My DCs have crossed over from 40M to 41M.

[QUOTE=rudy235;464741]There are only 7 remaining exponents to complete the 73M milestone

However this one will expire before completion.

72989101 LL LL, 63.10% 14 [COLOR="Red"]29[/COLOR] 2017-05-18 2017-08-02 2017-08-03 2017-08-31 Kent Freeze
©1996-2017 Mersenne Research, Inc. Current time: 2017-08-02 17:49 UTC - Page rendered in 0.0518s[/QUOTE]

There are 4 left, 3 of which won't finish in time (good job, ATH, on the one that actually will finish). That's based on my analysis of their past progress... they fall into that category of "mystery machines that check in daily but report no progress for days or weeks on end"

I'm not saying I'm poaching those 3 exponents, but don't be surprised if someone magically turns in results for those just before they expire. :smile:

Here's my analysis of the *actual* days-to-complete for these 3, just based on the average %/day of those assignments.
72831991 - 113.3 days (expires in 4 days)
72893621 - 394.2 days (expires in 10 days)
72989101 - 34 days (expires in 11 days)

[QUOTE=Madpoo;464863]There are 4 left, 3 of which won't finish in time (good job, ATH, on the one that actually will finish). That's based on my analysis of their past progress... they fall into that category of "mystery machines that check in daily but report no progress for days or weeks on end"

I'm not saying I'm poaching those 3 exponents, but don't be surprised if someone magically turns in results for those just before they expire. :smile:

Here's my analysis of the *actual* days-to-complete for these 3, just based on the average %/day of those assignments.
72831991 - 113.3 days (expires in 4 days)
72893621 - 394.2 days (expires in 10 days)
72989101 - 34 days (expires in 11 days)[/QUOTE]

I am not poaching those either, however, I will not cry or decry if (when) someone else does.

The server has no faith in us :smile: It expect us to take 26 months just for 521 exponents:

[QUOTE]Countdown to first time checking all exponents below 75M: 521 (Estimated completion : 2019-10-07)[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ATH;464886]The server has no faith in us :smile: It expect us to take 26 months just for 521 exponents:[/QUOTE]

LOL... it's just the latest "estimated time to completion" of all the exponents in that range.

Those client estimates are usually wrong anyway, and if a client stops reporting in then it's even more useless so I'm not entirely sure that milestone page should even report that. Oh well.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;464896]Those client estimates are usually wrong anyway, and if a client stops reporting in then it's even more useless so I'm not entirely sure that milestone page should even report that. Oh well.[/QUOTE]It was suggested many posts ago that those useless estimated completion dates be removed. They serve no purpose whatsoever. Might as well just post random numbers, they would make as much sense IMO.

I'm all in favour of showing more details (instead of whitespace and so-called "clean" layouts) but when those details are useless then they should be removed, or replaced with something else that actually conveys information.

[QUOTE=retina;464912]It was suggested...[/QUOTE]
+1

[QUOTE=retina;464912]It was suggested many posts ago that those useless estimated completion dates be removed. They serve no purpose whatsoever. Might as well just post random numbers, they would make as much sense IMO.

I'm all in favour of showing more details (instead of whitespace and so-called "clean" layouts) but when those details are useless then they should be removed, or replaced with something else that actually conveys information.[/QUOTE]

I'll take a look at it, maybe think about whether there's anything else useful I could put there instead.

FYI, I turned in the last 3 results for the < 73M exponents. They weren't going to finish in time, that much was clear. Now they can just turn in their double-check in however many days or years they'll actually take.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;464984]I'll take a look at it, maybe think about whether there's anything else useful I could put there instead.

FYI, I turned in the last 3 results for the < 73M exponents. They weren't going to finish in time, that much was clear. Now they can just turn in their double-check in however many days or years they'll actually take.[/QUOTE]

Just a few suggestions - such as a countdown to n=100M and a countdown to n=332192809 (100M digits)

:)

The top two lines of [URL=https://www.mersenne.org/report_classic/]this[/URL] report can now be merged.

[QUOTE=NBtarheel_33;465429]The top two lines of [URL=https://www.mersenne.org/report_classic/]this[/URL] report can now be merged.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure what the original thinking was of those breakpoints in the chart. I thought maybe it was based on the average FFT size used for those exponents or something like that (except for the large 0-35.1M section).