Loading of manual results into the DB
 

[B]Admin edit: split this conversation off into a separate thread due to its having veered off somewhat significantly from the general theme of the "News" thread[/B]

Drive #3 has now been imported into the DB. More should follow soon! :smile:

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;212043]Drive #3 has now been imported into the DB.[/QUOTE]

So you have to redo this!

All LLRnet-results (not sure yet, but it seems so) were added under the contributor "Unknown"!
See the [url=http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=user_pairs]Top Participants[/url].

Rank Participant Team Pairs Returned Pair Score
11 Unknown - 399398 584,472.485

The first range from Drive #3 was at n=340k and the first prime found there

[code]
user=kar_bon
[03/01/08 15:52:33]
399*2^341641-1 is prime! Time : 150.0 sec.
[/code]

but the primelist for filter "k=399" [url=http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=prime_list]here[/url] says

[code]
Participant Date Time k Base n Sign One Seconds Server Port Pair Score Prime Score Digits
Bruce 2009-11-29 15:09:08 2399 2 224852 - 1 1475 GB 7000 0.315990 0.177628 67691
Bruce 2009-11-29 14:08:13 2399 2 52196 - 1 133 GB 7000 0.017028 0.002222 15716
PCZ 2009-01-13 12:52:53 1399 2 142227 - 1 181 IB 9000 0.126428 0.044954 42818
gd_barnes 2008-05-24 06:22:05 399 2 496100 - 1 589 IB 5000 1.538220 1.907777 149344
[b]Unknown 2008-04-10 13:03:00 399 2 341641 - 1 50 MN 0003 0.729491 0.623060 102847 [/b]
Beyond 2008-03-20 07:25:00 399 2 290555 - 1 836 MN 0003 0.527639 0.383270 87469
[/code]

Sorry guys! Seems you overwrote all LLRnet-results with 'Unknown'!

'Unknown' owns 18 primes now!

PS: As I can say, Drive #3 got 386082 pairs done by LLRnet-server I5000/I8000.
The count (399398) from above is more than this! Question: Which pairs were false inserted, too?

[quote=kar_bon;212076]So you have to redo this!

All LLRnet-results (not sure yet, but it seems so) were added under the contributor "Unknown"!
See the [URL="http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=user_pairs"]Top Participants[/URL].

Rank Participant Team Pairs Returned Pair Score
11 Unknown - 399398 584,472.485

The first range from Drive #3 was at n=340k and the first prime found there

[code]
user=kar_bon
[03/01/08 15:52:33]
399*2^341641-1 is prime! Time : 150.0 sec.
[/code]

but the primelist for filter "k=399" [URL="http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=prime_list"]here[/URL] says

[code]
Participant Date Time k Base n Sign One Seconds Server Port Pair Score Prime Score Digits
Bruce 2009-11-29 15:09:08 2399 2 224852 - 1 1475 GB 7000 0.315990 0.177628 67691
Bruce 2009-11-29 14:08:13 2399 2 52196 - 1 133 GB 7000 0.017028 0.002222 15716
PCZ 2009-01-13 12:52:53 1399 2 142227 - 1 181 IB 9000 0.126428 0.044954 42818
gd_barnes 2008-05-24 06:22:05 399 2 496100 - 1 589 IB 5000 1.538220 1.907777 149344
[B]Unknown 2008-04-10 13:03:00 399 2 341641 - 1 50 MN 0003 0.729491 0.623060 102847 [/B]
Beyond 2008-03-20 07:25:00 399 2 290555 - 1 836 MN 0003 0.527639 0.383270 87469
[/code]

Sorry guys! Seems you overwrote all LLRnet-results with 'Unknown'!

'Unknown' owns 18 primes now![/quote]
Some of the early LLRnet results from the C*** servers never got imported into the DB; unless you still have the original files sitting around, the data on who specifically did what in those ranges has long since been lost. Those have therefore been imported as "Unknown".

However, if you do have the original results for those, please send them to me--I'll then send them to Dave and ask him to do a special re-import on them to overwrite the "Unknown"'s.

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;212077]Some of the early LLRnet results from the C*** servers never got imported into the DB; unless you still have the original files sitting around, the data on who specifically did what in those ranges has long since been lost. Those have therefore been imported as "Unknown".

However, if you do have the original results for those, please send them to me--I'll then send them to Dave and ask him to do a special re-import on them to overwrite the "Unknown"'s.[/QUOTE]

As mentioned those results were from IB5000 and IB 8000 servers!

Tell me which results you missing and i see what i got.

[quote=kar_bon;212082]As mentioned those results were from IB5000 and IB 8000 servers!

Tell me which results you missing and i see what i got.[/quote]
Okay, I've uploaded a dump of all results with user "Unknown" to:
[URL]http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/unknown_results.txt[/URL] [B]Edit by Max: link taken offline (no longer needed)[/B]

A few of the "Unknown" results are just occasional pairs that you, myself, or Gary filled in during processing, but there definitely appear to be some whole ranges in there. They are:

[B]1st Drive, n=510K-510K.5K[/B]
Strange...that range was done manually by me. It's possible that this range was accidentally mislabeled in manual-import preprocessing. This can be easily remedied with a quick SQL command.

[B]1st Drive, n=543038-543749[/B]
This range was originally done by the C443 server. It looks like we missed one file when we manually downloaded the results from Carlos's web site and sent them to Dave for importing.

[B]3rd Drive, n=340K-383274[/B]
Originally done by IB5000. This may have been before we moved the DB over to David's server; if it was still on Adam's machine, then we would have been doing these manually. It seems these files here were somehow neglected.

Karsten, if you have the original LLRnet-format results for the latter two, send them my way--I'll talk to Dave about figuring out some way to have the DB do a special import on them where it will use them to replace "Unknown" results where appropriate. As for the first one (the 1st Drive range done by me), since that was a manual range done entirely by one person it's simply a matter of mislabeling and can be easily corrected.

BTW, I didn't see any "Unknown" results from IB8000 ranges; could you possibly point those out to me?

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;212086]Karsten, if you have the original LLRnet-format results for the latter two, send them my way[/quote]

Mailed!

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;212086]
BTW, I didn't see any "Unknown" results from IB8000 ranges; could you possibly point those out to me?[/QUOTE]

IB8000 seems ok, as I can say from here.

But please check Drive #3 IB5000 again:
For example this primes:
Unknown 2008-11-10 10:24:00 371 2 571042

but it was found by Gary!

From resultfile "results_20081104_0657_IB_nplb_5000.txt":
[code]
user=gd_barnes
[11/04/08 05:35:56]
371*2^571042-1 is prime! Time : sec.
[/code]

There're several ranges done by IB5000 on Drive #3, see [url=www.rieselprime.de/NPLB/Drives/NPLB_Drive3.htm]here[/url]: I've documented all ranges with server or contributor there.

[quote=kar_bon;212090]Mailed![/quote]
Thanks, got 'em.[quote]IB8000 seems ok, as I can say from here.

But please check Drive #3 IB5000 again:
For example this primes:
Unknown 2008-11-10 10:24:00 371 2 571042

but it was found by Gary!

From resultfile "results_20081104_0657_IB_nplb_5000.txt":
[code]
user=gd_barnes
[11/04/08 05:35:56]
371*2^571042-1 is prime! Time : sec.
[/code]

There're several ranges done by IB5000 on Drive #3, see [URL="http://www.rieselprime.de/NPLB/Drives/NPLB_Drive3.htm"]here[/URL]: I've documented all ranges with server or contributor there.[/quote]
Now that is [i]strange[/i]. No results for that n appear in the list of "Unknown" results I posted earlier, yet I generated that list with the SQL command "select * from results where username = 'Unknown'", which should produce each and every "Unknown" result in the DB. Something isn't adding up here.

To investigate this further I tried selecting just this one k/n pair from the DB:
[code]mysql> select * from results where n = 571042 and k = 371;
+-----------+------------+----------+-----+------+--------+------+-----+-------+----------+---------+--------+------+----------------+-------------+
| username | date | time | k | base | n | sign | one | prime | residual | seconds | server | port | pair_score | prime_score |
+-----------+------------+----------+-----+------+--------+------+-----+-------+----------+---------+--------+------+----------------+-------------+
| gd_barnes | 2008-11-04 | 05:35:56 | 371 | 2 | 571042 | - | 1 | 0 | | 0 | IB | 5000 | 2.038056036025 | NULL |
+-----------+------------+----------+-----+------+--------+------+-----+-------+----------+---------+--------+------+----------------+-------------+
1 row in set (0.13 sec)[/code]
So it is in there under Gary's name, not Unknown. One thing I did find strange is that the "prime" column seemed to be set to 0 despite the number being prime but it's possible I'm just misinterpreting Dave's method of filing primes in the DB.

Yet the website lists it under "Unknown".

Dave, any idea of the cause of this apparent disconnect?

Why are we making this so extremely difficult? I have now stepped in and recommended that we dispense with this entire reloading of every result that we have into the DB.

The intent was that this be a manual results import not an all results import, which would take months.

If some stuff got overwritten, that is very bad news and shows that we did not properly analyze the situation ahead of time. If that is what happened, is there a way that we can restore them?

There should be very few "unknown" results. Perhaps no more than 50-100 on the entire project. For manual results, we should know who did all of them and it's just a matter of looking it up in the 1st post of each drive. The only ones that should end up entered in the DB as "unknown" are where the server might have somehow missed 1-2 of them and either Max, Karsten, or I ran the pairs manually and put them in our file that we keep so that they matched up with original sieve file.

Max, all results for the entire 5th thru 10th drives and mini-drive are now on Jeepford. Please analyze which ones of them were done manually, associate who did them and when they were done, and load only those into the DB. For each drive, the manual loading should go fairly quickly. Since this project started the 5th drive, 95-98% of all results have been done by the servers. The lion's share of the manual stats import is coming from the 1st thru 3rd drives but even those were largely done by servers.

Going forward, the only drives that should take a little while to load into the DB are the fully manual ones; that is the individual-k and mini drive. Everything else after the 3rd drive should go very fast.

In the future, before loading any manual pairs into the DB, I want to review what is being loaded.


Gary

grep search shows the following result

results_20081104_0657_IB_nplb_5000.txt:
user=gd_barnes^M
[11/04/08 05:35:56]^M
371*2^571042-1 prime! Time : sec.^M

results_20100415_2035_MN_nplb_0003.txt:
user=Unknown
[2008-11-10 10:24:00]
371*2^571042-1 is prime! Time : 0.0 sec.

Re the first file, that whole file is full of CTRL characters.
I will check if that has had an impact on the loading.
The prime detection is looking for "prime!" so the first instance should have been loaded and registered as a prime.
It could be the missing search-time. I will test the parsing.

Re the second file, this pair was not loaded because the pair already exists in the results table.
Why the pair was subsequently submitted again in manual search I do not know.

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;212094]So it is in there under Gary's name, not Unknown. One thing I did find strange is that the "prime" column seemed to be set to 0 despite the number being prime but it's possible I'm just misinterpreting Dave's method of filing primes in the DB.

Yet the website lists it under "Unknown".
[/QUOTE]

As i can say from an export of Adam's DB from 2008-09-15 17:09:22 there are tables for pairs and an extra table for primes!

So the pair is correctly in that table you requested but the prime as shown [url=http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=prime_list]here[/url] is from the prime-table and there is contributor = 'Unknown'!

suggest we splice these posts out of the News thread

@ kar_bon

Indeed.
I see it.
I also see the point in the processing sequence that allowed that to happen.
ho hum.
I have to first debug the loading parsing that should have loaded gary's prime as a prime.
Then I have to fix the primes decanting procedure.
But, before I do that I will look for any other occurrences so all are fixed.

Total of 3 occurrences found
[CODE]+----------+-----+--------+------------+-----+--------+
| username | k | n | username | k | n |
+----------+-----+--------+------------+-----+--------+
| Unknown | 301 | 566979 | gd_barnes | 301 | 566979 |
| Unknown | 371 | 571042 | gd_barnes | 371 | 571042 |
| Unknown | 331 | 575199 | Flatlander | 331 | 575199 |
+----------+-----+--------+------------+-----+--------+[/CODE]

all 3 in the same MN file and all 3 processed from the same server port knpairs file.

results_20081103_0657_IB_nplb_5000.txt:301*2^566979-1 prime! Time : sec.
results_20100415_2035_MN_nplb_0003.txt:301*2^566979-1 is prime! Time : 0.0 sec.

results_20081106_0657_IB_nplb_5000.txt:331*2^575199-1 prime! Time : sec.
results_20100415_2035_MN_nplb_0003.txt:331*2^575199-1 is prime! Time : 0.0 sec.

results_20081104_0657_IB_nplb_5000.txt:371*2^571042-1 prime! Time : sec.
results_20100415_2035_MN_nplb_0003.txt:371*2^571042-1 is prime! Time : 0.0 sec.

Perspective: 0.0546 % error rate due to combination of (a) unnacounted for source data issues and (b) processing logic
Observation: If the overlap had not occurred this bug would not have been found. How weird is that.

patch development and repair in progress etf 24 hrs

[quote=gd_barnes;212102]Why are we making this so extremely difficult? I have now stepped in and recommended that we dispense with this entire reloading of every result that we have into the DB.

The intent was that this be a manual results import not an all results import, which would take months.

If some stuff got overwritten, that is very bad news and shows that we did not properly analyze the situation ahead of time. If that is what happened, is there a way that we can restore them?

There should be very few "unknown" results. Perhaps no more than 50-100 on the entire project. For manual results, we should know who did all of them and it's just a matter of looking it up in the 1st post of each drive. The only ones that should end up entered in the DB as "unknown" are where the server might have somehow missed 1-2 of them and either Max, Karsten, or I ran the pairs manually and put them in our file that we keep so that they matched up with original sieve file.

Max, all results for the entire 5th thru 10th drives and mini-drive are now on Jeepford. Please analyze which ones of them were done manually, associate who did them and when they were done, and load only those into the DB. For each drive, the manual loading should go fairly quickly. Since this project started the 5th drive, 95-98% of all results have been done by the servers. The lion's share of the manual stats import is coming from the 1st thru 3rd drives but even those were largely done by servers.

Going forward, the only drives that should take a little while to load into the DB are the fully manual ones; that is the individual-k and mini drive. Everything else after the 3rd drive should go very fast.

In the future, before loading any manual pairs into the DB, I want to review what is being loaded.


Gary[/quote]
Let me clarify: nothing has been overwritten. All that happened was that some rather large chunks of work that had never been loaded the first time around were imported just now under "Unknown", therefore uncovering for us a gaping hole in our DB--an almost 40K LLRnet range from the early 3rd Drive was missing entirely. Since Karsten has all the results on file, all we have to do is "upsert" Karsten's files into the DB (as Dave termed it) so that the "real" results replace the "Unknown"s where applicable. Easy peasy. :smile:

Rest assured, though, yes, I will not try to import the LLRnet ranges along with the manual ones for the later drives; it was only the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd I was worried about since a lot about our servers was in a state of flux at that time and there was a very high probability of errors having been made that had gone unnoticed in the years since, and indeed that's what we turned up with this. But by the time of anything later, the server process had been cleaned up to essential clockwork, so there shouldn't be anything significant missing from there on out and therefore no need to further "re-import" any LLRnet ranges.

BTW, regarding the prime issue which we uncovered: having the "Unknown" results imported like this actually revealed a bug in Dave's duplicate-screening process which would have otherwise gone unnoticed. Now a fix is on the way. :smile:

Meanwhile, per Dave's suggestion I'm splitting off all posts related to this to a separate thread since they don't really belong in the News thread.

To contradict myself "patch development and repair in progress etf 24 hrs "
The patch fix is the easy bit, but the repair (data fix) requires due care.
I anticipate this patch and repair will be completed this coming weekend.

[quote=AMDave;212401]To contradict myself "patch development and repair in progress etf 24 hrs "
The patch fix is the easy bit, but the repair (data fix) requires due care.
I anticipate this patch and repair will be completed this coming weekend.[/quote]
Not to bug you, but I'd just like to verify: is this complete now?

Meanwhile, to all: The 12th Drive manual results have been imported (except for the k=2400-2600 range, which is already half in the DB, but will need some tricky import procedures to finish off due to the weirdness with that range--that will be later). Another one down! :grin:

More than half of this drive was done entirely manually by Bruce, so this represents a big boost in stats for him. Bruce, I know you haven't shown up on the forum for a while now, but if you see this, just wanted to let you know that we finally got your results imported! :smile:

Hey gents, thank you for the kind thoughts very much. :-)

I'm sorry that I haven't been around much as there has been some other stuff going on in my world that has shoved a lot of the distributed computing stuff more to the background than I would like but that's the way the ball bounces some times. :smile:

This whole effort is a lot of work on a lot of fronts by a lot of people. The stats thing though I have to say that Max and AMDave have really been putting in a TON of midnight oil. So congrats to you all. :-)

[quote=Brucifer;214007]Hey gents, thank you for the kind thoughts very much. :-)

I'm sorry that I haven't been around much as there has been some other stuff going on in my world that has shoved a lot of the distributed computing stuff more to the background than I would like but that's the way the ball bounces some times. :smile:

This whole effort is a lot of work on a lot of fronts by a lot of people. The stats thing though I have to say that Max and AMDave have really been putting in a TON of midnight oil. So congrats to you all. :-)[/quote]
Howdy--nice to have you back! :smile: If you're by chance ready to lend a hand again, our current priority is Drive #5, which we hope to finish by year's end--we have an LLRnet and PRPnet server available for it. Also, we've resumed the 12th Drive for n=250K-350K on LLRnet port 7000, if you'd prefer that.

(Of course, if you're still largely busy with other things, no problem--I definitely understand, being rather busy with non-prime-related things myself lately. :smile:)

I forgot to mention this, but all manual results so far on Drive #5 and #6 were imported into the DB a few days ago. Drive #7 should follow at tonight's daily stats rollover. :smile:

Edit: Drive #8 is now all set to be imported tonight as well.

Very nice work Max and Dave!

Max knocked them all over for you.
The database is doing it's job.
Mostly for me, it is 'look ma, no hands!' :smile:

What about the user 'Unknown'?

There're still 18 primes (300<k<400) found by this user and ~400,000 pairs in the database!

[quote=kar_bon;215200]What about the user 'Unknown'?

There're still 18 primes (300<k<400) found by this user and ~400,000 pairs in the database![/quote]
That's still pending Dave's coding the "upsert" procedure we'll need to insert those pairs under the correct usernames and have them replace the "Unknown"s, rather than be rejected as duplicates. From what I understand that's a somewhat complex task.

Dave, how's that coming? Do you by chance have an ETA on when that will be ready?

Acknowledged.
The retrospective aggregations have just now been refreshed after the manual loads which included Max's updates of 'who-did-what'.
/ed - except for the 3 primes under investigation which unfortunately is still pending testing & I have to check the other 15 -ed/

[quote=AMDave;215212]Acknowledged.
The retrospective aggregations have just now been refreshed after the manual loads which included Max's updates of 'who-did-what'.
/ed - except for the 3 primes under investigation which unfortunately is still pending testing & I have to check the other 15 -ed/[/quote]
Cool--I see that "Unknown" has been accordingly knocked down to 26th place (from somewhere in the earlier 1x's). However, I also see that he still has 87427 pairs to his name--is there by chance still something we missed that the upsert didn't cover? I don't have time right now but I can check later today to see which drive and range the remaining "Unknown" results are from.

Would it help if I submitted some results with the username Unknown? Then we could find them easily.:smile:

[quote=henryzz;215225]Would it help if I submitted some results with the username Unknown? Then we could find them easily.:smile:[/quote]
Hmm...actually, I think that would more serve to complicate matters since if we query the database for a list of all Unknown results, yours would come up as well. What we'd be looking for instead is the large, essentially contiguous bunches of results that would surely be produced by such a query; those indicate entire server results files that were never imported the first time around and were therefore caught in the manual import.

If your're looking at the [url=http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=prime_list]prime list[/url] on NPLB-stats using participant='Unknown' as filter, there're 18 primes shown:

15 primes are of the range 300<k<400 and 340k<n<384k so it's the range from Drive #3 of LLRnet port IronBits 5000! These are 76,999 pairs!

The other 3 primes are from same drive, IB5000 too, range 566k<n<576k. This makes 19,177 pairs.

So all over 96,176 pairs, a bit too muchas the current 87,427, but these should be the ranges to look further!

[quote=mdettweiler;215227]Hmm...actually, I think that would more serve to complicate matters since if we query the database for a list of all Unknown results, yours would come up as well. What we'd be looking for instead is the large, essentially contiguous bunches of results that would surely be produced by such a query; those indicate entire server results files that were never imported the first time around and were therefore caught in the manual import.[/quote]
:smile:I was joking:grin:

The first individual-k drive (k=300-400, n=600K-1M) has now been processed for importing to the DB and is awaiting Dave's triggering of the process.

BTW: yes, I didn't forget about those remaining "Unknown" results. I'll try to track those down as soon as I get the chance.

I've queried the DB for a list of all "Unknown" results and dumped the output to [URL]http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/max/unknown_results_20100521.txt[/URL].

The ranges currently claimed by "Unknown" appear to be as follows:
[B]1st Drive, n=510K-510.5K[/B]
Ergh, this was the one that was done by me manually and which I accidentally imported under "Unknown". I pointed this out in my previous itemization of "Unknown" ranges but never got around to fixing it. Dave, quick question: would there be any negative side effects if I remedied the problem with the following command?
[I]update results set username = 'mdettweiler' where (k between 400 and 1001) and (n between 510001 and 510500);[/I]

[B]1st Drive, n=~543038-~543749[/B]
This was in the middle of LLRnet C443's range, n=542.6K-544.0K. It would appear that one or more results files from in here were never imported (probably an accidental blooper, since importing of C* server results was a manual process). Karsten, do you have results files that cover this range? If so, please send them to Dave and I and we can get them in the DB using the "upsert" process.

[B]3rd Drive, n=340K-~383274[/B]
This rather large range was done by LLRnet IB5000. My guess is that it was right around here that IronBits started copying off his results files automatically; indeed, the [URL="http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/llrnet/results/results_20080309_1836_IB_nplb_5000.txt"]very first results file[/URL] by date that we have in our [URL="http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/llrnet/results/"]master directory[/URL] starts at about n=383274 (not counting a few assorted stragglers). Again, Karsten, if you have results files for this range, please send them to Dave and I.

Max :smile:

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;215656]Again, Karsten, if you have results files for this range, please send them to Dave and I.[/QUOTE]

Sent to Max! Please check them if these all of the needed.

The first individual-k drive (k=300-400, n=600K-1M) has now been imported into the DB. Since this drive was almost entirely manual, this represents a rather large jump in the stats (especially for Ian).

From here on out, the remaining drives to be imported represent a comparatively small amount of points. Therefore, we shouldn't have any more enormous jumps in the stats. :smile:

Manual results from the 9th Drive have now been processed for importing into the DB and should be pulled in at midnight CDT tonight. (The file is small enough--about 2 MB--that it seemed safe to let it go in automatically rather than having Dave do a special import for it.)

More to (hopefully) come soon...all that's left to do now are the small bit of manual work done on the 11th Drive, the mini-drive, and the doublecheck drive. (Note that the doublecheck drive will be imported as first pass since it is our first set of results for its range. The end of that drive is likely to be in the somewhat near future, so I'll just wait to the end before importing any of that.)

Drive 11 (3 MB) now awaits import as well.

All results from the k=3010-3200 mini-drive up to n=571K are now ready for Dave to import (this one, at 60 MB, will need to be done separately).

Since the mini-drive has been done almost entirely manually (that is, not through public servers--work done via private servers is considered manual for this purpose), this represents quite a few points being added to the database. gamer007 in particular should get a huge boost, as will Karsten. :smile:

As results continue to come in on the mini-drive, I'll periodically process the new ones and have them imported. (Those files will be rather smaller, so they can be pulled in at the nightly import rather than Dave having to do them separately.)

With this, we are now all caught up as far as importing manual results goes! :smile: (Whew, nice to have that out of the way.)

What about the [url=http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=drive_progress]Drive Progress Graph[/url]?

[QUOTE=kar_bon;233758]What about the [url=http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=drive_progress]Drive Progress Graph[/url]?[/QUOTE]
Ah, right...Dave, while you're at it, could you possibly add the following drives to the progress graph? Thanks.

-Individual-k #1: k=300-400, n=600K-1M
-Individual-k #2: k=300-400, n=1M-2M
-Mini-drive #1: k=3010-3200, n=420259-650K
-Doublecheck #1: k=3-1001, n=100K-260K

Some of these have results in the database already; others currently have few or none but will be populated in the near future.

I have added those drives to the chart.
There are no primes in the doublecheck prime list for that doublecheck range.
The double check primes that are loaded start from n > 260K

[QUOTE=AMDave;234312]I have added those drives to the chart.
There are no primes in the doublecheck prime list for that doublecheck range.
The double check primes that are loaded start from n > 260K[/QUOTE]
Great, thanks! :grin:

Regarding Doublecheck #1: we're going to be loading that one into the firstpass database (under MN-2001) since it is our first set of data for that range; the "real" firstpass tests on that range were done prior to NPLB's inception and thus we don't have any residuals for them. A few years down the road we'll do a triplecheck drive on that range to get the second set of residuals needed for complete verification. Those will then be loaded into the doublecheck database.

n>=260K was done by NPLB the first time around, so we have a firstpass set of residues for it. Thus, the doublecheck work for that range goes directly into the doublecheck database.

Confused yet? :smile:

On the DB drive progress chart, The Mini Drive#3 shows okay, but the manual
stuff for the individual k drive (k=300-400 n=1M-2M) doesn't. Aren't they loaded yet or do we need another legend entry? Just trying to get a visual of whats done and what isn't.

[QUOTE=MyDogBuster;286259]On the DB drive progress chart, The Mini Drive#3 shows okay, but the manual
stuff for the individual k drive (k=300-400 n=1M-2M) doesn't. Aren't they loaded yet or do we need another legend entry? Just trying to get a visual of whats done and what isn't.[/QUOTE]
Hmm...I'm not sure what you're referring to. I see the k=300-400 n=1M-2M results on the chart right now: they're the little dots on the far left stretching up to n=1.6M+. They seem to be showing up fine as far as I can tell.

One thing to note with this drive, though, is that not [I]all[/I] of its results are in the DB yet; most of the primes are from the 6 k's running in LLRnet port 3500, which are in the DB, but the manual results have otherwise not yet been inserted (with the exception of Mini-Geek's manual ranges, which were automatically inserted in a manner similar to your present 10th Drive reservation). Thus there are a few odd primes from this drive listed in the [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=13188]forum thread[/url] that aren't on the Drive Progress chart yet.

[QUOTE]One thing to note with this drive, though, is that not [I]all[/I] of its results are in the DB yet; most of the primes are from the 6 k's running in LLRnet port 3500, which are in the DB, but the manual results have otherwise not yet been inserted (with the exception of Mini-Geek's manual ranges, which were automatically inserted in a manner similar to your present 10th Drive reservation). Thus there are a few odd primes from this drive listed in the [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=13188"]forum thread[/URL] that aren't on the Drive Progress chart yet. [/QUOTE]

It was the manual results I was referring to. I know there is still some of Bruce's manual stuff from Drive 12 not loaded because of a duplication problem, but I thought everything else was loaded.

[QUOTE=MyDogBuster;286261]It was the manual results I was referring to. I know there is still some of Bruce's manual stuff from Drive 12 not loaded because of a duplication problem, but I thought everything else was loaded.[/QUOTE]

The manual stuff from the individual-k drive is only loaded sporadically. To the best of my knowledge, we haven't loaded anything for n>1M yet. The only thing in there for n>1M is the 6k drive and Tim's stuff, where the server was set up like we are doing for you on k=1400-2000 to automatically download stuff into the DB like all public servers do.