[QUOTE=chalsall;532675]Yup. We're about three weeks or so from bringing most of 9x up to 74.

Thanks to Ben, the idea of giving LL Cat4 assignments which have been "optimally" TF'ed and P-1'ed has been thrown out the window.

No problem. Instead, super cool! :tu:

My current thinking is once everything in 99M is taken to 74, GPU72 will next offer work to take to 75 (starting in 95M). The next logical and least expensive work assignment which "Makes Sense" for GIM[B][U][I]P[/I][/U][/B]S in the near future.

Alternative thinking welcomed.[/QUOTE]

Running 2^75's on Colab is not practical, for me. My 1080 can run around 3x what a K80 can. 2^74's, at this level finish in 29 minutes, typically. Double that for a 2^75. I have no problems with that. The only thing they have faster is a P100, and above. I never seem to get those now. So, I think I will let that part of this go.

I agree with your thinking on LL and P-1 here. Let the people who like to run those, run them, when they are factored enough. There is no need to mix them here!

I decided to give this a run today and I got something new, to me:

Tesla P100-PCIE-16GB

It's about the same speed as the previous P100. 1100 GHz-d/day. This would appear to have more RAM.

Every P100 I've seen says 16GB

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;532909]Every P100 I've seen says 16GB[/QUOTE]

Ditto. On Colab. And they're a recent addition.

Interestingly, out of the last four backend requests, three have been P100s.

I haven't run Kaggle for a while now, but I seem to remember they weren't explicit about the RAM. Could be wrong about that.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;532909]Every P100 I've seen says 16GB[/QUOTE]

Until now, they have displayed as something shorter than what I wrote above. Perhaps it is just a name change and nothing more.

I think we have reached the top of the collection. I am receiving this error from [I]Gpu72WorkFetch[/I].

[QUOTE]Fatal Error: Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection.
Parameter name: startIndex[/QUOTE]

I also got something (different) odd:[code]20191222_133834: GPU72 TF V0.33 Bootstrap starting...
20191222_133834: Working as "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"...

20191222_133834: Installing needed packages (1/4)
20191222_133839: Installing needed packages (2/4)
20191222_133845: Installing needed packages (3/4)
20191222_133854: Installing needed packages (4/4)
20191222_133855: Fetching initial work...
20191222_133856: Running GPU type Tesla P100-PCIE-16GB

20191222_133856: running a simple selftest...
20191222_133900: Selftest statistics
20191222_133900: number of tests 107
20191222_133900: successfull tests 107
20191222_133900: selftest PASSED!
20191222_133900: Bootstrap finished. Exiting.[/code]Restarting the notebook results in the same thing.
My other instance happily resumed its work (I'll have to check in 30 mins if it continues to a next exponent or also quits).

Yes, I am receiving that as well, plus, there are no assignments allocated to crunch using Colab.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;533364]I also got something (different) odd:[code]20191222_133834: GPU72 TF V0.33 Bootstrap starting...
20191222_133834: Working as "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"...

20191222_133834: Installing needed packages (1/4)
20191222_133839: Installing needed packages (2/4)
20191222_133845: Installing needed packages (3/4)
20191222_133854: Installing needed packages (4/4)
20191222_133855: Fetching initial work...
20191222_133856: Running GPU type Tesla P100-PCIE-16GB

20191222_133856: running a simple selftest...
20191222_133900: Selftest statistics
20191222_133900: number of tests 107
20191222_133900: successfull tests 107
20191222_133900: selftest PASSED!
20191222_133900: Bootstrap finished. Exiting.[/code]Restarting the notebook results in the same thing.
My other instance happily resumed its work (I'll have to check in 30 mins if it continues to a next exponent or also quits).[/QUOTE]

My last Colab instance ran in the 95M area from 2^74 to 2^75. It did not seem to have a fetch problem at the time.

As for the rest, I was kind of expecting it to wrap back around on its own and start running everything again to 2^75. It never occurred to me that it would have to be reset manually, if that is what needs to happen.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;533364]My other instance happily resumed its work (I'll have to check in 30 mins if it continues to a next exponent or also quits).[/QUOTE]After it finished its assignment it did indeed quit:[code]20191222_154800: no factor for M95828179 from 2^74 to 2^75 [mfaktc 0.21 barrett76_mul32_gs]
20191222_154800: tf(): time spent since restart: 17m 38.257s
20191222_154800: estimated total time spent: 50m 50.830s
20191222_154800: Bootstrap finished. Exiting.[/code]

Send Chris a PM. He can fix the problem.

Also, he posted code a while back about how to add assignments. Run the initial code. Let it exit. Then run the code to add manual assignments. Or edit the worktodo file while stopped.