I put the GPU into it, and let the 25162937 finish. Residue matched. Now let the anonymous guy make the triple check. I know it is not fair for him, and I am quite sorry. But I got angry with P95 :furious:.

What is the better path to go for DC and LL assignments taken from GPU-2-72? I mean, do I have to put them into P95? (to confirm the key and take the ownership?). Will they be unreserved if I just do nothing, and keep them as anonymous, DC/LL them with CudaLucas, and report the residue without the key?

Other better idea?

Something is wrong with my CudaLucas, the time increases instead of decreasing....

[CODE]
e:\<snip\>C4 -c100000 -t -D1 29006071
CUDALucas: Could not find a checkpoint file to resume from
Iteration 100000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 29:16:10)
Iteration 200000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 30:16:07)
Iteration 300000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 31:44:39)
Iteration 400000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 32:06:54)
Iteration 500000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 32:31:03)
Iteration 600000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 32:33:38)
Iteration 700000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 33:03:41)
Iteration 800000 M( 29006071 )C, <snip>, ETA 33:13:00)
[/CODE]

[SPOILER]this post is a joke, I was launching other tasks in between, that took some juice from the CPU/GPU, but it was fun to see it, when I looked to the times I was crossed for few seconds until I realized what was going on[/SPOILER]

[QUOTE=LaurV;280224]I put the GPU into it, and let the 25162937 finish. Residue matched. Now let the anonymous guy make the triple check. I know it is not fair for him, and I am quite sorry. But I got angry with P95 :furious:.[/QUOTE]

But this was assigned to you as a TF (67 -> 69), not a DC... (And this TF work was done: Assigned 2011-11-22 11:34:09, Completed 2011-11-23 00:33:11).

[QUOTE=LaurV;280224]What is the better path to go for DC and LL assignments taken from GPU-2-72? I mean, do I have to put them into P95? (to confirm the key and take the ownership?).[/QUOTE]

Make sure they're actually DC and LL assignments; don't do DC/LL work on DC/LL [B][I][U]Trial Factoring[/U][/I][/B] assignments. And while it is good if you put them in P95 to take ownership (and also to let PrimeNet know that someone's actually working it), it is not fundamentally required.

[QUOTE=LaurV;280224]Will they be unreserved if I just do nothing, and keep them as anonymous, DC/LL them with CudaLucas, and report the residue without the key?[/QUOTE]

Nope. Spidy will detect that you've completed the work, award you your credit, and then unassign the anonymous registration. I realized that this would be a path some would take.

Who's a good spider???
 

OK, just so you know, Spidy has been let off it's leash with regards to detecting and awarding GHzDays credit for completed LL and DC work.

Completed work will be detected at approximately 35 minutes after each hour, and the associated reports will automatically be updated (and the candidate unreserved if appropriate).

I think that's one of the exponents that Prime95 mysteriously unreserved for no reason. So he did have a DC assignment (not TF) at some point...

[QUOTE=chalsall;280230]But this was assigned to you as a TF (67 -> 69), not a DC... (And this TF work was done: Assigned 2011-11-22 11:34:09, Completed 2011-11-23 00:33:11).

Make sure they're actually DC and LL assignments; don't do DC/LL work on DC/LL [B][I][U]Trial Factoring[/U][/I][/B] assignments. And while it is good if you put them in P95 to take ownership (and also to let PrimeNet know that someone's actually working it), it is not fundamentally required.

Nope. Spidy will detect that you've completed the work, award you your credit, and then unassign the anonymous registration. I realized that this would be a path some would take.[/QUOTE]

That exponent was FIRST TIME assigned to me to TF, which I done long ago. Then it was SECOND TIME assigned to me, for Double Check (NOT TF) with a proper assigment key. See [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=280082&postcount=270"]my post #270[/URL] above.

And what do you want to say with "Nope." ?? Should I take this path, or not? Should I unreserve the exponent or should I not, after DC-ing it with CudaLucas, if it is still reserved as anonymous? I want to avoid using P95 for expos got from GPU2-72, exactly for the reasons explained in post 270.

[QUOTE=LaurV;280340]That exponent was FIRST TIME assigned to me to TF, which I done long ago. Then it was SECOND TIME assigned to me, for Double Check (NOT TF) with a proper assigment key. See [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=280082&postcount=270"]my post #270[/URL] above.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but, as you said in post #270 above, Prime95 unreserved it. Thus you no longer "owned" it, and should not have completed the DC on it. This has simply resulted in (possible) duplication of effort (as you, again, said in #270).

[QUOTE=LaurV;280340]And what do you want to say with "Nope." ?? Should I take this path, or not? Should I unreserve the exponent or should I not, after DC-ing it with CudaLucas, if it is still reserved as anonymous? I want to avoid using P95 for expos got from GPU2-72, exactly for the reasons explained in post 270.[/QUOTE]

I thought the rest of the paragraph explained it clearly. But to be extra explicit, do [B][I][U]not[/U][/I][/B] unresearve the exponent from your G72 assignments page. This system will pick up that you've completed the work (assuming you're logged in when you submit the results manually) and unassign it automatically within an hour.

Ok. Now is clear.

And to clarify about my mysterious exponent: that was not a complain against GPU272. It was just my anger leashed out, against P95's mysterious** ways, and the "anonymous" who "stolen" my exponent :smile: I know I duplicated (triplicated) the work, but that was my way of "showing off" in his face :P

edit: I said "mysterious", because it was so. It can not be related to "days to unreserve" or other thing like that, as it only happened to worker 2, but not to the other workers. Each worker had 2 (two) DC exponents to crunch, first one from GPU272 and second one from Primenet. I did this specially, I requested work from Primenet to have one exponent in each queue, because I was reading "stories" on the forum about P95 "mysterious unreserving" work when it is "too much to do". So, I said in my mind, I will take 4 expos from GPU272, and INSERT one in each queue, BEFORE the one got from Primenet. My logic was that in such case, if P95 considers that I have "too much work to do", it will unreserve the expos on the "tail" of the queue, which had no work done yet (therefore the one from Primenet) and not the expos in the "front" of the queue, which had some iterations done already. I intended to have the "end of the queue" occupied by Primenet expos, for each worker. But he misteriously decided to unreserve BOTH exponents from worker 2, but keep ALL 6 exponents that were in the queues for workers 1, 3, and 4 (which are still active, P95 is crunching them, first three (number 1 in each queue) are GPU272 expos, last three (number 2 in each queue) are Primenet expos, in the range 29M. Additionally, he got a brand-new expo (29M) from Primenet, which is crunched currently on worker 2. So, why for the other 3 queues the work-to-do was not "too much"?!?!?! Mystery!! I will let them finish in P95, and do not want to touch the worktodo file anymore. Therefore, I want to DC future assignments from GPU272 with CudaLucas, without using P95 to "take ownership", send the results as LaurV, then your spider should unreserve the (still anonymous) assignment. That is all.

Ok, now a small suggestion:

The "overall system progress" report page should include a new column saying "exponents cleared by DC/LL" or equivalent, after the "factors found column", OR this information should be shown in the "factors found" column, with a small red asterisk (because in this case, no factor is found, but in either case, - factor found, or DC/LL completed - the work counts as "the exponent was cleared" - either by the factor which it was found, or by the completion of DC/LL). And in this case, the column "Average blabla per factor" could be modified in "average blabla per factor or expo cleared/completed", or whatever, and instead of N/A, it must show the real figure (it would be an average of whatever credit Primenet gives for each DC/LL). Then the report would be more reliable and accurate. One who is looking there first time and finds "0" and "N/A" wonders "what in the hack that means, and why do these guys work in vain here?". In the case when no column is added, the "factors found" title should be changed in "exponents cleared/completed", because we know that the "clearance" means "factors" for TF things, and it means "test done" for DC. The "completed" part refers to LL, as the "clearance" is not exact when the new row for LL completed will appear, because then, the exponent is not really "cleared". It still have to wait for DC completion... But anyhow, the "0" and the "N/A" look bad there...

[QUOTE=LaurV;280357]And to clarify about my mysterious exponent: that was not a complain against GPU272. It was just my anger leashed out, against P95's mysterious** ways, and the "anonymous" who "stolen" my exponent :smile: I know I duplicated (triplicated) the work, but that was my way of "showing off" in his face :P[/QUOTE]

I know you're relatively new around here, so please take the following as friendly advice from a long term GIMPSer...

You didn't duplicate the work, you caused another user to possibly duplicate it. Since it is an anonymous account, it's possible (but not certain) that the work (legitimately) assigned to them may not actually ever be completed, and thus no harm (may have been) done.

But what you did is very similar to what is known around here as "poaching", and is considered bad "PrimeNetiquette". I know you felt you owned that assignment. But as soon as Prime95 hands it back to PrimeNet (for whatever reasonable or mysterious reason), it is no longer yours.

You hadn't yet done any work on it, had you? You should have simply requested another one and continued on -- there's lots of work to go around.... :smile:

[QUOTE=chalsall;280398]I know you're relatively new around here, so please take the following as friendly advice from a long term GIMPSer...
[/QUOTE]
Well, this is not quite exact... I am new to the "GPU owners" class, and somehow new to the theoretical domain. Being GIMPSter since the beginnings (about 10 years). There was a time when I had 40 computers involved into the project, and I was in top 100 list for years. The interest went down after the 10M-digit prize was awarded, I got tired to run around the building to maintain them, and I only kept the stuff around me (office, home). They slowly died one by one, with new OS re-installations, upgrades, renew the hardware farm in the company, etc. The interest revived since I joined the forum. But thanks for the advice, anyhow :D