=26349
completedKCount=500
inProgressKCount=250

What can I do now?

[QUOTE=rebirther;410479]I have 15 phases and was at 22% in phase 14, the ckpt looks like:

phase=14
completedStep=4
completedMaxK=26349
completedKCount=500
inProgressKCount=250

What can I do now?[/QUOTE]

I suggest that you run the entire range of k (pl_remain.txt) thru steps 14 and 15 then remove k for which a prime is found from pl_remain.txt.

[QUOTE=rogue;410487]I suggest that you run the entire range of k (pl_remain.txt) thru steps 14 and 15 then remove k for which a prime is found from pl_remain.txt.[/QUOTE]

Iam using the last version of srbsieve and try to run from the last checkpoint. What I got is:

Status (00:00:00): Started recovery at phase 13 with 2268 terms
PFGW Version 3.7.10.64BIT.20150809.Win_Dev [GWNUM 28.6]

No factoring at all, not even trivial division
Found 9 previous PRPs/Primes for distinct $a.
ABC File Processing for at most 1 Primes

Looks good so far but loosing some days. I will use the new base script next time. I have more control of it if something goes wrong and can save my last position.

[QUOTE=rebirther;410490]Iam using the last version of srbsieve and try to run from the last checkpoint. What I got is:

Status (00:00:00): Started recovery at phase 13 with 2268 terms
PFGW Version 3.7.10.64BIT.20150809.Win_Dev [GWNUM 28.6]

No factoring at all, not even trivial division
Found 9 previous PRPs/Primes for distinct $a.
ABC File Processing for at most 1 Primes

Looks good so far but loosing some days. I will use the new base script next time. I have more control of it if something goes wrong and can save my last position.[/QUOTE]

srbsieve is still much faster than the new bases script, but as you discovered, if it crashes midway thru it can be time consuming to recover.

[QUOTE=rogue;410513]srbsieve is still much faster than the new bases script, but as you discovered, if it crashes midway thru it can be time consuming to recover.[/QUOTE]

Maybe a resume feature would be sensible.

[QUOTE=henryzz;410601]Maybe a resume feature would be sensible.[/QUOTE]

Even to get it really simple: in case of crash when srbsieve is started over simply to check what last phase is over and start again.
In that case when phase is over srbsieve create single text file with phase number.
So you can manually resume at every phase ( if that case is needed)

[QUOTE=pepi37;410602]Even to get it really simple: in case of crash when srbsieve is started over simply to check what last phase is over and start again.
In that case when phase is over srbsieve create single text file with phase number.
So you can manually resume at every phase ( if that case is needed)[/QUOTE]

The resume code I have tries to resume in the middle of a phase, but it is buggy. I have no time right now to fix it.

[QUOTE=rogue;410456]Since you already tested this range to n=2500, I could just provide a list of primes up to n=10000. I think that would save us both some time.[/QUOTE]

I went thru all my results and double-checked. There are only 315 primes from n=2500 to n=10000, which I believe that I have already posted. Do you want me to recreate pl_remain.txt or do you want to do it?

Just a quick update on some bases that were started:

R598 is at n = ~13000. Last update is 547 k remaining (base started with 43726), though undoubtedly more have been removed.
R708 is at n = ~12000. Last update is 627 k remaining (started with 41120).

Taking both to n = 25,000.

S810 tested n=50k (20-50k)

93 primes found, 215 remain

Results emailed - Base released

Reserving R754 to n=100k (50-100k) for BOINC

Reserving R954 to n=100k (50-100k) for BOINC

R754 tested to n=100k (50-100k)

1 prime found, 15 remain

509*754^58046-1

Results emailed - Base released

R954 tested to n=100k (50-100k)

1 prime found, 17 remain

102*954^52163-1

Results emailed - Base released

Reserving R703 to n=100k (50-100k) for BOINC

R682
 

R682 tested n=10K-25K

151 primes found - 359 remain

Results emailed - Base released

R703 tested to n=100K (50-100k)

3 primes found, 15 remain

3266*703^55570-1
4368*703^62145-1
3596*703^94090-1

Results emailed - Base released

Reserving S583 to n=100k (50-100k) for BOINC

Reserving S620 to n=200k (100-200k) for BOINC

Reserving R746 to n=200k (100-200k) for BOINC

S997
 

S997 tested n=2.5K-25K

336 primes found - 364 remain

Results emailed - Base released

S583 tested to n=100K (50-100k)

nothing found, 15 remain

Results emailed - Base released

S620 tested to n=200K (100-200k)

nothing found, 2 remain

Results emailed - Base released

R746 tested to n=200K (100-200k)

nothing found, 2 remain

Results emailed - Base released

R636, S678, S834, S864 Bases released

S510 tested to n=200K (100-200k)

nothing found, 2 remain

Results emailed - Base released

Reserving R995 to n=200k (100-200k) for BOINC

Reserving R708 to n=10k as new base running with the new base script

Reserving R940 to n=10K.

Reserving R862 to n=25K.

Reserving as New, S1023 to n=25K.

I'm going to use srbsieve and run this test, to see how efficient srbsieve running with optimized settings can actually complete a run from n=1 to n=25K :smile:

R940 is complete to n=10K; 315 primes were found for n=2500-10K; 515 k's remain; base released.

Reserving S565 to n=100k (50-100k) for BOINC

Reserving S708 to n=25K.

R995 tested to n=200K (100-200k)

nothing found, 2 remain

Results emailed - Base released

S1018 tested to n=10k

2050 remain

Results emailed - Base released

S565 tested to n=100K (50-100k)

4 primes found, 16 remain

Results emailed - Base released

R862 is complete to n=25K; 78 primes were found for n=10K-25K shown below; 243 k's remain; base released.

Primes:
[code]
5054*862^10031-1
12078*862^10047-1
8426*862^10167-1
17013*862^10288-1
3419*862^10304-1
24318*862^10323-1
3771*862^10441-1
11378*862^10571-1
8418*862^10652-1
16364*862^10731-1
15764*862^10797-1
13943*862^10860-1
6612*862^10989-1
17070*862^11219-1
16365*862^11224-1
11993*862^11300-1
8181*862^11306-1
15867*862^11814-1
5472*862^11996-1
3600*862^12079-1
4248*862^12152-1
24726*862^12189-1
12266*862^12234-1
11393*862^12288-1
24615*862^12529-1
18945*862^12769-1
10323*862^12796-1
22320*862^12817-1
25212*862^12906-1
10337*862^13382-1
2123*862^13480-1
18309*862^13627-1
18372*862^13728-1
9561*862^13963-1
11633*862^14164-1
26316*862^14383-1
23729*862^15019-1
257*862^15458-1
19989*862^15496-1
7068*862^15754-1
10211*862^15863-1
10157*862^15912-1
25100*862^15944-1
7569*862^16107-1
1556*862^16131-1
3579*862^16332-1
18416*862^16461-1
5466*862^16917-1
22161*862^16989-1
4874*862^17088-1
7107*862^17413-1
15018*862^17454-1
9573*862^17484-1
16065*862^17681-1
23513*862^18262-1
23079*862^18344-1
8628*862^18583-1
17748*862^18704-1
11573*862^18771-1
12156*862^18809-1
26127*862^19360-1
1787*862^19552-1
15486*862^19679-1
14618*862^20139-1
23757*862^20400-1
16827*862^20488-1
3741*862^20782-1
22067*862^20921-1
26394*862^21181-1
11688*862^21335-1
2555*862^22909-1
14664*862^23123-1
20790*862^23131-1
12414*862^23736-1
21597*862^23910-1
18942*862^24032-1
24308*862^24664-1
12345*862^24837-1
[/code]

S797 is completed to n=400k. No primes found. Residues for n=290k-400k are attached. I'm also sieving the next range (up to n=1M, I believe, and currently approaching p=20e12), though I am releasing the base.

S708 is complete to n=25K; 25 primes were found for n=20K-25K shown below; 295 k's remain; base released.

Primes:
[code]
19226*708^20009+1
11943*708^20079+1
9513*708^20091+1
28291*708^20119+1
13125*708^20140+1
24166*708^20319+1
11728*708^21235+1
13907*708^21358+1
11090*708^21831+1
12880*708^22294+1
17911*708^22349+1
15157*708^22374+1
12930*708^22669+1
19563*708^22714+1
22646*708^23352+1
16460*708^23525+1
20686*708^23556+1
19007*708^23648+1
17091*708^23667+1
25576*708^23696+1
12516*708^23969+1
18999*708^24126+1
18026*708^24520+1
3137*708^24590+1
19021*708^24851+1
[/code]

Reserving R800 to n=1M (800k-1M) for BOINC

R708 tested to n=10K (1-10k)

1073 remain

Results emailed - Base released