[QUOTE=axn;397364]Please note that these TFs have snowball's chance in hell of finding any factors. Just sayin' :whistle:[/QUOTE]

So, they have a high chance now and less as North America moves into summer?

[IMG]http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2014/01/08/hell082way_wide-d452268a5a1fd0fbc7351a269588579ff078053d-s1600-c85.jpg[/IMG]
[URL]http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/01/08/260735693/hell-has-frozen-over-headline-writers-rejoice[/URL]

Assignments "Expired" but still in worktodo.txt
 

The following are a few lines at the top of my current worktodo.txt (there are about 2 dozen in total for this worker; all but the first in the same "boat")
The first is a valid assignment I still see on PrimeNet.
The rest I DO NOT see; in fact they show up as "expired" a few days ago on the Exponent Status report.
I check in every day from that PC so by now it should have recognized and dropped the "expired" assignments.

[CODE][Worker #1]
Factor=BD9B5D9E9B9F087288B7759EC0043C9B,65839,61,62
Factor=CDADEADE888F5B31CF54929461F9073B,62207,61,62
Factor=CE2B0D27C722F9161738D5874ED6B695,62233,61,62[/CODE]

This shows the first assigned to me: [url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=65839&exp_hi=&full=1[/url]
This shows the assignment completed on 03/06 and my assignment "expired" that same day [url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=62207&exp_hi=&full=1[/url]
Ditto: [url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=62233&exp_hi=&full=1[/url]

You do realise those exponents have had the equivalent of a t35 of ECM?

[edit]
Realised a bunch of people mentioned this before.

[QUOTE=VictordeHolland;397576]You do realise those exponents have had the equivalent of a t35 of ECM?[/QUOTE]

Yes I know the near zero change of finding a factor this way....just using "space heater" hardware for a little fun advancing bit levels.

[QUOTE=manfred4;397346]But that one only works for Prime95, mfaktc won't reserve anything if I wanted to. How would you reserve a big bunch of Assignments for your GPU?
[/QUOTE]

Evidently you have now figured that out, without the need for anyone to perhaps be accused of promotion of nefarious techniques.
I don't always reserve work in low ranges, but am more inclined to make that extra effort when there is a heightened risk of collision.
But when I don't reserve during a few hour period of work, in the slight potential conflict areas, that would be because I am at keyboard and would at each hour or two be aware of the results of adjacent workers, and thereby have a good idea where they have been been operating in recent days.
Certainly I would not queue a TF job that was already reserved for TF.

I figured out a workaround to reserve it, propably not the fastest way, but it works.
Usually I don't reserve such work (I am also working 20M-22M 66-67 Bits without reservations), because I can easily see that nobody else is working there recently.
But in the sub-1M-range, where I will be working after that more, there seems to be a bigger potential of clashing Assignments, so I will reserve the work there.

[QUOTE=sdbardwick;394053]Chris, I didn't think you took any action. I'm just irked that (1) the server assigned me my own doublecheck, and (2) revoked the assignment after significant work performed. I'm moderately concerned that it might be using the public name as the basis for that reassignment, given that I have over the years been assigned my own doublechecks (years later) like [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=33677509&full=1"]here[/URL].
Normally if I notice such assignments I release them back to PrimeNet.[/QUOTE]

FYI, if it makes you feel any better, I'm doing triple-checks of self-verified work and I did notice a few of yours in there (old v4 assignments that were self-checked with your v5 account).

Nothing wrong with that happening...there was just nothing on the server to prevent that situation from arising. :smile:

FYI, these aren't part of the larger list of triple-check candidates I put out... it's a smaller list of just v4/v5 work by the same user which I'm pretty sure were just happy accidents of chance. :) I'm working my way through them now.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;398539]FYI, if it makes you feel any better, I'm doing triple-checks of self-verified work and I did notice a few of yours in there (old v4 assignments that were self-checked with your v5 account).

Nothing wrong with that happening...there was just nothing on the server to prevent that situation from arising. :smile:

FYI, these aren't part of the larger list of triple-check candidates I put out... it's a smaller list of just v4/v5 work by the same user which I'm pretty sure were just happy accidents of chance. :) I'm working my way through them now.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I saw a couple of those go by...my bad SSD in my Haswell-E caused a bunch of more recent ones too, albeit with double checks. I think an odd collection of edge cases combined to cause them:

0. Account set to get lowest exponents
1. SSD corrupted save files
2. Days of Work set to 1
3. Computer could do about 1.9 per day, and met other low-exponent criteria for reliability and confidence
4. Computer reported mismatched residue due to #1, and immediately requested new work, since it was now below the "days of work" threshold.
5. First available exponent was the one it just turned in, so it was re-assigned.
6. Computer was rarely turned off, so corrupted save files only occasionally used, causing problem to be frustratingly intermittent, as uninterrupted runs returned matching residues.

I doubt I'll get a response in time for my needs, but this seems like the only existing thread for my kind of question. I will have to leave home for a few weeks and I can't take my computer with me and I can't risk leaving it on unattended for the length of time I will be gone. Should I unreserved every exponent that won't finish before I leave? I hate to do that because one will be almost done an hour or 2 before I have to leave, but I won't be able to stay home to let it finish. I'd love for them to e able to just stay with me until I get back, but I am guessing that can't happen.

I'd suggest unassigning the tasks that haven't been started yet.

For the ones that have been started, I'd just finish them when you get back - 2 weeks is not long enough for them to be automatically be unassigned, although you can always get an extension on them by going to "Manual Testing" -> "Extensions" if you are worried about that.

If you're back within 60 days, they shouldn't become unassigned from you unless they are within 60 days of their max time - [url]http://www.mersenne.org/thresholds/[/url] will tell you about assignment rules depending on the category they are in. If you haven't signed up for the quickest exponents, then they will probably be fine. If you are able to access the internet while you are away you can extend the time manually using [url]http://www.mersenne.org/manual_extension/[/url] as well as long as they don't break those threshold rules.