[QUOTE=chalsall;296410]Yes, it was. 80 GD/D to be exact. It's now 20 GD/D.

Sorry about that.

Feel free to unreserve what you were assigned, and claim lower candidates.[/QUOTE]

There still seems to be some automated policies to be tweaked. I just got this. I hope it my card will stay occupied until tomorrow morning.
[QUOTE]Sorry Patrik Johansson, but you already have too many assignments.

Since you joined the project you have done on average 135.39 GHz Days of Trial Factoring work per day.

You currently have 12 assignments totalling 115.83 GHz Days of work assigned, or 0 days worth based on your history. The oldest is 28 days old.

In order to have access to additional assignments, please complete some more of the work already assigned (particularily the oldest), or Contact Us and explain why you should be exempted from this automated policy. [/QUOTE]

And the oldest should be only about 2 weeks (unless I lost one while copying and pasting). After counting, I have five assignments, about 2 weeks old, that has not been reported yet. Can I see somewhere what the other seven I am supposed to have are?

[QUOTE=patrik;297002]And the oldest should be only about 2 weeks (unless I lost one while copying and pasting).[/QUOTE]If you look at [url]http://www.gpu72.com/account/assignments/bydate/[/url] you should see which one is 28 days old.

I just found two files called not_completely_submitted_20120... that explains it. The missing parts have just been manually re-submitted. I hope this will resolve the issue when gpu272 discovers they have been submitted.

[QUOTE=patrik;297004]I just found two files called not_completely_submitted_20120... that explains it. The missing parts have just been manually re-submitted. I hope this will resolve the issue when gpu272 discovers they have been submitted.[/QUOTE]

Based on the number of assignments you now hold, that appears to have fixed the problem.

Sorry about that Patrik -- perhaps the warning page should explicitely link to the View Assignments page. And thanks James for pointing you in the right direction.

Just for the record, I never intended to have such limitations imposed. They were introduced only when the need presented itself....

[QUOTE=chalsall;297009]I never intended to have such limitations imposed. They were introduced only when the need presented itself....[/QUOTE]Limits are not all bad, however. Patrik found some couple completed assignments that weren't submitted that he may never have noticed if they hadn't become "too old".

I have 10 assignments left, good for about 1.5 days. What's the best (most needed TF) to select right now? (I can't get new assignments, which I understand as I had to extend the current ones.)

[QUOTE=sonjohan;297115]I have 10 assignments left, good for about 1.5 days. What's the best (most needed TF) to select right now? (I can't get new assignments, which I understand as I had to extend the current ones.)[/QUOTE]

I have set you to be "trusted".

The best thing everyone can do is to leave the settings as they are. Pledge to 72. "What makes sense."

I find it somewhat amusing... The effort to automate the prevention of the fouling of the commons is much more work than just letting everyone do whatever they want....

Chris,

Is there any way you can make the 'Facts' found on the Workers' Overall Progress page clickable so we can click it and see all the factors each person has found?

~Jerry

[QUOTE=flashjh;297584]Is there any way you can make the 'Facts' found on the Workers' Overall Progress page clickable so we can click it and see all the factors each person has found?[/QUOTE]

Easy to do. So it has been done.

[QUOTE=chalsall;297593]Easy to do. So it has been done.[/QUOTE]

Thanks

[QUOTE=chalsall;297593]Easy to do. So it has been done.[/QUOTE]

Heh, I have exactly 42 factors :smile: (and you can see what I meant about the pathetic size of my P-1 factors :razz:)

(Could you add the same link the the factor total in "Individual Overall Statistics"?)

[QUOTE=Dubslow;297598](Could you add the same link the the factor total in "Individual Overall Statistics"?)[/QUOTE]

Sure.

Once the target is built, it is trivial to link to it.

This has been done.

This is curious?
 

[CODE]Work Type Rank Of Candidates Factors GHz Days
Assigned Completed Expected Found
P-1 9 49 600 [B][U]Soon[/U][/B] 28 1,622.498[/CODE]

[QUOTE=petrw1;297609]...[/QUOTE]
It's on his to do list to add a function that guesses roughly how many P-1 factors you should have found based on the total average; he's done the same for TF, but P-1 is different enough that it's not a simple matter of copying code.

[QUOTE=petrw1;297609][CODE]Work Type Rank Of Candidates Factors GHz Days
Assigned Completed Expected Found
P-1 9 49 600 [B][U]Soon[/U][/B] 28 1,622.498[/CODE][/QUOTE]

@petrw1: "This is curious?

Not terribly.

I haven't yet finished the code required to predict P-1 factors found.

It's much more complicated than predicting simple TFing.

But I am amused that someone finally noticed (or, perhaps, noticed and brought it forward).

[QUOTE=chalsall;297617]@petrw1: "This is curious?

Not terribly.

I haven't yet finished the code required to predict P-1 factors found.

It's much more complicated than predicting simple TFing.

But I am amused that someone finally noticed (or, perhaps, noticed and brought it forward).[/QUOTE]

Guess I thought that since I do not have any assignments I could not have an Expected.

[QUOTE=petrw1;297623]Guess I thought that since I do not have any assignments I could not have an Expected.[/QUOTE]It's not an expected completion date, it's how many factors you were expected to find, compared to the 28 you actually found.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;297624]It's not an expected completion date, it's how many factors you were expected to find, compared to the 28 you actually found.[/QUOTE]

:doh!:

[QUOTE=chalsall;297617]
But I am amused that someone finally noticed.[/QUOTE]
I noticed days ago, but I figured it out and did not ask (I was almost to ask, however). :D

[QUOTE=chalsall;294183]Instead I've added a "FactTo desc" to the "order by" clause. Try now.... :smile:[/QUOTE]
I was able to get one at 74, but everything else it gives me is 72. I would like to get the 73's before the 72's. How do I get them?

[QUOTE=flashjh;297889]I was able to get one at 74, but everything else it gives me is 72. I would like to get the 73's before the 72's. How do I get them?[/QUOTE]

A few weeks ago I changed the query to just sort by Exponent.

To give people a bit more control, I've added the same type of Options on the P-1 assignment page as is on the LLTF and DCTF pages; "What Makes Sense", "Lowest TF", "Highest TF", "Lowest Exponent", "Highest Exponent" and "Oldest Exponent".

Currently "What Makes Sense" is simply "Lowest Exponent", but this may change from time to time as the situation warrents. The other options will always do what they say they do.

[QUOTE=chalsall;297922]"Oldest Exponent"[/QUOTE]What does this option mean? Is that the one that GPUto72 has owned for the longest, or..?

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;297928]What does this option mean? Is that the one that GPUto72 has owned for the longest, or..?[/QUOTE]

Yes. Oldest held by GPU72 (as a function of when the system was first ever assigned it).

[QUOTE=chalsall;297922]A few weeks ago I changed the query to just sort by Exponent.

To give people a bit more control, I've added the same type of Options on the P-1 assignment page as is on the LLTF and DCTF pages; "What Makes Sense", "Lowest TF", "Highest TF", "Lowest Exponent", "Highest Exponent" and "Oldest Exponent".

Currently "What Makes Sense" is simply "Lowest Exponent", but this may change from time to time as the situation warrents. The other options will always do what they say they do.[/QUOTE]
Awesome! Thanks.

[QUOTE=chalsall;297617]@petrw1: "This is curious?

Not terribly.

I haven't yet finished the code required to predict P-1 factors found.

It's much more complicated than predicting simple TFing.

But I am amused that someone finally noticed (or, perhaps, noticed and brought it forward).[/QUOTE]

Okay, now I'm "Not sure".
[code]Predicted Found
Not sure 27[/code]Code sill in testing?

Edit: Also, I found the attached (right side). Perhaps a line break? :razz:

14 < 13
 

[url]http://www.gpu72.com/reports/workers/[/url]
I'm in 14th position in 13th place. :ermm:

[i]edit:[/i] it seems to be fixed now.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;298535][url]http://www.gpu72.com/reports/workers/[/url]
I'm in 14th position in 13th place. :ermm:

[i]edit:[/i] it seems to be fixed now.[/QUOTE]

Yeah. The Rankings are in a seperate table, so there's a short temporal window where this can happen when someone's ranking changes before the script responsible finishes updating that table.

I've had this happen quite a few times, but I finally am asking since I have the time.

In the attached capture, there is a 45M exponent that needs P-1, but I'm unable to get it. This happens with TF and P-1 exponents.

Does anyone know why?

[QUOTE=flashjh;298643]In the attached capture, there is a 45M exponent that needs P-1, but I'm unable to get it. This happens with TF and P-1 exponents.

Does anyone know why?[/QUOTE]

In order to clear out the low candidates, I had a conditional for P-1 such that if you had a history of less than 5 GHz Days / Day (not your case) or a candidate older than 15 days old (your case), you were limited to candidates at 52M or above. I have just removed this conditional.

There was a similar conditional for LLTF at 21 days, but this has not been active for about a week or so.

[QUOTE=chalsall;298645]In order to clear out the low candidates, I had a conditional for P-1 such that if you had a history of less than 5 GHz Days / Day (not your case) or a candidate older than 15 days old (your case), you were limited to candidates at 52M or above. I have just removed this conditional.

There was a similar conditional for LLTF at 21 days, but this has not been active for about a week or so.[/QUOTE]
I see. Thanks for the info -- that makes sense now. I actually don't mind that conditional, and it probably makes sense. If the assignment page had said that instead of that there weren't any exponents that met my conditions, I would have understood that I need to clear some older stuff out first ;)

Thanks again

Potentially last week of DC TF?
 

Less than 6 days of work left according to this:
[url]http://www.gpu72.com/reports/estimated_completion/[/url]

Plus whatever new spidey gets in the next 6 days.

[QUOTE=petrw1;298677]Less than 6 days of work left according to this:
[url]http://www.gpu72.com/reports/estimated_completion/[/url][/QUOTE]

Not really...

That report shows the estimated completion across both ranges based on the 30 day average of all TF work the system is coordinating. Thus, we would only clear out what we currently hold in the DC range in six days if everyone did only DC work.

But, please don't do that!!! So everyone knows, we are currently approximately 220 days ahead of the DC wavefront. This is why "bcp19" AKA "Pete" has moved most of his fire power over to the LL range.

[QUOTE=chalsall;298679]That report shows the estimated completion across both ranges based on the 30 day average of all TF work the system is coordinating. Thus, we would only clear out what we currently hold in the DC range in six days if everyone did only DC work.[/QUOTE]

OK, so that explains why, even though the estimated completion is dropping is drops at a rate less than 1 day per day.

[QUOTE=chalsall;298679]Not really...

That report shows the estimated completion across both ranges based on the 30 day average of all TF work the system is coordinating. Thus, we would only clear out what we currently hold in the DC range in six days if everyone did only DC work.

But, please don't do that!!! So everyone knows, we are currently approximately 220 days ahead of the DC wavefront. This is why "bcp19" AKA "Pete" has moved most of his fire power over to the LL range.[/QUOTE]

Actually, I switched most of my effort to LL due to the fact that my heavyweight systems are less efficient for factor finding at DC ranges than LL. The one machine would only break even at 37M-38M for 70 bits, compared to 32M-33M for the ones still crunching. (and the HD5770 is technically efficient to 72 bits at 30M, since it cannot do LL yet)

[QUOTE=bcp19;298698] (and the HD5770 is technically efficient to 72 bits at 30M, since it cannot do LL yet)[/QUOTE]

One more reason to release my next version of mfakto soon :smile:

Chalsall, that's an interesting way to get localized web pages, cool! Sometimes it is hard to pick the correct one of several possible translations if you only have the phrase without context. Such as "Saved" (GHz-Days) that is now "Gespeichert" (which means you saved it to hard disk, for instance) instead of "Gespart" in German. Is there a way to object to some of the translations? Also, translating "GPU to 72" at all is questionable, but "GPU hoch 72" means "GPU to the power of 72", which is kind of funny (was that intended?).

For me personally, localization has a rather low priority (I have US-English keyboards, and sometimes have difficulties understanding German error messages of the Operating system at friend's PCs.) Therefore, if you're really looking for ideas what to implement, I have one:

I'd find it helpful if I had a single comments field on the "Get Assignments" pages that would save the entered comment for each of the assigned tasks, and display it on the "View Assignments" pages. I would use that field to enter the machine names that I requested the assignment for, making it much easier to check why there are still some old ones hanging around. If the "View Assignments" were sortable by the comments, this feature could also be used to check if machines are running dry without logging in to them.

And maybe, once your submission spider reserves work for mfakto :smile:, it could automatically insert the machine name (ComputerID) into the comments ...

BTW, for portability reasons I now decided to implement the file locking using an empty .lck file (worktodo.txt.lck and results.txt.lck). As long as it exists, mfakto will not touch the corresponding txt file.

[QUOTE=Bdot;298708]Chalsall, that's an interesting way to get localized web pages, cool![/QUOTE]

Thanks. It's an interesting experiment in "crowd sourcing". I'm about to start building a big web presence for an international NGO, and multilingual ability will be critical. I figured this would be a good place to experiment with how to implement such a thing.

[QUOTE=Bdot;298708]Sometimes it is hard to pick the correct one of several possible translations if you only have the phrase without context. Such as "Saved" (GHz-Days) that is now "Gespeichert" (which means you saved it to hard disk, for instance) instead of "Gespart" in German. Is there a way to object to some of the translations? Also, translating "GPU to 72" at all is questionable, but "GPU hoch 72" means "GPU to the power of 72", which is kind of funny (was that intended?).[/QUOTE]

No, it wasn't intended. Someone put it in.

And, yes, being able to "object" to / correct translations is planned for.

[QUOTE=Bdot;298708]For me personally, localization has a rather low priority (I have US-English keyboards, and sometimes have difficulties understanding German error messages of the Operating system at friend's PCs.)[/QUOTE]

You're lucky. As a mono-language speaker myself, I resonate with those who have difficulty working in a language other than their own.

And if it results in someone signing up and using the system who might not have otherwise, so much the better! :smile:

[QUOTE=Bdot;298708]Therefore, if you're really looking for ideas what to implement, I have one:

I'd find it helpful if I had a single comments field on the "Get Assignments" pages that would save the entered comment for each of the assigned tasks, and display it on the "View Assignments" pages. I would use that field to enter the machine names that I requested the assignment for, making it much easier to check why there are still some old ones hanging around. If the "View Assignments" were sortable by the comments, this feature could also be used to check if machines are running dry without logging in to them.[/QUOTE]

An excellent idea. And relatively easy to implement. Consider it added to the "Todo List" (near the top).

[QUOTE=Bdot;298708]BTW, for portability reasons I now decided to implement the file locking using an empty .lck file (worktodo.txt.lck and results.txt.lck). As long as it exists, mfakto will not touch the corresponding txt file.[/QUOTE]

May I suggest a slight variant?

Check for a file like "worktodo.txt.ext". If it doesn't exist, then create a file called "worktodo.txt.lck" and wait a second or two. Then check again. If it exists then delete "worktodo.txt.lck" and go away for a while. If it doesn't then make your modifications and delete it. (Same for "results.txt.ext".)

Another program (e.g. a fetching or returning spider) then does the reciprical -- it looks for "worktodo.txt.lck". If it doesn't exist it creates "worktodo.txt.ext", waits one or two seconds, looks for "worktodo.txt.lck" again, etc.

It's a rather primative, but effective, file-system based semaphore.

[QUOTE=chalsall;298712]
May I suggest a slight variant?
[/QUOTE]
Of course you may :grin:
[QUOTE=chalsall;298712]
Check for a file like "worktodo.txt.ext". If it doesn't exist, then create a file called "worktodo.txt.lck" and wait a second or two. Then check again. If it exists then delete "worktodo.txt.lck" and go away for a while. If it doesn't then make your modifications and delete it. (Same for "results.txt.ext".)

Another program (e.g. a fetching or returning spider) then does the reciprical -- it looks for "worktodo.txt.lck". If it doesn't exist it creates "worktodo.txt.ext", waits one or two seconds, looks for "worktodo.txt.lck" again, etc.

It's a rather primative, but effective, file-system based semaphore.[/QUOTE]
Even though it would not happen very often I really dislike the "wait a second or two" part. And I'm not sure that this is really needed (but I'm not fluent in Perl ...):

I'm using the built-in file-system-semaphore for files, like
lockfd = open(lock_filename, O_EXCL | O_CREAT, MODE)

This will either create the desired file if it did not exist, or fail if it existed. Atomically. I found that all relevant OSes and their file systems including NFS and Samba support this operation.

I think in perl you'd use
sysopen (lockfd, lock_filename, O_RDWR|O_EXCL|O_CREAT, mode);
for the same.

This would also avoid the scenario of both programs creating their files, checking the other files' existence, saying oops, deleting their files and starting over for the next decade :smile:

[QUOTE=Bdot;298721]Atomically. I found that all relevant OSes and their file systems including NFS and Samba support this operation.[/QUOTE]

Not NFS version 2 nor 3. Although I admit I'm probably being overly paranoid about race conditions which would be rare.

Also, I mis-understood your intention. I didn't apprecaite that you would be using file locking in addition to the lock file itself.

[QUOTE=Bdot;298721]This would also avoid the scenario of both programs creating their files, checking the other files' existence, saying oops, deleting their files and starting over for the next decade :smile:[/QUOTE]

I agree. Your proposed solution seems sane and reasonable. :smile:

[QUOTE=Bdot;298708] "GPU to the power of 72"[/QUOTE]
Cool! I will use it like that from now on! :smile:

Doubly Devilish stats.
 

[CODE]Overall DC TF LL TF P-1 LL DC GHz Days
# Worker Out 68 69 70 71 72 73 >73 Facts Saved Done
1 Craig Meyers 2,286 3,639 11,513 15,072 9,329 15,964 738 460 35 666 94,666 281,344[/CODE]

The heading don't all line up; a pair of triple 6's in the latter columns.

[QUOTE=Bdot;298708] Such as "Saved" (GHz-Days) that is now "Gespeichert" (which means you saved it to hard disk, for instance) instead of "Gespart" in German. Is there a way to object to some of the translations? Also, translating "GPU to 72" at all is questionable, but "GPU hoch 72" means "GPU to the power of 72", which is kind of funny (was that intended?).
[/QUOTE]

The "Gespeichert" was my fault because i didn't see the context :blush:
"GPU hoch 72" is also my creation, intended to sounds funny, but i know that letting the phrase "GPU to 72" as it is, is more appealing :/

[QUOTE=Redarm;298788]The "Gespeichert" was my fault because i didn't see the context :blush:
"GPU hoch 72" is also my creation, intended to sounds funny, but i know that letting the phrase "GPU to 72" as it is, is more appealing :/[/QUOTE]

No problem. I appreciate your putting in translations. I knew mistakes would sometimes be made, and that a system would have to be built to allow people to make corrections and suggest alternatives.

Because that ability is not yet enabled, I have taken the liberty of making the two changes suggested by Bdot manually.

Any additional translation work you'd like to do would be most welcomed. And there is now a list of all pages where a phrase appears, so the context should be easier to determine.

[QUOTE=Bdot;298721]
I'm using the built-in file-system-semaphore for files, like
lockfd = open(lock_filename, O_EXCL | O_CREAT, MODE)

This will either create the desired file if it did not exist, or fail if it existed. Atomically. I found that all relevant OSes and their file systems including NFS and Samba support this operation.

I think in perl you'd use
sysopen (lockfd, lock_filename, O_RDWR|O_EXCL|O_CREAT, mode);
for the same.

This would also avoid the scenario of both programs creating their files, checking the other files' existence, saying oops, deleting their files and starting over for the next decade :smile:[/QUOTE]

Another option is to use a lock directory. mkdir either creates it or fails with a non-zero rc. In factMsieve.pl I wrote the following routine: [code]
######################################################
sub getlock {
######################################################
# Get the lock directory
return if (!$USE_LOCKDIR);
my $res=0;
my $count=0;
while ($res ==0) {
$res=mkdir "$NAME.lockdir";
last if ($res==1);
sleep 1;
$count++;
die "Can't get lock dir $NAME.lockdir\n" if ($count>120);
}
logwrite("Waited $count times for lock") if ($count);
}
[/code]
The freelock routine just contains:
rmdir "$NAME.lockdir" or die "Could not delete $NAME.lockdir $!";

Chris

Anyone care to bet on just how high in the rankings The Judger will go in P-1?:rolleyes:

Sorry for the trivia, but Oliver's charge up the chart is remarkable. The only recent entry to come anywhere close is GrunwalderGIMP.

[QUOTE=kladner;298846]Oliver's charge up the chart is remarkable. The only recent entry to come anywhere close is GrunwalderGIMP.[/QUOTE]On the [url=http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_P-1/]P-1 Top 500[/url], Axon is blazing up the rankings and has found 3193 P-1 factors in the past year (probably less). :surprised

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;298848]On the [url=http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_P-1/]P-1 Top 500[/url], Axon is blazing up the rankings and has found 3193 P-1 factors in the past year (probably less). :surprised[/QUOTE]

But those aren't actually P-1; there's a thread somewhere here about the low TF work he's doing. This will disappear when PrimeNet's credit assignment system is fixed.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;298848]On the [URL="http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_P-1/"]P-1 Top 500[/URL], Axon is blazing up the rankings and has found 3193 P-1 factors in the past year (probably less). :surprised[/QUOTE]

Sheesh! I see what you are saying about Axon, but The Judger has already overrun most of the GPU272 heavy hitters in PrimeNet ranking. I'm watching to see how that steep trajectory evens out. It seems that he might blow just about everyone down a notch on GPU272.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;298856]But those aren't actually P-1; there's a thread somewhere here about the low TF work he's doing. This will disappear when PrimeNet's credit assignment system is fixed.[/QUOTE]
Yes, [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15690"]see here[/URL].

[QUOTE=chalsall;297617]@petrw1: "This is curious?

Not terribly.

I haven't yet finished the code required to predict P-1 factors found.

It's much more complicated than predicting simple TFing.

But I am amused that someone finally noticed (or, perhaps, noticed and brought it forward).[/QUOTE]
To get the P-1 prediction going, I came up with the following using the data from G272's P-1 stats page at ~0500 UTC today.

The data shows an average across the board of 1 factor per every 21.28 P-1 exponents. Predictions can be made per the following:

[CODE]
ROUNDDOWN( ([I] P-1 done[/I] + [I]factors found[/I] ) / 21.28)
[/CODE]

This does not take into account everyone's actual B1/B2 or E value, only the raw data and a median calcualted off of the results from G272. I know that actual P-1 factor probablity is based on a lot more, but I thought it a good start to see where everyone stands.

[QUOTE=chalsall;298726]Not NFS version 2 nor 3.[/QUOTE]

I now tested all (accessible to me) variations of NFSv3, Samba, cifs, and of course, local file systems. All behave as expected with the O_EXCL | O_CREAT options. (I did not test hard for race conditions, though.)

The mkdir approach may work as well, and it may also be atomically on some systems, but this is not documented (opposed to "open"), so I will not rely on it.

On NFSv2, or when running a Linux kernel before 2.6, the open call may contain a race condition - not sure if anyone has a 64-bit Linux still running a 2.4 kernel ... probably mfakto would not run on that anyway.

So I think I will keep the current implementation, and release 0.11 soon.

[QUOTE=Bdot;298919]So I think I will keep the current implementation, and release 0.11 soon.[/QUOTE]

Cool!!!

I guess this means I'll have to reciprocate, and deliver my promised work fetching spider.... :smile:

[QUOTE=kladner;298864]Sheesh! I see what you are saying about Axon, but The Judger has already overrun most of the GPU272 heavy hitters in PrimeNet ranking. I'm watching to see how that steep trajectory evens out. It seems that he might blow just about everyone down a notch on GPU272.[/QUOTE]

Torchwood is moving up awful fast too.

Here is the progress of the top 10 so far in 2012
[CODE] Total | Rank Change | Overtake date based on
Rank Member Name GHz-Days Attempts Successes |90day 30day 7 day 1 day | 90 days 30 days 7 days
------ -------------------- ------------ -------- --------- |----- ----- ----- ----- | ------- ------- -------
1 ANONYMOUS 8383.446 3184 96 | 1 | 366dy 285dy
2 Torchwood Institute 6308.100 1657 84 | *** 1 |
3 Jerry Hallett 5814.907 1963 233 | 13 5 1 |
4 James Heinrich 5558.519 4976 212 | 3 1 |
5 TheJudger 5410.186 1431 72 | 1 2 1 |
6 Never Odd Or Even 4991.143 130 1 | 5 4 3 | 95dy 76dy 46dy
7 kdgehman 4843.124 978 45 | 2 1 |
8 curtisc 4076.383 1768 60 | 5 3 |
9 GrunwalderGIMP 3588.970 1099 50 | 20 2 1 |
10 Axon 3283.901 16716 0 | 78 1 | [/CODE]

And since April 1-2012
[CODE] Total | Rank Change | Overtake date based on
Rank Member Name GHz-Days Attempts Successes |90day 30day 7 day 1 day | 90 days 30 days 7 days
------ -------------------- ------------ -------- --------- |----- ----- ----- ----- | ------- ------- -------
1 Jerry Hallett 2317.640 731 94 | 7 2 1 |
2 James Heinrich 2019.427 2226 83 | 3 2 1 | >999dy
3 TheJudger 1640.387 452 19 | 1 4 2 |
4 GrunwalderGIMP 1634.590 506 20 | 30 2 1 |
5 Torchwood Institute 1512.187 410 20 | *** 4 4 1 | 14dy 13dy
6 kdgehman 1433.976 299 13 | 1 | 365dy
7 ANONYMOUS 1331.446 485 9 | 6 5 | 48dy 53dy 112dy
8 David Campeau 1140.745 403 14 | 9 |
9 monst 751.597 240 18 | 2 1 | 146dy 207dy 27dy
10 curtisc 743.543 335 16 | 7 1 1 1 | 62dy 93dy 69dy [/CODE]

Looks like a pair of "JH" has it recently....could that be a "Jack-of-Hearts" in disguise?:smile:

Login
 

Hey chalsall,
I've noticed that login sessions are not shared between the separate language subdomains. While it doesn't really have a practical impact, since in theory a user will choose one language and stick with it, it would be nice for translators or the curious who like to switch back and forth if you could log in the English site and have that transfer to the French site (et cetera).
Dubslow

(It seems like such a... 'sticky' (gooey? floppy-with-formalness?) post. :razz:)

[QUOTE=Dubslow;299205]I've noticed that login sessions are not shared between the separate language subdomains.[/QUOTE]

No kidding. Do you understand why?

[QUOTE=Dubslow;299205]While it doesn't really have a practical impact, since in theory a user will choose one language and stick with it, it would be nice for translators or the curious who like to switch back and forth if you could log in the English site and have that transfer to the French site (et cetera).[/QUOTE]

The curious will probably not be accessing password protected areas.

Translators will hopefully understand the reason for the need to log in to password protected areas for each language subdomain.

No new DC assignments?

[QUOTE=bcp19;299416]No new DC assignments?[/QUOTE]

Xyzzy came by, and reserved all the DC TF candidates. I've topped up the supply again.

Milestone: Team "GPU to 72" now #1 for P-1.
 

Hey all.

Just to let you know, the "GPU to 72" team on PrimeNet is now #1 for P-1 work, #1 for TF work, and #3 overall.

Thanks for all the cycles everyone!!! :smile:

Did spidy broke a paw? I reported a DC and a LL in the same time, they both appeared on PrimeNet instantly, the DC appeared on gpu272 in few (10, 20) minutes, but the LL does not appear yet, hours past.

[QUOTE=LaurV;299715]Did spidy broke a paw? I reported a DC and a LL in the same time, they both appeared on PrimeNet instantly, the DC appeared on gpu272 in few (10, 20) minutes, but the LL does not appear yet, hours past.[/QUOTE]

Spidy is trying its best not to unnecessarily impact PrimeNet.

Since DC and LL completions are so rare, it was decided to minimize the expensive queries which are needed to determine them "real-time".

If your LL completion doesn't show up within a next couple of hours, please let me know.

[QUOTE=chalsall;299718]If your LL completion doesn't show up within a next couple of hours, please let me know.[/QUOTE]

LaurV... Could you please share with us the LL candidate's exponent number which was not detected from your above?

I would really like to make sure Spidy is sane.

Looks like PrimeNet is taking another bit.
 

I am now getting regular TF assignments in the 63M+ range to 71 bits.

Almost time for a name change? GPUtoP+2 (P=Primenet)

Actually there is not reason to change the name; it is starting to become almost as worldly familiar as Coke, Microsoft, or McDonalds.

[QUOTE=petrw1;299723]Actually there is not reason to change the name; it is starting to become almost as worldly familiar as Coke, Microsoft, or McDonalds.[/QUOTE]

Thanks to the work of Oliver and Bdot. And let us not forget George and Scott.

[QUOTE=chalsall;299718]
If your LL completion doesn't show up within a next couple of hours, please let me know.[/QUOTE]
Clear with this, didn't know the change and expected update every hour or 3 times per hour like old good times. :) Every change is welcomed if it makes the PrimeNet access smoother for my (manual) reports.

Early morning coffee time here, just woke up and put me'nose on the monitor, the expo shows up in the list, everything is fine here. Thanks.

[QUOTE=chalsall;299720]LaurV... Could you please share with us the LL candidate's exponent number which was not detected from your above?

I would really like to make sure Spidy is sane.[/QUOTE]
Sleeping time, sorry, there is night is Thai sometimes, that hour I was sleeping like a log. I replied above, and replied to your PM too, with the expo. I would be afraid next time to report any problem, you are ready to change those programs 10 times a day (and night) and phone me two times for each change, including the one at 3:37 AM, to ask me if the problem is solved...


[COLOR=Gray]p.s. Don't get me wrong, that was laudatory. We really appreciate your efforts! [/COLOR]

[QUOTE=LaurV;299750][COLOR=gray][COLOR=black]p.s. Don't get me wrong, that was laudatory. We really appreciate your efforts![/COLOR] [/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Yes, we all are very, very much!:smile:

[QUOTE=aketilander;299763]Yes, we all are very, very much!:smile:[/QUOTE]

Very kind. Thank you.

It's been a lot of fun developing the site and observing the progress.

First 2,000 + P-1
 

Jerry Hallett:party:

New GPU72 milestone...
 

Hey all...

Just to announce, the GPU to 72 sub-project has now saved GIMPS slightly over [URL="http://www.gpu72.com/reports/overall/"]2,000 GHz YEARS of LL, DC and P-1 work[/URL]. (Yes, years.) :cool:

[QUOTE=chalsall;299870]Hey all...

Just to announce, the GPU to 72 sub-project has now saved GIMPS slightly over [URL="http://www.gpu72.com/reports/overall/"]2,000 GHz YEARS of LL, DC and P-1 work[/URL]. (Yes, years.) :cool:[/QUOTE]

Yes but why the f*** can't we TF every exponent on the leading edge to 73 before it is handed out by Primenet. I have said this 1000 times.

<insert obligatory YouTube clip here>

[QUOTE=garo;299879]...I have said this 1000 times.[/QUOTE]

Just in case it isn't clear to everyone, garo is making a funny.... :smile:

[QUOTE=chalsall;299887]Just in case it isn't clear to everyone, garo is making a funny.... :smile:[/QUOTE]

The mention of YouTube clips was rather suggestive by itself, besides the carp about factoring.:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=chalsall;299887]Just in case it isn't clear to everyone, garo is making a funny.... :smile:[/QUOTE]

I thought it was a case of demonic possession.

[QUOTE=kladner;299892]The mention of YouTube clips was rather suggestive by itself, besides the carp about factoring.:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Yeah... Sorry for "stating the bleading obvious" to most of you. But we've had several new participants join the project recently (I think partly because of the translation experiment), and I didn't want anyone who's new to our little group to get the wrong idea....

[QUOTE=chalsall;299901]Yeah... Sorry for "stating the bleading obvious" to most of you. But we've had several new participants join the project recently (I think partly because of the translation experiment), and I didn't want anyone who's new to our little group to get the wrong idea....[/QUOTE]

No kidding! 81! Impressive. (To be fair, only exactly 50 have work out.)

[QUOTE=Prime95;299896]I thought it was a case of demonic possession.[/QUOTE]

Or yet another super-mod account hacked. :devil:

[QUOTE=garo;299879]Yes but why the f*** can't we TF every exponent on the leading edge to 73 before it is handed out by Primenet. I have said this 1000 times.

<insert obligatory YouTube clip here>[/QUOTE]
Now you realize what I have been advocating for well over a year.
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlDzFeHmO9w]U-tube here[/url]

Bloody Nancy Boys

The LLDC queue looks empty I got assigned a 27M exponent.

[QUOTE=diamonddave;300122]The LLDC queue looks empty I got assigned a 27M exponent.[/QUOTE]

Whoops. I turned of AnonSpidy last night to do a manual transfer, and forgot to turn him back on. The queue will start refilling now.

[QUOTE=chalsall;300125]Whoops. I turned of AnonSpidy last night to do a manual transfer, and forgot to turn him back on. The queue will start refilling now.[/QUOTE]

Not yet....still nothing below 28M and most at 29M

[QUOTE=petrw1;300132]Not yet....still nothing below 28M and most at 29M[/QUOTE]

Yeah... That's as expected.

Spidy doesn't have any special privilages from PrimeNet. The queue will get lower exponents as they become available early tomorrow morning (UTC).

Are we slowing?
 

[url]http://www.gpu72.com/reports/overall/graph/month/[/url]

Or is this just a sign of too much progress (i.e. caught up) and less critical of a need?

[QUOTE=petrw1;300474]Or is this just a sign of too much progress (i.e. caught up) and less critical of a need?[/QUOTE]

We're pretty steady-state at the moment; and have [URL="http://www.gpu72.com/reports/overall/graph/quarter/"]been for the last three months[/URL].

Don't forget that our #2 contributor, Xyzzy, only submits once a week or so. That explains the lower "GHz Days per Day of Work Done" showing on the graph over the last few days.

However, with regards to "caught up", that's definitely the case in the DC range. We are currently over 400 days ahead of that wave. And, while I'm "talking", I had might as well mention that a few days ago the last few DC candidates at 67 bits (in the 36M and 37M ranges) were brought up to 68.

Work saved is dropping as we're doing higher bit levels now. (higher bit levels = more GHz-days needed to yield a factor; work saved = f(factors found, etc) ) To be expected.

Is Xyzzy submitting all results now? (not just factors found)

I thought that might be cause for slowness trend.

-- Craig Meyers

[QUOTE=nucleon;300563]Work saved is dropping as we're doing higher bit levels now. (higher bit levels = more GHz-days needed to yield a factor; work saved = f(factors found, etc) ) To be expected.[/QUOTE]

Good point. While we're working in the higher ranges, where each factor is worth more using the "GHz Days Saved" metric, we're also effectively only working from 71->72 (or ->73) which takes more work per factor found, as all the "low hanging fruit" has already been harvested at the lower bit levels.

[QUOTE=nucleon;300563]Is Xyzzy submitting all results now? (not just factors found)[/QUOTE]

Yes.

[QUOTE]Is Xyzzy submitting all results now?[/QUOTE]Since George tweaked PrimeNet it will now accept 3000+ line uploads.

:whistle:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;300568]Since George tweaked PrimeNet it will now accept 3000+ line uploads.[/QUOTE]I have noticed this too... I just uploaded 2501 lines myself.
Of course, my 2k5 lines (about 2 weeks work) totaled 368GHz-days... or about 5 [i]nucleon[/i]-hours :flex:

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;300575]about 5 [I]nucleon[/I]-hours :flex:[/QUOTE]

:lol:

Missing P-1 assignments?
 

Last night I was down to 27 pending P-1 assignments. So I did my usual
weekly grab of 80 exponents (about a week's work). I only got 70
exponents. So I grabbed another ten. 80 exponents, distributed around
my various machines.

Check the P-1 factoring progress report, see that only 77 exponents are
assigned to me. Now, this morning, it's down to 73. That's only 50
exponents assigned. What happened to the other 30 that I see in the
file I downloaded from GPUto72?

Gareth

[QUOTE=Graff;300614]Check the P-1 factoring progress report, see that only 77 exponents are assigned to me. Now, this morning, it's down to 73. That's only 50
exponents assigned. What happened to the other 30 that I see in the
file I downloaded from GPUto72?[/QUOTE]

Not sure.

Could you please PM me a couple of examples of P-1 assignments which you don't see any more?

[QUOTE=chalsall;300615]Not sure.

Could you please PM me a couple of examples of P-1 assignments which you don't see any more?[/QUOTE]

Sent via PM.

Gareth

More P-1 assignment oddities
 

Down to 36 P-1 assignments this morning. Go to grab another 80 (# CPUs = 2,
# per CPU = 40). Download the worktodo.txt file, find there are 140 entries
in the file. In addition, the count of my assignments only goes up to 76.

Gareth

[QUOTE=Graff;301219]Down to 36 P-1 assignments this morning. Go to grab another 80 (# CPUs = 2, # per CPU = 40). Download the worktodo.txt file, find there are 140 entries
in the file. In addition, the count of my assignments only goes up to 76.[/QUOTE]

Sorry Gareth... I've obviously got a bug in the P-1 assignment code (TheJudger reported similar).

I've been away from the system for the last few days (deep in a complex computer vision project). I'll figure out what's going on today.

[QUOTE=chalsall;301305](deep in a complex computer vision project)[/QUOTE]

[OT] I'm really curious. What does that mean? [/OT]

[QUOTE=Dubslow;301307][OT] I'm really curious. What does that mean? [/OT][/QUOTE]

Without going into too much detail, a distributed SfM system.

Edit: And, as an aside, if anyone here has a Canon digital camera you should [B][I][U]definitely[/U][/I][/B] check out the [URL="http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK"]Canon Hack Development Kit[/URL]. RAW files from cheap kit!!!

[QUOTE=chalsall;301313]
Edit: And, as an aside, if anyone here has a Canon digital camera you should [B][I][U]definitely[/U][/I][/B] check out the [URL="http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK"]Canon Hack Development Kit[/URL]. RAW files from cheap kit!!![/QUOTE]

That's really interesting! It does not apply to my camera (50D DSLR), but my partner has an SX20IS, which is listed. Getting RAW capability on that one would be cool.

[QUOTE=kladner;301322]That's really interesting! It does not apply to my camera (50D DSLR), but my partner has an SX20IS, which is listed. Getting RAW capability on that one would be cool.[/QUOTE]

Yeah. And RAW is just the beginning. Scripts, automatic bracketing, ultra-fast (and ultra-slow) exposure times, live histograms... The list goes on and on!

It's a little scary the first time you use it (Do I [I][U]really[/U][/I] want to update my firmware with this code (even though it doesn't actually touch the firmware)?) but I have not had any problems with it, and I haven't heard of anyone else having any problems either. And by setting the SD card(s) to be "bootable" (from within the system after the first manual boot) the code will run automatically every time you turn on the camera.

You do need a USB SD Card Reader (you can't upload the software to the SD card via the camera), but they're dirt cheap and handy to have anyway.

[QUOTE=chalsall;301305]I'll figure out what's going on today.[/QUOTE]

OK, just so everyone knows, this bug has been squashed. Stupid Programmer Error (as usual) -- I missed initiating (clearing) the string variable used to build the WorkTodo data which is passed to the script which downloads the WORKTODO.TXT file when asked. ModPerl is unforgiving that way...

The reason this bug has been lurking undetected for so long is I only missed it in the P-1 assignment script, it only manifested when someone used the "Download WORKTODO.TXT" function, and then only when another user had previously and recently used the same server context to get P-1 work.

See Dubslow -- Once A Month Bugs aren't limited to C... :wink:

As a side effect of debugging this, I added the ability to toggle assignments by work type on the View Assignments page (Under the "Select..." drop down at the bottom of the page). Needless to say, I was doing a lot of unreserving of P-1 assignments in my own account today....