[QUOTE=chalsall;386243]I have spiders. It's a bit like having crabs, but different....[/QUOTE]

I'll take your word for it :smile:

Conspiracy plot: Chalsall IS Big Brother!

[QUOTE=retina;385325][QUOTE=retina;381855]Using this query on the temporary new server:
[url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_LL/default.php?exp_lo=30000000&exp_hi=33219278&exp_date=&user_only=0&user_id=&exdchk=1&exbad=1&exfactor=1&txt=1&dispdate=1[/url]
And removing duplicates I show 2204 remaining exponents to finish all numbers below 10M decimal digits.[/QUOTE]As of now there appears to be 2[sup]8[/sup] remaining till there's no more.[/QUOTE]And currently 2[sup]7[/sup]+1 remaining.

And they are all currently [url=http://www.mersenne.org/assignments/default.php?exp_lo=1&exp_hi=33219280&execm=1&exfirst=1&exp1=1&extf=1]assigned[/url].

[QUOTE=retina;386308]And currently 2[sup]7[/sup]+1 remaining.

And they are all currently [url=http://www.mersenne.org/assignments/default.php?exp_lo=1&exp_hi=33219280&execm=1&exfirst=1&exp1=1&extf=1]assigned[/url].[/QUOTE]
And many overdue.
As one of our top veteran producers I have nothing but respect for grunwalderGIMP and his contributions.
That said, he has 19 of these all over due and his recent progress suggests he's either quit or taken a break.

If anyone knows for sure that he has quit these could all be released. If its just a break ..... you can ignore this post

[QUOTE=Madpoo;386232]Prime95 does have the concept of the rolling average, and despite what the user sets the "time on per day" to, the rolling average is an up to date reflection of how the machine is doing..[/QUOTE]

Prime95 won't let the rolling average go below 50 (I think). If a machine is on a few minutes a day, then prime95 will be wildly optimistic as to the completion date.

[QUOTE=Prime95;386323]Prime95 won't let the rolling average go below 50 (I think). If a machine is on a few minutes a day, then prime95 will be wildly optimistic as to the completion date.[/QUOTE]
This might be one of various possibilities. My machine is on about 8 hours a day and the estimates are always on the pessimistic side, jumping around from day to day between slightly too pessimistic and wildly pessimistic. (I haven't bothered to update the version of mprime I run in the last few years - sorry for my laxness there - and maybe you changed the way rolling average is handled since then. But mine won't be the only machine running an old client, I'm sure.)

Countdown to proving M(32582657) is the 44th Mersenne Prime: 12 (Estimated completion : 2014-11-16)

[quote]Countdown to testing all exponents below M(57885161) once: [COLOR=blue]6,156[/COLOR][/quote][quote]First-time LL assignments in ]M(51646879), M(57885161)[ = [COLOR=blue]781[/COLOR][/quote]Should they be the same thing? Why am I wrong?

[QUOTE=Luis;386420]Should they be the same thing? Why am I wrong?[/QUOTE]

[CODE]Countdown to testing [B][I]all exponents[/I][/B] below M(57885161) once: 6,156[/CODE]
[CODE]First-time[B][I] LL assignments[/I][/B] in ]M(51646879), M(57885161)[ = 781[/CODE]I'd guess not all untested exponents are currently assigned for LL testing (maybe some are out for TF, ECM or P-1).

[QUOTE=sdbardwick;386422][CODE]Countdown to testing [B][I]all exponents[/I][/B] below M(57885161) once: 6,156[/CODE][CODE]First-time[B][I] LL assignments[/I][/B] in ]M(51646879), M(57885161)[ = 781[/CODE]I'd guess not all untested exponents are currently assigned for LL testing (maybe some are out for TF, [STRIKE]ECM[/STRIKE] or P-1).[/QUOTE]
Or are not assigned at all.

[QUOTE=sdbardwick;386422][CODE]Countdown to testing [B][I]all exponents[/I][/B] below M(57885161) once: 6,156[/CODE]
[CODE]First-time[B][I] LL assignments[/I][/B] in ]M(51646879), M(57885161)[ = 781[/CODE]I'd guess not all untested exponents are currently assigned for LL testing (maybe some are out for TF, ECM or P-1).[/QUOTE]

Correct... there are still quite a few unassigned exponents below M(48) that need a first time check.

There are 350039 total in that range
- 224586 have a known factor
- 119298 have some kind of LL result (single/double) (excludes any unverified bad/suspect results)
- 5980 are assigned as first LL checks and haven't expired

There's some overlap involved there... 91 LL results where a factor was found later on for example.

I get 264 unassigned when I combined the different things together and filter out the ones that I can account for, removing overlaps.

But that 264 unassigned in that range is pretty different from what was mentioned. Specifically, I see 5980 assigned in that range, not a mere 781.

I might also have to take a closer look at the countdown of 6156 remaining. I'm probably just doing something wrong because my numbers aren't adding up. I didn't count suspect/bad results. If I include those, there are just 249 left, but I don't think I'd want to count a suspect result towards a milestone. :) That's *probably* where my method differed from the countdown, but I don't know.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;386441]I might also have to take a closer look at the countdown of 6156 remaining. I'm probably just doing something wrong because my numbers aren't adding up. I didn't count suspect/bad results. If I include those, there are just 249 left, but I don't think I'd want to count a suspect result towards a milestone. :) That's *probably* where my method differed from the countdown, but I don't know.[/QUOTE]

There is an old expression: "No good deed goes unpunished".