M42,643,801 has been verified as the 46th Mersenne prime. Congratulations to everyone involved!

[QUOTE=ixfd64;480647]M42,643,801 has been verified as the 46th Mersenne prime. Congratulations to everyone involved![/QUOTE]

Yay!
On to the 47th. M(43112609). Still 287 to go.:smile:

[QUOTE=ixfd64;480647]M42,643,801 has been verified as the 46th Mersenne prime. Congratulations to everyone involved![/QUOTE]

Ugh, yes. Someone (I think) poached a couple, and I did the last two. They were stalled. Well, one stopped checking in, but even before that, it's progress history showed it would run and then stall for days/weeks. The other one was doing the same, either no progress at all between checkins or moving very slowly like < 0.1% daily.

The same is true of some of the < 77M exponents. I picked one up just as it expired which will be done in another hour, and also turned in 3 others that had definitely stalled.

It's just weird to me to see a computer updating an assignment with zero progress for weeks on end. One was at 98% for the longest time and I kept thinking it would get a burst of energy and finish, but it's been at 98% for over 2 weeks...

The assignment for M76872911 and M77213089 are progressing nicely. They're updating and shows progress from day to day and their estimated completion they report jibes well with my prediction (4 and 6 days respectively) so we should be good with those.

Is someone going to update the main page with the news about M42,643,801 being officially the 46th Mersenne prime?

[QUOTE=ixfd64;480724]Is someone going to update the main page with the news about M42,643,801 being officially the 46th Mersenne prime?[/QUOTE]

Whoops, I forgot the home page has an existing blurb there about M45's proof-of-order.

It might be good to cleanup that home page anyway, remove some of those older mini-milestone things like the older "double checked up to M(xxx)" mentions.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;480732]Whoops, I forgot the home page has an existing blurb there about M45's proof-of-order.

It might be good to cleanup that home page anyway, remove some of those older mini-milestone things like the older "double checked up to M(xxx)" mentions.[/QUOTE]

Well, I updated the home page. I took the opportunity to add some stats about our high watermarks for DC and LL exponents as well as the previous days counts on how many LL/DC/factors were done.

Some general cleanup too, like making sure version 29.4 is prominently featured on the home page to try and get folks (who don't read the forums) to notice it and update since it has a lot of new features and performance changes.

The LL test for M76872911 just completed. This means all exponents below 77M have now been checked at least once.

[QUOTE=ixfd64;481110]The LL test for M76872911 just completed. This means all exponents below 77M have now been checked at least once.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't paying attention when it happened, but I did update the milestone page now. I also got an update ready for when the last one under M(50) comes in... I think in the next 24 hours if it keeps up the pace.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;481192]I also got an update ready for when the last one under M(50) comes in... I think in the next 24 hours if it keeps up the pace.[/QUOTE]It looks like we may get 2 (and possibly 3) more milestones completed by the end of March.
:clap:

Interesting milestone coming up
 

There is a rather interesting milestone approaching that I've looked at over the years...

It's the count of unverified exponents done by a Primenet version 4 computer (pre-2008'ish).

There are only 537 of them left, most of them in the 43M-44M range, so they should be done soon. I think when I first looked a couple years back there were several thousand (over 10K maybe?) and here we are now, near the end!

There were a handful above 44M that I went ahead and reserved (25 or so) as well as some already assigned to others.

It'll be great to finally get those older results "off the books". My SQL queries that look for work done by "probably" bad computers has to do some extra gymnastics to account for the different way these results are stored, and not having to worry about those will make things simpler. :smile:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;481248]It'll be great to finally get those older results "off the books". My SQL queries that look for work done by "probably" bad computers has to do some extra gymnastics to account for the different way these results are stored, and not having to worry about those will make things simpler. :smile:[/QUOTE]

Don't look now, but there's one user (spica) still turning in new v4_computers results. Most recently [M]M75759427[/M].

You might get one or two new first-time tests a year. But those results are all good. I don't know if they have any current v4 assignments.