[QUOTE=Mark Rose;411796]I've queued 56 74,75 assignments in the P-1 range for the weekend. It escapes me at the moment how to find out how many P-1 assignments are being completed per day.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for adding those to your "barbies".

With regards to how many P-1 are completed, it's difficult to tell exactly from "outside" (read: without access to the Primenet DB). But, about 150 a day are done through GPU72, and I'd guess perhaps another 100 to 150 a day directly through Primenet.

[QUOTE=Gordon;411822]I was thinking along the lines of P95 for stage 1 then GMP-ECM for stage 2, primenet doesn't hand out exponents less than 10k does it?[/QUOTE]

You can do ECM for any exponent; no lower limit...but on the other hand 20M seems to be the current upper limit.
It is TF that you can't get assignments under 20K

[QUOTE=chalsall;411762]For CPUs, either LL or DC is fine. We're far behind in DC, but if you want to find the next MP, do LL.

Personally I only DC because I use it to initially test, and then continue to ensure, the sanity of my CPUs.[/QUOTE]

I'll second chalsall and suggest that you might consider doing some DC work. The spread between first and second time checks seems to be growing.

I'm only doing DC work. I'm not that concerned about finding the next prime, otherwise I'd be doing all first-time checks, but then again I do have a theory that we missed a prime between M47 and M48, lurking somewhere in that 42M-57M range.

I've been trying to find the likeliest cases where LL was done wrong the first time. If you're interested in helping out with that project, I can send you a lot of work.

One little project I have is to go through all of the exponents between 35M and 58M that have already been checked twice and resulted in a mismatch. There's over 5000 of them though, so it's no small undertaking and I won't complete that by myself.

In most of those cases, one or the other is correct but then we'll be able to say "this other CPU had a bad result" and we may be able to point to other work from that CPU and do advance double-checking on it to find other bad results... work that hasn't been DC'd already.

Unfortunately that's a lot of manual work... getting exponents and manually getting them assigned to yourself, updating worktodo files, etc. I do it with my systems but then I have some batch files setup to help out so it's not too much overhead.

Anyway, if it's something you're interested in, find that other thread:
[URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=20372"]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=20372[/URL]

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;411717]Anonymous does have 165THzd of work out, I have a feeling we'll get a big dump of results on Monday, give or take a day.[/QUOTE]

SHAZAAAMMMM 122,000 GhzDays turned in recently in the 44M range including 146 factored.

[QUOTE=petrw1;411851]SHAZAAAMMMM 122,000 GhzDays turned in recently in the 44M range including 146 factored.[/QUOTE]

J. F. F. C!

When I first started doing TF, that would be more than a year's worth of effort. Anonymous is insane. Anonymous will probably pass LaurV and I soon. I'm glad to see the progress being made!

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;411858]When I first started doing TF, that would be more than a year's worth of effort. Anonymous is insane. Anonymous will probably pass LaurV and I soon. I'm glad to see the progress being made![/QUOTE]

To be fair "airsquirrels" is actually averaging more per day (12K) than anonymous (10K) though some LLTF and some DCTF

[QUOTE=petrw1;411860]To be fair "airsquirrels" is actually averaging more per day (12K) than anonymous (10K) though some LLTF and some DCTF[/QUOTE]

True. In the beginning Anonymous was doing slightly more. Then Rocky built his NVidia rig for cheap.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;411850]I'll second chalsall and suggest that you might consider doing some DC work. The spread between first and second time checks seems to be growing.

I'm only doing DC work. I'm not that concerned about finding the next prime, otherwise I'd be doing all first-time checks, but then again I do have a theory that we missed a prime between M47 and M48, lurking somewhere in that 42M-57M range.

I've been trying to find the likeliest cases where LL was done wrong the first time. If you're interested in helping out with that project, I can send you a lot of work.

One little project I have is to go through all of the exponents between 35M and 58M that have already been checked twice and resulted in a mismatch. There's over 5000 of them though, so it's no small undertaking and I won't complete that by myself.

In most of those cases, one or the other is correct but then we'll be able to say "this other CPU had a bad result" and we may be able to point to other work from that CPU and do advance double-checking on it to find other bad results... work that hasn't been DC'd already.

Unfortunately that's a lot of manual work... getting exponents and manually getting them assigned to yourself, updating worktodo files, etc. I do it with my systems but then I have some batch files setup to help out so it's not too much overhead.

Anyway, if it's something you're interested in, find that other thread:
[URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=20372"]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=20372[/URL][/QUOTE]
I WOULD like to find the next one, would be neat, but I set all my LL workers to do 2% DC for the moment, may adjust it later. I figure that'll be effective to help DC.

In about a month I will have cleared all the DCTF work above 58M and below 100M. I'm devoting about 500 GHz-d/d to it. There are about 400 exponents needing work.

I imagine more will come about as old high assignments are completed though.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;412712]In about a month I will have cleared all the DCTF work above 58M and below 100M. I'm devoting about 500 GHz-d/d to it. There are about 400 exponents needing work.[/QUOTE]

Coolness.

There is not much work needed there, but it's worth the effort just to get it off the books.

And, interestingly, we're only about six months away from getting all DCTF work done.

Very much look forward to that.