[QUOTE=petrw1;391170]Would this not always hand out the largest exponents since that would result in the most LL savings?[/quote]

Depends on how far each has been factored.

[quote]And if so how do you get the leading edge (lowest exponents) TF'd?[/QUOTE]

Unless you explicitly give a range of exponents, primenet is dolling out exponents exponents from the rather small range of those apt to be assigned for LL in the next 90 days. Within that narrow range you are correct that PrimeNet will tend to work downward.

[QUOTE=Prime95;391174]Within that narrow range you are correct that PrimeNet will tend to work downward.[/QUOTE]

This brings up a point we had privately discussed.

Would it not make sense to also assign LL work sorted by "Factored_To desc", in addition to and much like you do already for assignments where P-1 completed assignments are given before no P-1 completed (grouped by 1M range)?

I think this would be a (very slight) more optimal use of resources.

[QUOTE=chalsall;391176]I think this would be a (very slight) more optimal use of resources.[/QUOTE]

Very slight times thousands of machines is significant.

[QUOTE=chalsall;391176]
Would it not make sense to also assign LL work sorted by "Factored_To desc", in addition to and much like you do already for assignments where P-1 completed assignments are given before no P-1 completed (grouped by 1M range)?[/QUOTE]

Yes, it would make sense. There is no index on that column, so currently SQL would have to do a full scan of the 1M range. The new server would likely have no trouble doing that.

Even more optimal would be for LLTF to have enough firepower such that LLs are always optimally factored during the 90 day window the exponent is available for TF.

[QUOTE=Prime95;391200]There is no index on that column, so currently SQL would have to do a full scan of the 1M range. The new server would likely have no trouble doing that.[/QUOTE]

Indeed; adding a new index should only take a few seconds.

[QUOTE=Prime95;391200]Even more optimal would be for LLTF to have enough firepower such that LLs are always optimally factored during the 90 day window the exponent is available for TF.[/QUOTE]

I think we're alread there.

But I would argue that if "working down" for TF'ing is what is done, than "working down" for LL'ing also makes sense.

Hey Chris, could you bring in 42/43M?
There are no DC assignments free to 70 bits for my 7970.

[QUOTE=LaurV;392251]Hey Chris, could you bring in 42/43M?
There are no DC assignments free to 70 bits for my 7970.[/QUOTE]

Oops. I've been doing a breadth-first approach, for fun.

Hi Chris, could you please check what GPU72 expects to happen for [B][URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/default.php?exp_lo=75685481&full=1"]75685481[/URL], [/B]for example? I have a couple of old assignments that I was about to add to my worktodo again. This time I checked upfront and could avoid the "result not needed" ... anyway, these assignments are long done, but not picked up by GPU72.

[QUOTE=Bdot;392266]Hi Chris, could you please check what GPU72 expects to happen for [B][URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/default.php?exp_lo=75685481&full=1"]75685481[/URL], [/B]for example? I have a couple of old assignments that I was about to add to my worktodo again. This time I checked upfront and could avoid the "result not needed" ... anyway, these assignments are long done, but not picked up by GPU72.[/QUOTE]

GPU72 has no thoughts as to 75685481.

It doesn't "own" it, nor has it "worked" it.

[QUOTE]GPU72 has [U]no thoughts[/U] as to 75685481[/QUOTE]

heh! :smile:

[QUOTE=LaurV;392251]Hey Chris, could you bring in 42/43M?
There are no DC assignments free to 70 bits for my 7970.[/QUOTE]

While Chris is healing, you can use [url]http://mersenne.org/manual_gpu_assignment[/url]