I put my first chunk of data in the sftp site: 11386995 relations collected since saturday evening.

I'll be proceeding at a somewhat slower rate of ~ 3Mrels per day.

Yep, thanks!
Internal redundancy is very low (this is a moot sanity test, but anyway: in this small range, there were only 50k self-redundant rels); and the incremental redundancy, i.e. 78M old + these, was "88402184 unique, 1507519 duplicate", which looks very good. 86.7% relations are 'new'.

[QUOTE=Batalov;252491]Yep, thanks!
Internal redundancy is very low (this is a moot sanity test, but anyway: in this small range, there were only 50k self-redundant rels); and the incremental redundancy, i.e. 78M old + these, was "88402184 unique, 1507519 duplicate", which looks very good. 86.7% relations are 'new'.[/QUOTE]

I will send a CD early next week with ~10M more relations.

____________________
[COLOR=green]SB: Very good. If you'd like, you could try a small range with KF - and you will have both types of relations (and burn them, too)![/COLOR]

A proposal
 

This post is really addressed to Bob but it's of general interest (IMAO, anyway) so it is a post and not a PM. The title was going to be "A modest proposal" but I'm serious.

Bob has recently announced that the Cunningham NFS factorizations have finally exceeded the limit of his resources. (They exceeded mine some time back, which is why I've not had much impact recently.)

Bob has also accepted assistance from others when his resources were inadequate at the time. I've run several Lanczos for him, for instance.

Proposal: anyone who is interested helps out Bob with the sieving and/or the LA for his choice of Cunningham factorization. No guarantees and all work is done on a best-efforts basis.

As with the current effort on 2,1870L factorization, I'll throw in some computrons. If, in return, Bob (or anyone else with wimpish machines not up to state of the art sieving) would like to point an ECMNET client at my GCW server I would be (a) grateful and (b) give appropriate acknowledgement. Acceptance of that offer is independent of my main proposal. By "wimpish", most anything built in the current millennium is included.

Paul

[QUOTE=xilman;252593]This post is really addressed to Bob but it's of general interest (IMAO, anyway) so it is a post and not a PM. The title was going to be "A modest proposal" but I'm serious.

Bob has recently announced that the Cunningham NFS factorizations have finally exceeded the limit of his resources. (They exceeded mine some time back, which is why I've not had much impact recently.)

Bob has also accepted assistance from others when his resources were inadequate at the time. I've run several Lanczos for him, for instance.

Proposal: anyone who is interested helps out Bob with the sieving and/or the LA for his choice of Cunningham factorization. No guarantees and all work is done on a best-efforts basis.

As with the current effort on 2,1870L factorization, I'll throw in some computrons. If, in return, Bob (or anyone else with wimpish machines not up to state of the art sieving) would like to point an ECMNET client at my GCW server I would be (a) grateful and (b) give appropriate acknowledgement. Acceptance of that offer is independent of my main proposal. By "wimpish", most anything built in the current millennium is included.

Paul[/QUOTE]

I can run independent ECM jobs, but they can not connect to an
external server. I plan on running ECM on the 2LM numbers when
2,1870L finishes.

I may also finish up the homogeneous Cunninghams to exponent 200
via NFS. They are not high priority.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;252595]I can run independent ECM jobs, but they can not connect to an
external server. I plan on running ECM on the 2LM numbers when
2,1870L finishes.

I may also finish up the homogeneous Cunninghams to exponent 200
via NFS. They are not high priority.[/QUOTE]That's fine by me. The suggestion that some ECM work for me as a quid pro quo was made to anyone wishing to help you out, not just to you.

Paul

(Added in edit: a factor of 986*9^986+1 appeared in the last few seconds!)

[QUOTE=xilman;252602]That's fine by me. The suggestion that some ECM work for me as a quid pro quo was made to anyone wishing to help you out, not just to you.

Paul

(Added in edit: a factor of 986*9^986+1 appeared in the last few seconds!)[/QUOTE]

Note that Bruce just found a factor of 2,932+ that is 3 digits shorter than
his previous factor (of the same number, natch)!

[QUOTE=xilman;252602]That's fine by me. The suggestion that some ECM work for me as a quid pro quo was made to anyone wishing to help you out, not just to you.

Paul

(Added in edit: a factor of 986*9^986+1 appeared in the last few seconds!)[/QUOTE]

This factor has not made it to the [URL="http://www.factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000042008355&scan=3"]factor database[/URL] yet. (I assume that you have [I]not[/I] meant the p13, which is the biggest factor of this number in the DB)

[QUOTE=xilman;252602]That's fine by me. The suggestion that some ECM work for me as a quid pro quo was made to anyone wishing to help you out, not just to you.
[/QUOTE]
Paul, has anyone run 43000 260e6 curves on Woodall 951?

[QUOTE=Batalov;252615]Paul, has anyone run 43000 260e6 curves on Woodall 951?[/QUOTE]Not as far as I know. The ecmserver.ini record for this number is:
[code]W_951 N 18101159423518357666828255177479109538365804182759476871194099689081082431482170358290624858698812024459501904953261022348573575276969028199796222497643229300730947446598839553529533129630939491374047682419407574822021491459083058737118733981076145112889022659672203022021130838051387342847
W_951 P 1210279207,217567,0,active,nolocalcontrol,recurse
W_951 B 2000 522:0 3:0 1:0
W_951 B 50000 300:0 3:0 1:0
W_951 B 250000 610:0 3:0 1:0
W_951 B 1000000 900:0 3:0 1:0
W_951 B 3000000 2437:0 3:0 1:0
W_951 B 11000000 238:0 3:0 1:0
W_951 B 43000000 0:0 3:0 1:0
W_951 B 110000000 0:0 14:0 1:0[/code] which may underestimate the amount of ECM work done but not by a large amount. It does seriously underestimate the amount of P +/- 1 work --- both have been run to B1=1G with whatever gmp-ecm chooses by default for B2.

At a guess, there are very likely no factors to be found smaller than p40.

Paul

[COLOR=green]Good, I ran about 4000 of these so far. --SB[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Andi47;252614]This factor has not made it to the [URL="http://www.factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000042008355&scan=3"]factor database[/URL] yet. (I assume that you have [I]not[/I] meant the p13, which is the biggest factor of this number in the DB)[/QUOTE]I make no effort to add factors to that database so if anything gets in there it's by the activity of others.

Paul