Can I make an appeal for something like 1 in 50 of the assignments being handed out be in the 332M range? With the current capacity of GPUto72, taking everything from 33219xxxx to 332999999 to 79 should be easy. There are people still selecting LL assignments in that range. Getting rid of a few more exponents in that range would save quite a few GPU years. And later dialing that back to 1 in every 500 would help bring them up to 80 slowly and extend things into the 333M range.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;504406]Can I make an appeal for something like 1 in 50 of the assignments being handed out be in the 332M range? With the current capacity of GPUto72, taking everything from 33219xxxx to 332999999 to 79 should be easy.[/QUOTE]

If people are interested, I could reactivate the 332M range in GPU72. But, importantly, it would be up to each individual worker to select that work type.

Would people work this range if available? I'll do it if people will work it.

[QUOTE=chalsall;504411]If people are interested, I could reactivate the 332M range in GPU72. But, importantly, it would be up to each individual worker to select that work type.

Would people work this range if available? I'll do it if people will work it.[/QUOTE]

I wish we could concentrate on the DC TF work and get it off the books once and for all. I have been working on it for the past five months.

Glad to be providing some of that serious fire-power :)

[QUOTE=Chuck;504440]I wish we could concentrate on the DC TF work and get it off the books once and for all. I have been working on it for the past five months.[/QUOTE]I did not realise that the DC TF range was still active. My request is of lesser priority than that. I was only thinking that if it was just a case of going ever deeper ahead of the first time wave, because there is not much else to do, the 332M range does see wasted LL cycles. (I have found factors on exponents that folks were running LL's on, several times. They didn't even bother to go to 77 or 78.)

I agree that TF on the 332M range has value. It would be nice to stay ahead of all the GIMPS wavefronts.

[QUOTE=chalsall;504411]If people are interested, I could reactivate the 332M range in GPU72. But, importantly, it would be up to each individual worker to select that work type.

Would people work this range if available? I'll do it if people will work it.[/QUOTE]

Yes :)

[QUOTE=Prime95;504454]I agree that TF on the 332M range has value. It would be nice to stay ahead of all the GIMPS wavefronts.[/QUOTE]

OK. I've brought in ~3,000 candidates in 332M (those that are above 332192831) at 74 "bits" to take higher, for those willing to work the range. Please note that the GHzD/D achieved up there is ~8% less than in our "nominal" ranges; Oliver has said in the past this is to be expected.

George and Aaron... May I please suggest that you begin applying the recycling rules up there? It's a bit of a disincentive for TF'ers to work up there, only to have [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/assignments/?exp_lo=332192831&exp_hi=333000000&exdchk=1&extf=1"]assignments languish[/URL]. Many "well" TF'ed candidates are currently held by "-Anonymous-" users who haven't reported progress in over two years (if ever)....

[QUOTE=chalsall;504467]OK. I've brought in ~3,000 candidates in 332M (those that are above 332192831) at 74 "bits" to take higher, for those willing to work the range. Please note that the GHzD/D achieved up there is ~8% less than in our "nominal" ranges; Oliver has said in the past this is to be expected.[/QUOTE]

How do I get them? I tried selecting LMH Depth first from the drop-down box but it said "no assignments match criteria" when I selected "get assignments".

[QUOTE=Chuck;504510]How do I get them? I tried selecting LMH Depth first from the drop-down box but it said "no assignments match criteria" when I selected "get assignments".[/QUOTE]
I only selected Depth first. The other values came up on their own.
I previously got a couple of Bit first assignments just to check things out.

[QUOTE=Chuck;504510]How do I get them? I tried selecting LMH Depth first from the drop-down box but it said "no assignments match criteria" when I selected "get assignments".[/QUOTE]

OK, I'm going to be AFK for the most part for the next couple of days. An important guest has arrived for her once-every-two-years visit.

I'll drill down on the logs once I have a chance, but "LMH" TF assignments /should/ work (I see some assignments currently, and I ran a test when I first brought in the candidates).

Probably just a SPE. I know that "LMH Bit-first" works.