|
I think the 92.85/cycle at the end of filtering is the number that's expected to be equal to TD.
I also believe you'll get a matrix smaller by 8-10% in dimension, and shorter in solve time by slightly less (say, 5-9%) if you chop off 20M relations and re-run the filtering. If you have disk space, keep this matrix and re-run filtering in another folder, so that if I'm wrong you can pick this one back up where it is? |
I’ll give it a try in a few days - real life calls. Will publish the results.
|
My self-renamed OPN_C160_44611351_13_3_3_2 is complete:
[code]commencing linear algebra read 4313364 cycles cycles contain 14253116 unique relations read 14253116 relations using 20 quadratic characters above 4294917295 building initial matrix memory use: 1965.9 MB read 4313364 cycles matrix is 4313185 x 4313364 (2180.4 MB) with weight 660455126 (153.12/col) sparse part has weight 519830653 (120.52/col) filtering completed in 2 passes matrix is 4313130 x 4313309 (2180.4 MB) with weight 660452084 (153.12/col) sparse part has weight 519829437 (120.52/col) matrix starts at (0, 0) matrix is 4313130 x 4313309 (2180.4 MB) with weight 660452084 (153.12/col) sparse part has weight 519829437 (120.52/col) saving the first 48 matrix rows for later matrix includes 64 packed rows matrix is 4313082 x 4313309 (2113.4 MB) with weight 567975050 (131.68/col) sparse part has weight 510879747 (118.44/col) using block size 8192 and superblock size 589824 for processor cache size 6144 kB commencing Lanczos iteration (4 threads) memory use: 1752.8 MB linear algebra at 0.0%, ETA 14h14m313309 dimensions (0.0%, ETA 14h14m) checkpointing every 300000 dimensions309 dimensions (0.0%, ETA 14h50m) linear algebra completed 43251 of 4313309 dimensions (1.0%, ETA 18h14m) linear algebra completed 4313043 of 4313309 dimensions (100.0%, ETA 0h 0m) lanczos halted after 68210 iterations (dim = 4313080) recovered 27 nontrivial dependencies BLanczosTime: 69690 commencing square root phase handling dependencies 1 to 64 reading relations for dependency 1 read 2157715 cycles cycles contain 7128136 unique relations read 7128136 relations multiplying 7128136 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 375.60 million bits initial square root is modulo 5489443 GCD is N, no factor found reading relations for dependency 2 read 2157468 cycles cycles contain 7128992 unique relations read 7128992 relations multiplying 7128992 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 375.65 million bits initial square root is modulo 5499889 sqrtTime: 2116 p67 factor: 6446978583841027855549010689131178001573102083169940653773620668827 p93 factor: 255189151844756035601754529106018167926082558528540728539144708443206079727228686296324462541 elapsed time 20:46:56[/code] [url]https://pastebin.com/7FhNMz5w[/url] |
Taking C227_950xxx351_11
|
Taking C199_441xx221_5
(easy number running on a fast machine, should be done by Thursday evening) |
9_265+ complete
1 Attachment(s)
265*(9^265+1).C232 complete (15e)
[CODE] Thu Feb 8 03:44:59 2018 p85 factor: 1855241207284127368898046737497608792708474713117420717677909129155858901047202318841 Thu Feb 8 03:44:59 2018 p148 factor: 2258672543466128666976204848591086426139873889516235395443766796644806949760435435031790483402216395079284918421988642687891834881336978897495088657 [/CODE] |
Reserving C233_133_86 for postprocessing. Thank you.
|
Phi_3(Phi_11(Phi_3(794191)/small)/small)/small factored
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=richs;478663]Reserving Phi_3(Phi_11(Phi_3(794191)/small)/small)/small.[/QUOTE]
aka C160_114xxx461_3. [CODE]p75 factor: 104653668506096276421425077072910351711487258276864163977467534767592397439 p86 factor: 27895417369071658122647213059002481429646601518449649335072887342974960085047937667549[/CODE] 57.9 hours on 2 threads Core i3-2310M with 4 GB memory for a 5.98M matrix at TD = 70 (didn't bother to try 130). Log attached and at [URL="https://pastebin.com/sRKad8Tb"]https://pastebin.com/sRKad8Tb[/URL] |
C199_441xx221_5 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
p62 factor: 15415954084900364323268807850169781151239504513806412289297301 p138 factor: 341347647921572982181378183150497363220453323323286540351339229240390778153708987279830900344167018890832438234781584675855750316088483601 [/code] 19.5 hours on 6 threads i7/5820K for 6.83M density-120 (not 122) matrix. Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/3Vhrv3vb[/url] |
Taking C232_146_49
|
Taking C197_219xx857_5
|
[QUOTE=RichD;479095]Looks like the GCW number (9_266+.C255) in the 14e queue can use a few more relations. Currently the 32-bit job is at 345M.[/QUOTE]
Are you going to do this one? |
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;479411]I think the 92.85/cycle at the end of filtering is the number that's expected to be equal to TD.
I also believe you'll get a matrix smaller by 8-10% in dimension, and shorter in solve time by slightly less (say, 5-9%) if you chop off 20M relations and re-run the filtering. If you have disk space, keep this matrix and re-run filtering in another folder, so that if I'm wrong you can pick this one back up where it is?[/QUOTE] Results. [code] Sat Feb 10 12:01:48 2018 Sat Feb 10 12:01:48 2018 Sat Feb 10 12:01:48 2018 Msieve v. 1.52 (SVN unknown) Sat Feb 10 12:01:48 2018 random seeds: bcfbbf68 cf2f23f0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:48 2018 factoring 2234378048249495869632277535776778536491220070872178334323257257984004715599817130218098631993983409929561189021862530161860248402011281511389799252654886688065574453902542653717067012722454732217367978217338892307708541470519239077 (232 digits) Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 no P-1/P+1/ECM available, skipping Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 commencing number field sieve (232-digit input) Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 R0: 2892546549760000000000 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 R1: -53653278865596927234911463541904971226579 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 A0: 487340 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 A1: 0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 A2: 0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 A3: 0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 A4: 0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 A5: 0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 A6: 1 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 skew 8.87, size 1.061e-012, alpha -0.098, combined = 1.277e-013 rroots = 0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 commencing relation filtering Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 setting max relations to 440000000 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 setting target matrix density to 128.0 Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 estimated available RAM is 16316.6 MB Sat Feb 10 12:01:49 2018 commencing duplicate removal, pass 1 Sat Feb 10 12:08:02 2018 error -15 reading relation 41705422 Sat Feb 10 12:08:47 2018 error -15 reading relation 46842753 Sat Feb 10 12:08:48 2018 error -9 reading relation 46863751 Sat Feb 10 12:08:49 2018 error -15 reading relation 47047448 Sat Feb 10 13:06:42 2018 error -9 reading relation 439588204 Sat Feb 10 13:06:43 2018 error -15 reading relation 439648219 Sat Feb 10 13:06:44 2018 error -9 reading relation 439724594 Sat Feb 10 13:06:45 2018 error -9 reading relation 439883298 Sat Feb 10 13:06:46 2018 error -9 reading relation 439978479 Sat Feb 10 13:06:46 2018 skipped 19 relations with b > 2^32 Sat Feb 10 13:06:46 2018 found 90012979 hash collisions in 439998409 relations Sat Feb 10 13:06:46 2018 commencing duplicate removal, pass 2 Sat Feb 10 13:18:17 2018 found 78356557 duplicates and 361641852 unique relations Sat Feb 10 13:18:17 2018 memory use: 2387.0 MB Sat Feb 10 13:18:17 2018 reading ideals above 388038656 Sat Feb 10 13:18:17 2018 commencing singleton removal, initial pass Sat Feb 10 14:16:56 2018 memory use: 6024.0 MB Sat Feb 10 14:16:56 2018 reading all ideals from disk Sat Feb 10 14:18:02 2018 memory use: 5762.6 MB Sat Feb 10 14:18:13 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 14:18:24 2018 begin with 361641852 relations and 292955978 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 14:20:37 2018 reduce to 226089518 relations and 142675170 ideals in 16 passes Sat Feb 10 14:20:37 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 42 Sat Feb 10 14:20:51 2018 reading ideals above 720000 Sat Feb 10 14:20:52 2018 commencing singleton removal, initial pass Sat Feb 10 15:07:51 2018 memory use: 5512.0 MB Sat Feb 10 15:07:51 2018 reading large ideals from disk Sat Feb 10 15:11:40 2018 keeping 165708379 ideals with weight <= 20, target excess is 18405417 Sat Feb 10 15:15:31 2018 memory use: 5259.5 MB Sat Feb 10 15:15:31 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:15:40 2018 begin with 226089519 relations and 165708379 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:17:36 2018 reduce to 225885995 relations and 165504811 ideals in 11 passes Sat Feb 10 15:17:36 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:18:39 2018 removing 12676235 relations and 10676235 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:18:42 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:18:51 2018 begin with 213209760 relations and 165504811 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:20:28 2018 reduce to 212638988 relations and 154251121 ideals in 10 passes Sat Feb 10 15:20:28 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:21:27 2018 removing 9436120 relations and 7436120 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:21:30 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:21:38 2018 begin with 203202868 relations and 154251121 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:22:52 2018 reduce to 202832486 relations and 146440833 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:22:52 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:23:49 2018 removing 8449147 relations and 6449147 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:23:52 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:24:00 2018 begin with 194383339 relations and 146440833 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:25:09 2018 reduce to 194065187 relations and 139670388 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:25:09 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:26:03 2018 removing 7921337 relations and 5921337 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:26:05 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:26:13 2018 begin with 186143850 relations and 139670388 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:27:19 2018 reduce to 185850604 relations and 133452884 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:27:19 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:28:10 2018 removing 7604477 relations and 5604477 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:28:13 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:28:20 2018 begin with 178246127 relations and 133452884 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:29:15 2018 reduce to 177971140 relations and 127570526 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:29:15 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:30:04 2018 removing 7349926 relations and 5349926 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:30:07 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:30:13 2018 begin with 170621214 relations and 127570526 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:31:06 2018 reduce to 170347543 relations and 121943937 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:31:06 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:31:52 2018 removing 7191517 relations and 5191517 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:31:55 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:32:01 2018 begin with 163156026 relations and 121943937 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:32:58 2018 reduce to 162892381 relations and 116485880 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:32:58 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:33:42 2018 removing 7019644 relations and 5019644 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:33:45 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:33:50 2018 begin with 155872737 relations and 116485880 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:34:37 2018 reduce to 155598810 relations and 111189123 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:34:37 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:35:20 2018 removing 6962199 relations and 4962199 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:35:22 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:35:27 2018 begin with 148636611 relations and 111189123 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:36:12 2018 reduce to 148370278 relations and 105957318 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:36:12 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:36:52 2018 removing 6870101 relations and 4870101 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:36:54 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:36:59 2018 begin with 141500177 relations and 105957318 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:37:46 2018 reduce to 141227531 relations and 100811110 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:37:46 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:38:25 2018 removing 6786384 relations and 4786384 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:38:27 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:38:32 2018 begin with 134441147 relations and 100811110 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:39:10 2018 reduce to 134157357 relations and 95737145 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:39:10 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:39:47 2018 removing 6783134 relations and 4783134 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:39:49 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:39:53 2018 begin with 127374223 relations and 95737145 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:40:30 2018 reduce to 127087796 relations and 90663540 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:40:30 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:41:04 2018 removing 6708028 relations and 4708028 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:41:06 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:41:10 2018 begin with 120379768 relations and 90663540 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:41:44 2018 reduce to 120073402 relations and 85644416 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:41:44 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 20 Sat Feb 10 15:42:16 2018 removing 6661710 relations and 4661710 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:42:18 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:42:22 2018 begin with 113411692 relations and 85644416 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:42:54 2018 reduce to 113081740 relations and 80647429 ideals in 7 passes Sat Feb 10 15:42:54 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 19 Sat Feb 10 15:43:24 2018 removing 6727394 relations and 4727394 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:43:26 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:43:30 2018 begin with 106354346 relations and 80647429 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:44:03 2018 reduce to 106026002 relations and 75586220 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:44:03 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 19 Sat Feb 10 15:44:31 2018 removing 6688311 relations and 4688311 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:44:33 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:44:36 2018 begin with 99337691 relations and 75586220 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:45:07 2018 reduce to 98972663 relations and 70526301 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:45:07 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 19 Sat Feb 10 15:45:33 2018 removing 6657393 relations and 4657393 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:45:35 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:45:38 2018 begin with 92315270 relations and 70526301 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:46:06 2018 reduce to 91907375 relations and 65452975 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:46:06 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 18 Sat Feb 10 15:46:30 2018 removing 6772580 relations and 4772580 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:46:32 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:46:34 2018 begin with 85134795 relations and 65452975 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:47:02 2018 reduce to 84709951 relations and 60246671 ideals in 9 passes Sat Feb 10 15:47:02 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 18 Sat Feb 10 15:47:25 2018 removing 6751558 relations and 4751558 ideals in 2000000 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:47:26 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:47:29 2018 begin with 77958393 relations and 60246671 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:47:54 2018 reduce to 77475388 relations and 55001126 ideals in 9 passes Sat Feb 10 15:47:54 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 17 Sat Feb 10 15:48:14 2018 removing 4039879 relations and 2915901 ideals in 1123978 cliques Sat Feb 10 15:48:15 2018 commencing in-memory singleton removal Sat Feb 10 15:48:17 2018 begin with 73435509 relations and 55001126 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:48:38 2018 reduce to 73201847 relations and 51847563 ideals in 8 passes Sat Feb 10 15:48:38 2018 max relations containing the same ideal: 17 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 0 large ideals: 3636128 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 1 large ideals: 16504799 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 2 large ideals: 26620434 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 3 large ideals: 18839501 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 4 large ideals: 6371744 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 5 large ideals: 1106778 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 6 large ideals: 113486 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 relations with 7+ large ideals: 8977 Sat Feb 10 15:49:00 2018 commencing 2-way merge Sat Feb 10 15:49:27 2018 reduce to 44947729 relation sets and 23593445 unique ideals Sat Feb 10 15:49:27 2018 commencing full merge Sat Feb 10 15:53:36 2018 memory use: 2145.8 MB Sat Feb 10 15:53:41 2018 found 21810559 cycles, need 19443617 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 weight of 19443617 cycles is about 1998872945 (102.80/cycle) Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 distribution of cycle lengths: Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 1 relations: 3640317 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 2 relations: 1621033 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 3 relations: 1260516 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 4 relations: 1130614 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 5 relations: 1093049 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 6 relations: 1057335 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 7 relations: 1039569 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 8 relations: 1010345 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 9 relations: 981143 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 10+ relations: 6609696 Sat Feb 10 15:53:43 2018 heaviest cycle: 21 relations Sat Feb 10 15:53:44 2018 commencing cycle optimization Sat Feb 10 15:54:12 2018 start with 141431620 relations Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 pruned 10462633 relations Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 memory use: 3893.6 MB Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 distribution of cycle lengths: Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 1 relations: 3640317 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 2 relations: 1687035 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 3 relations: 1344115 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 4 relations: 1220138 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 5 relations: 1200687 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 6 relations: 1174640 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 7 relations: 1165984 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 8 relations: 1132602 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 9 relations: 1097990 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 10+ relations: 5780109 Sat Feb 10 15:59:30 2018 heaviest cycle: 21 relations Sat Feb 10 16:00:14 2018 RelProcTime: 14305 Sat Feb 10 16:00:14 2018 Sat Feb 10 16:00:14 2018 commencing linear algebra Sat Feb 10 16:00:17 2018 read 19443617 cycles Sat Feb 10 16:00:50 2018 cycles contain 61729232 unique relations Sat Feb 10 16:13:09 2018 read 61729232 relations Sat Feb 10 16:14:58 2018 using 20 quadratic characters above 4294917296 Sat Feb 10 16:19:25 2018 building initial matrix Sat Feb 10 16:30:36 2018 memory use: 7832.2 MB Sat Feb 10 16:30:58 2018 read 19443617 cycles Sat Feb 10 16:31:04 2018 matrix is 19441927 x 19443617 (7607.4 MB) with weight 2195299526 (112.91/col) Sat Feb 10 16:31:04 2018 sparse part has weight 1780348408 (91.56/col) Sat Feb 10 16:36:44 2018 filtering completed in 3 passes Sat Feb 10 16:36:50 2018 matrix is 19401095 x 19401295 (7598.5 MB) with weight 2192592875 (113.01/col) Sat Feb 10 16:36:50 2018 sparse part has weight 1778494929 (91.67/col) Sat Feb 10 16:39:07 2018 matrix starts at (0, 0) Sat Feb 10 16:39:12 2018 matrix is 19401095 x 19401295 (7598.5 MB) with weight 2192592875 (113.01/col) Sat Feb 10 16:39:12 2018 sparse part has weight 1778494929 (91.67/col) Sat Feb 10 16:39:12 2018 saving the first 48 matrix rows for later Sat Feb 10 16:39:17 2018 matrix includes 64 packed rows Sat Feb 10 16:39:20 2018 matrix is 19401047 x 19401295 (7269.1 MB) with weight 1833426013 (94.50/col) Sat Feb 10 16:39:20 2018 sparse part has weight 1711547679 (88.22/col) Sat Feb 10 16:39:20 2018 using block size 8192 and superblock size 393216 for processor cache size 4096 kB Sat Feb 10 16:41:08 2018 commencing Lanczos iteration (8 threads) Sat Feb 10 16:41:08 2018 memory use: 6195.0 MB Sat Feb 10 16:43:52 2018 linear algebra at 0.0%, ETA 558h 4m Sat Feb 10 16:44:47 2018 checkpointing every 40000 dimensions [/code] |
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;479716]Are you going to do this one?[/QUOTE]
No, I picked another one that was ready to go. And I still have 206 hours remaining on another one. But if it is still available in a week I may look at it again. |
[QUOTE=swellman;479762]Results.
[/QUOTE] If I'm reading the logs correctly, 460M raw relations got you a 20.0M matrix at actual density of 78, ETA 560 hours. 440M raw relations got you 19.4M matrix at actual density 92, ETA 556 hours. 420M or 425M relations would likely build you a density 120+ matrix, but I have no reason to forecast a time savings from doing so. Seems in this case, extra relations above ~430M raw are useless, but didn't hurt your LA time meaningfully. |
Taking C197_765xx099_5
|
C227_950xxx351_11 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
Sat Feb 10 15:03:00 2018 p82 factor: 1095193141328015162716493532106123782950723869553949291490820009007510135749910083 Sat Feb 10 15:03:00 2018 p146 factor: 23926079189061260400618041569502760850075373745086217777983400666870108043229761716731216586642611068237798960489517087770451062881601266623583271 [/code] 27.8 hours on 7 threads E5-2650v2 for 7.44M density-130 (not 132) matrix Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/63GvANHg[/url] |
C197_219xx857_5 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
Sun Feb 11 21:10:35 2018 p70 factor: 1197029444897180361944790744670570161356167559163209890310767474793921 Sun Feb 11 21:10:35 2018 p128 factor: 24100466461420844234549269959534690293572884763094032297267197739596062292980402475234916848661896386722219380579767478275678441 [/code] 29.9 hours for 8.13M density-116 (not 118) matrix on 7 cores E5-2650v2 Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/hd4gpVbn[/url] |
Taking XY_C230_130_77
(the 137^77+77^137 cofactor) ETA morning of 21 Feb |
5393^71-1 (15e) factored
276M total relations/205M unique relations to build a 19.0M matrix using TD=124 (TD=128 failed).
Solve time about 312 hours. (-t 4) [CODE]p123 factor: 109558303194501545340622556522112849755919116026282420699878221877707763830469976822392439233030056326572517411587534588451 p140 factor: 15437062394425238488942809721483132705076085680929608027646686831712819500794920018624963577571811457431849021242830690447583651681075421693[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/fVX0tDTs[/url] |
C232_146_49 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
Tue Feb 13 03:44:06 2018 p108 factor: 877857151493934739623436317289798858920138203613426371257328695012215052055135532031577577504043678026294161 Tue Feb 13 03:44:06 2018 p124 factor: 1154061941856923705709793226740774910279843202974345743448753739568349382635558815444489737151822743462949622370597641787653 [/code] 76.7 hours on 6 cores i7/5820K for a 12.21M density-124 (not 126) matrix. Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/NkbW9vNr[/url] |
Reserving C164_140xx289_7 phi_7(largest factor of phi_7(phi_13(7))) in 14e
|
[QUOTE=Dubslow;479397]This will be done within a day, so I'll also reserve and start downloading XY_C233_144_53.[/QUOTE]
[code]matrix is 11329575 x 11329800 (5093.9 MB) with weight 1312390653 (115.84/col) sparse part has weight 1222031013 (107.86/col) using block size 8192 and superblock size 589824 for processor cache size 6144 kB commencing Lanczos iteration (4 threads) memory use: 4356.5 MB linear algebra at 0.0%, ETA 140h24m329800 dimensions (0.0%, ETA 140h24m) checkpointing every 80000 dimensions29800 dimensions (0.0%, ETA 142h36m) linear algebra completed 11329570 of 11329800 dimensions (100.0%, ETA 0h 0m) lanczos halted after 179161 iterations (dim = 11329570) recovered 38 nontrivial dependencies BLanczosTime: 524225 commencing square root phase handling dependencies 1 to 64 reading relations for dependency 1 read 5662511 cycles cycles contain 18665598 unique relations read 18665598 relations multiplying 18665598 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 547.20 million bits initial square root is modulo 81163 sqrtTime: 2383 p54 factor: 792843510963833767311688647106230819237955248262384157 p179 factor: 48400865829920451100946564756191825351531505680732327184650733081930247419348772568050079108048391431206750496970616025706613506747187701535524593356707418436213076175112327841477 elapsed time 147:49:00[/code] [url]https://pastebin.com/3VaNExwj[/url] I'll reserve XY_C234_138_130. |
[QUOTE=RichD;479764]No, I picked another one that was ready to go. And I still have 206 hours remaining on another one. But if it is still available in a week I may look at it again.[/QUOTE]
Just to let you know I won’t be doing this one since I’ve still another job to complete and from this Sunday I’ll have no fast and unlimited internet connection to download 20 or 30GB of data until 9th of March. |
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;480145]Just to let you know I won’t be doing this one since I’ve still another job to complete and from this Sunday I’ll have no fast and unlimited internet connection to download 20 or 30GB of data until 9th of March.[/QUOTE]
In fact, I will be able to start on it later this weekend. Reserving 9_266+.C255 |
Should the need arise, I've got a quad-core 32GB machine that I've used for 14e and 15e NFS@home post-processing tasks before. Only restriction is that I don't like doing task that take more than a month on it. Preferably I'd like to use Msieve SVN988 (or if somebody has a newer Win64 .exe compiled for Ivy/Sandy bridge without CUDA)
|
[QUOTE=VictordeHolland;480149]Should the need arise, I've got a quad-core 32GB machine that I've used for 14e and 15e NFS@home post-processing tasks before. Only restriction is that I don't like doing task that take more than a month on it. Preferably I'd like to use Msieve SVN988 (or if somebody has a newer Win64 .exe compiled for Ivy/Sandy bridge without CUDA)[/QUOTE]
Try these ones: [QUOTE=ATH;479462]So apparently the large vectors makes sense even without MPI=1: make all WIN=1 WIN64=1 ECM=1 CUDA=0 NO_ZLIB=1 VBITS=64/128/256: [URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/msieve-svn1018-vbits64-haswell.zip"]msieve-svn1018-vbits64-haswell.zip[/URL] [URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/msieve-svn1018-vbits128-haswell.zip"]msieve-svn1018-vbits128-haswell.zip[/URL] [URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/msieve-svn1018-vbits256-haswell.zip"]msieve-svn1018-vbits256-haswell.zip[/URL] [URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/msieve-svn1018-vbits64-sandybridge.zip"]msieve-svn1018-vbits64-sandybridge.zip[/URL] [URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/msieve-svn1018-vbits128-sandybridge.zip"]msieve-svn1018-vbits128-sandybridge.zip[/URL] [URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/msieve-svn1018-vbits256-sandybridge.zip"]msieve-svn1018-vbits256-sandybridge.zip[/URL][/QUOTE] |
[QUOTE=RichD;480148]In fact, I will be able to start on it later this weekend.
Reserving 9_266+.C255[/QUOTE] Thank you. |
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;480150]Try these ones:[/QUOTE]
Thanks! Looks like [B]C180_132_95[/B] is still available, I'll take that. |
[QUOTE=VictordeHolland;480152]
Looks like [B]C180_132_95[/B] is still available, I'll take that.[/QUOTE] TD=130 failed in filtering quite fast, but TD=110 produced a very doable matrix [code]Fri Feb 16 15:44:13 2018 building initial matrix Fri Feb 16 15:58:57 2018 memory use: 8148.5 MB Fri Feb 16 15:59:13 2018 read 18975595 cycles Fri Feb 16 15:59:17 2018 matrix is 18975418 x 18975595 (8290.2 MB) with weight 2442796130 (128.73/col) Fri Feb 16 15:59:17 2018 sparse part has weight 1964482337 (103.53/col) Fri Feb 16 16:03:17 2018 filtering completed in 2 passes Fri Feb 16 16:03:21 2018 matrix is 18974709 x 18974886 (8290.1 MB) with weight 2442769230 (128.74/col) Fri Feb 16 16:03:21 2018 sparse part has weight 1964473875 (103.53/col) Fri Feb 16 16:04:34 2018 matrix starts at (0, 0) Fri Feb 16 16:04:37 2018 matrix is 18974709 x 18974886 (8290.1 MB) with weight 2442769230 (128.74/col) Fri Feb 16 16:04:37 2018 sparse part has weight 1964473875 (103.53/col) Fri Feb 16 16:04:37 2018 saving the first 48 matrix rows for later Fri Feb 16 16:04:43 2018 matrix includes 64 packed rows Fri Feb 16 16:04:46 2018 matrix is 18974661 x 18974886 (7983.0 MB) with weight 2066813897 (108.92/col) Fri Feb 16 16:04:46 2018 sparse part has weight 1902948638 (100.29/col) Fri Feb 16 16:04:46 2018 using block size 8192 and superblock size 786432 for processor cache size 8192 kB Fri Feb 16 16:06:46 2018 commencing Lanczos iteration (4 threads) Fri Feb 16 16:06:46 2018 memory use: 6832.5 MB Fri Feb 16 16:08:21 2018 linear algebra at 0.0%, ETA 313h17m[/code] After I stopped Prime95 the estimate dropped a couple of hours linear algebra completed 80401 of 18974886 dimensions (0.4%, ETA 304h45m) This was with ~430M raw relations, I'll wait 1-2 days and see if the pending estimated extra 10-15M raw relations produce a smaller matrix. Since filtering takes 3-4 hours it is probably not worthwhile to do it dozens of times just to scrape of a fews hours of LA. |
13_2_836m1 factors:
[code]prp63 factor: 615432708408540644993309521436286351080675379553050706481514181 prp135 factor: 725958415369854475739869435622503526962405088792159410461634667153144026733499423144407527930822023555250253049498873070317163266494269[/code] Log at [url]https://pastebin.com/T4Dipd6v[/url] 627M raw relations yielded 527M unique, too many for this project. 518M unique relations and TD=130 produced a 17.6M matrix of weight 119, with sparse part of weight 95. This took roughly 220hr to solve on a 6-core i7 otherwise engaged with 2 threads of sieving or ECM tasks. It looks like 33LP is producing matrices a bit bigger than 32LP on similar-sized tasks on the 14e queue. I may be trading 15% faster sieving for 10% slower matrix-solving by using 33LP. That's an improvement in total computation required for a factorization, but an increase in wall-clock time. |
C197_765xx099_5 factored
272M total relations/206M unique relations
190M unique relations built a 10.8M matrix with TD=120. Solve time about 71 hours, -t 4. [CODE]p68 factor: 22726767643012661157151921978727041530619824532657908863618310432031 p129 factor: 678499760154193479244955373203903959731616834937418545527716064636547032946529341437803340883755653114621774722043721820057417431[/CODE] Attempted. [CODE]max_rel TD Status 206M 132 failed 190M 132 failed 175M 132 failed 164M 132 failed 206M 120 failed 190M 120 worked[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/S0et5FMH[/url] |
127^109+109^127 C220 cofactor - done
500M total relations/385M unique relations built a 23.1M matrix at TD=132.
Solve time about 480+ hours, -t 4. [CODE]p67 factor: 2699935107759395427335079340061832131939311530160794710576979606371 p153 factor: 498885302896473701382526984601600163465587298326497219500902097988986196964713314746766299761027846199910844519156886894610638104722646128979982212004989[/CODE] Attempted. [CODE]max_rel TD matrix 385M 132 23.1M 332M 132 ----- 340M 132 22.6M 340M 140 22.3M[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/if2Gpm6b[/url] |
Taking C235_136_73, ETA morning of March 2nd
|
Taling Aliquot 3408 term 1679 cofactor
|
Reserving C184_217081_43.
|
L1384 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
p77 factor: 27266708936627427608014275239441080091055064001808754946503114785096128049409 p110 factor: 27170244853060565321721117801947062575312920091429176176798347010555531295933238477560952570986850077113337729 [/code] 322.7 hours for 20.72M density-98 matrix (produced with td=134, in another over-sieving case) on 4 cores i7/4790K. Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/8YWfN8gr[/url] |
C230_137_77 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
Thu Feb 22 15:30:05 2018 p115 factor: 1794175503413102524128069431178111346638698393818371894515731605731927220523623849817274738327736998491980728472473 Thu Feb 22 15:30:05 2018 p116 factor: 10208111052583636215319262654150392915871636088218726649421427061153515632839446480298690771282169767332345726389039 [/code] 132.2 hours for 15.56M matrix at density 134 (not optimised) on 7 threads E5-2650v2. Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/SH8A8cLm[/url] |
Aliquot 3408 term 1679 cofactor - done
30 hours to solve a 6.7M matrix using TD=124 (-t 4).
[CODE]p61 factor: 9404643831226098056073576345266047213181311781740795920750743 p105 factor: 196707045121235576939750851749252614630166339832052944950926603406803270026025674535214352134385935032569[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/Rhtyf3eb[/url] |
F1361 now started; 39.15M matrix on 16 cores E5-2650v1, ETA March 27th.
|
C164_140xx289_7 phi_7(largest factor of phi_7(phi_13(7))) factored
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=richs;479950]Reserving C164_140xx289_7 phi_7(largest factor of phi_7(phi_13(7))) in 14e[/QUOTE]
[CODE]p64 factor: 6066887398194432577444110333739654184687284554543212625495468119 p100 factor: 3934210891069458617891085562188165606006344549911421032509843087017 919157780051398497000480133621451[/CODE] 46.6 hours on 2 threads Core i3-2310M with 4 GB memory for a 5.29M matrix at TD = 70 (didn't bother to try 130). Redacted log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/wRGG7cqU[/url] (removed about 30,000 consecutive relation error messages to fit forum and Pastebin size limits). Factors reported to factor database. |
Interested in C190_659xx917_5
I would be interested in taking it assuming it will fit into 8 or 9 gig of RAM. Would somebody be able to give me an estimate on how many hours it would take. If this number will not work with in 8 to 9 gig of RAM please feel free to recommend one . It may take me some time to process as my computer is running roughly 10 to 12 hours a day. I have a 5960 X running stock at 3 GHz. I want to be able to use machine to be able to do everyday tasks too. In advance for assistance
|
[QUOTE=Speedy51;481137]I would be interested in taking it assuming it will fit into 8 or 9 gig of RAM. Would somebody be able to give me an estimate on how many hours it would take. If this number will not work with in 8 to 9 gig of RAM please feel free to recommend one . It may take me some time to process as my computer is running roughly 10 to 12 hours a day. I have a 5960 X running stock at 3 GHz. I want to be able to use machine to be able to do everyday tasks too. In advance for assistance[/QUOTE]
As an example for memory use: 8_271_minus_5_271 SNFS(245) 31bits 242digits [code] Mon Oct 05 22:09:49 2015 commencing relation filtering Mon Oct 05 23:44:35 2015 memory use: 4378.6 MB ... Tue Oct 06 00:32:51 2015 commencing linear algebra ... Tue Oct 06 00:51:53 2015 matrix is 9890546 x 9890724 (4634.8 MB) with weight 1341255398 (135.61/col) [/code]That task is a lot smaller (SNFS 220 with 30bits) so should easily fit in 4GB of free memory. By the way: OddPerfect C185_226741_43b has 400M+ raw relations for a 31bit job? and OddPerfect C190_659xx917_5 has 241M raw relations for a 30bit job doesn't seem right? Oversieved by almost a factor of 2? |
5869^71-1 (OPN) is aiming at almost 1B relations over on 15e as well, for what it’s worth. (This is 32-bit job.)
If it will help things, I can grab 5869^71-1 once the # of relations is north of 460M and build a matrix. Once LA is underway and an ETA established, the sieving job can then be killed. |
[QUOTE=VictordeHolland;481157]As an example for memory use:
8_271_minus_5_271 SNFS(245) 31bits 242digits [code] Mon Oct 05 22:09:49 2015 commencing relation filtering Mon Oct 05 23:44:35 2015 memory use: 4378.6 MB ... Tue Oct 06 00:32:51 2015 commencing linear algebra ... Tue Oct 06 00:51:53 2015 matrix is 9890546 x 9890724 (4634.8 MB) with weight 1341255398 (135.61/col) [/code]That task is a lot smaller (SNFS 220 with 30bits) so should easily fit in 4GB of free memory. By the way: OddPerfect C185_226741_43b has 400M+ raw relations for a 31bit job? and OddPerfect C190_659xx917_5 has 241M raw relations for a 30bit job doesn't seem right? Oversieved by almost a factor of 2?[/QUOTE] Thank you for the information. I will reserve C200_213xx011_5assuming it will fit in 9 gig of RAM or less? Depending on how long it takes it could take me a couple of weeks to get the results from post process in if result is required in hurry someone else please feel free to take it. I am unsure where I got the numbers starting with C 190 from. It currently has just over 38,000 relations remaining. If somebody is keen to PM me the details on how I can download it in increments/parts please feel free to do so. Thanks. |
In order to perform postprocessing, you must get a login ID/password from Greg Childers (user “frmky”). He maintains the servers hosting NFS@Home. Until you get this you cannot proceed. See [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=188690&postcount=1]this post by him[/url] and send him a PM.
Once you get in, find the directory named for the composite you are planning to postprocess. Right-click/‘save as’ the .ini file, the .fb file and the large .dat file (this file will be compressed). Save the three files in the directory containing msieve. Once downloaded, rename the .ini file to worktodo.ini. Rename the .fb file to msieve.fb. Decompress the .dat file with 7zip and rename it to msieve.dat. With Windows, open a cmd window and use the following command line in the directory containing msieve. [code] msieve -v -nc target_density=110 -t 4 [/code] Where the target_density value can be changed as desired; I’ve used 110 as a starting value, you may need to lower this value if msieve refuses to build a matrix and exits. You can also use higher values to attempt to build a denser matrix. If the target_density parameter is not used, the default value is 70. The -t 4 signifies 4 threads. Modify as necessary. [code] msieve -h [/code] will show all possible parameters and answer questions. I’ve kept the above simple - there are alternative ways to do some steps. But this should get you started. Linux is similar in use though syntax is a bit different of course. Post any questions you may have or if you have problems reaching Greg. |
Thank you yes I have information to get into server. Is it better to build a bigger matrix or smaller? I am aware figure will take longer
|
[QUOTE=Speedy51;481216]Thank you yes I have information to get into server. Is it better to build a bigger matrix or smaller? I am aware figure will take longer[/QUOTE]
I suggest you start smaller and go from there. A 30-bit job from the 14e queue can be completed in a day or two depending on hardware. You’ll factor the composite and see how it all works. Afterwards, if you’re interested, you can rerun the same job and change things like target_density to understand its effect on postprocessing. Just note I’ve been doing this for a few years and I’m still learning new things. Suggest you reserve C192_988xx249_11 (Phi_11(Phi_7(70841)/7/29/6301)) and go from there. A couple of notes: - one can download the data at any time, even when the column ‘Est. Pending Relations’ is > 0 without issue. - more relations is not always a good thing, the opposite in fact. In general, the number of relations required is centered on the large prime base (lpb) of the job, i.e. 30-bit in this case. 110-125M is all the relations you will need for a 30-bit job. The number doubles with increasing bit. Good luck! |
[QUOTE=swellman;481223]I suggest you start smaller and go from there. A 30-bit job from the 14e queue can be completed in a day or two depending on hardware. .
Suggest you reserve C192_988xx249_11 (Phi_11(Phi_7(70841)/7/29/6301)) Good luck![/QUOTE] Thank you for the suggestion. I would like to take the number in the paragraph above. I am aware number is ready. I will get in 5 to 6 hours from this post |
Taking C200_213xx011_5.
BTW, C190_659xx917_5 is really a 31-bit job. Just a misprint on the summary page. 250M relations is about right. Well, a little over. :smile: |
[QUOTE=Speedy51;481260]Thank you for the suggestion. I would like to take the number in the paragraph above. I am aware number is ready. I will get in 5 to 6 hours from this post[/QUOTE]
I was looking at the wrong number it will be possibly a day or so before I download because the relations aren't at 0. I am aware you can download before the relations are at 0 I would prefer to wait |
[QUOTE=Speedy51;481285]I would prefer to wait[/QUOTE]
It really makes no difference. The last few percent (read: last few million) will result in less than a 1% savings, if that, in the matrix step, so it will literally take you longer to wait. |
+1; in fact, waiting may make the matrix more difficult to build, as many recent jobs have been oversieved to the point that reducing relations available builds a faster-to-solve matrix. If estimated relations remaining is below 2% of total relations, consider the job complete and proceed!
|
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;481304]+1; in fact, waiting may make the matrix more difficult to build, as many recent jobs have been oversieved to the point that reducing relations available builds a faster-to-solve matrix. If estimated relations remaining is below 2% of total relations, consider the job complete and proceed![/QUOTE]
Great. Thank you both for your responses. I will download in the morning as I do not think I will have enough time to download before I have to turn the computer off for the night |
C235_136_73 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
p69 factor: 407537365103518118555484783641874762030851042640189824641870589461159 p166 factor: 7415510824152946485841062003906240962099629444305954366131218939233656347593641371304137420787310916165692118642314967563917378949006870526132071612346587125922823267 [/code] 189.6 hours on 7 cores E5-2650v2 for 18.39M density-124 (not 126) matrix. Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/j587euCh[/url] |
Taking C233_124_115
|
[QUOTE=Speedy51;481306]Great. Thank you both for your responses. I will download in the morning as I do not think I will have enough time to download before I have to turn the computer off for the night[/QUOTE]
@Speedy51 - did you end up downloading your composite? Which number? The gatekeeper can note your reservation to avoid collisions but he will need your real name (if he doesn’t have it already). |
[QUOTE=swellman;481421]@Speedy51 - did you end up downloading your composite? Which number?
The gatekeeper can note your reservation to avoid collisions but he will need your real name (if he doesn’t have it already).[/QUOTE] Sean, he is Jarod. |
[QUOTE=swellman;481421]@Speedy51 - did you end up downloading your composite? Which number?
The gatekeeper can note your reservation to avoid collisions but he will need your real name (if he doesn’t have it already).[/QUOTE] I downloaded C192_988xx249_11. Thanks Carlos |
[QUOTE=Dubslow;481293]It really makes no difference. The last few percent (read: last few million) will result in less than a 1% savings, if that, in the matrix step, so it will literally take you longer to wait.[/QUOTE]
I tried to build the this matrix with a TD= 120 & got the following message saying matrix probably couldn't be built. What am I best to do wait until relations drop to 0 (currently 85,233) and re-download/try another TD? This is the 1st time I have encountered such a message in the log file [CODE]Sat Mar 03 16:46:38 2018 found 40246 cycles, need 2492828 Sat Mar 03 16:46:38 2018 too few cycles, matrix probably cannot build [/CODE] |
I would try density 112 before I bothered to re-download the relations file. If my connection were slow (home rather than work, for instance), I would try 108 also before waiting for the full set of relations and a re-download.
|
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;481435]I would try density 112 before I bothered to re-download the relations file. If my connection were slow (home rather than work, for instance), I would try 108 also before waiting for the full set of relations and a re-download.[/QUOTE]
Thank you I will try your suggestions. I have started it again at 112. I have a fast connection I think downloaded this morning something like 3.2 meg a second. I suspect it got faster because it downloaded in about an hour 6.5 gig |
112 did the trick on .C192_988xx249_11 It has just under 8.75 hours to go and it has done 9.6% I will probably post results either on Monday or Tuesday Sunday or Monday in the States
|
Taking C185_226741_43b.
|
1 Attachment(s)
C180_132_95
425M raw relations TD=130 failed filtering TD=110, matrix is 18975418 x 18975595 (8290.2 MB) 450M raw relations TD=120 would produce a matrix of 17.7M TD=125 produced matrix is 17505627 x 17505804 (8499.0 MB) LA solved in 279h with 4 cores 3770k @3.5GHz [code] Sat Mar 03 12:24:53 2018 p65 factor: 42337705729976923871123351991590721765474585339687667310169346969 Sat Mar 03 12:24:53 2018 p115 factor: 6835435713782847853349317582459025244003297697766971757753750797110569658680713422329041495173717007082372557746193[/code] Log attached and uploaded in [url]https://pastebin.com/ghdBxKEf[/url] |
Taking [B]C190_659xx917_5[/B]
|
C184_217081_43 factored
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=richs;480497]Reserving C184_217081_43.[/QUOTE]
[CODE]p75 factor: 289661195464210716901505154667005017904799787131736224463983195103502350047 p109 factor: 3747791658358806698250517211528437570531400004835714895367604993924821965996794758155346672634998517418930359[/CODE] 96.5 hours on 2 threads Core i3-2310M with 4 GB memory for a 7.76M matrix at TD = 70 (didn't bother to try 130). Log attached and at [URL="https://pastebin.com/mpPJVEAc"]https://pastebin.com/mpPJVEAc[/URL] Factors reported to factor database. One error that I have not seen before in the square root phase of Msieve about the relation product being incorrect: Sat Mar 3 14:49:01 2018 error: relation product is incorrect Sat Mar 3 14:49:01 2018 algebraic square root failed |
[QUOTE=richs;481505]error: relation product is incorrect
[/QUOTE] Corrupted relations file sometime while the matrix was running? |
[QUOTE=richs;481505]
One error that I have not seen before in the square root phase of Msieve about the relation product being incorrect: Sat Mar 3 14:49:01 2018 error: relation product is incorrect Sat Mar 3 14:49:01 2018 algebraic square root failed[/QUOTE] It’s a known issue using Msieve. Search on “algebraic square root failed” and you’ll get an explanation. I don’t know if this error can be avoided or just survived. Glad you eventually got factors. I’m currently getting a similar message on a job in nc3. First four square roots failed to converge. There’s another 28 more to go, so I’m hoping one generates factors! Job has been running since Nov 22... |
[QUOTE=swellman;481513]It’s a known issue using Msieve. Search on “algebraic square root failed” and you’ll get an explanation. I don’t know if this error can be avoided or just survived. Glad you eventually got factors.
I’m currently getting a similar message on a job in nc3. First four square roots failed to converge. There’s another 28 more to go, so I’m hoping one generates factors! Job has been running since Nov 22...[/QUOTE] Dependency #2 worked for me, thank goodness. |
C224_122_119
1 Attachment(s)
Finally factored on dependency 7
[code] prp82 factor: 7479806906268800101533676510355191222018383353326313757312482719781824119096199607 prp142 factor: 1779173910194406368495044430112900163130517448824350193582699887366373959502204876568831498399084738877803025912899503244770405792309234842407 [/code] 450M raw rels / 340M unique truncated log attached - many, many errors |
9_266+.C255 factored
433M total relations/328 unique relations built an 18.1M matrix with TD=124. (TD=128 failed)
[CODE]p100 factor: 5950058409801258346590656035622283376874703741333600074436610776077344097537354183518011112549694243 p126 factor: 141043614387058938328670711694241597284131372903913776922629154042338581043105567749265659680754509099486906767486098392096673[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/8qcCh1hW[/url] |
C192_988xx249_11 Results
1 Attachment(s)
Please find attached the results. I was unable to contact Lionel or William due to email bounce backs. Have they changed addresses?
[CODE]p77 factor: 42540925808331363823034680213324772999806051189285254465098316591582635377711 p116 factor: 17301772301809665201147561782654376686987889235547424073058654232715039129322417881016404742310381326498569042597969[/CODE] |
Taking 124^109+109^124 C236 cofactor (15e).
|
[QUOTE=Dubslow;480003]
I'll reserve XY_C234_138_130.[/QUOTE] [code]commencing linear algebra matrix starts at (0, 0) matrix is 16723287 x 16723464 (8081.5 MB) with weight 2359189512 (141.07/col) sparse part has weight 1934555532 (115.68/col) saving the first 48 matrix rows for later matrix includes 64 packed rows matrix is 16723239 x 16723464 (7814.0 MB) with weight 2038792292 (121.91/col) sparse part has weight 1881147400 (112.49/col) using block size 8192 and superblock size 589824 for processor cache size 6144 kB commencing Lanczos iteration (4 threads) memory use: 6702.2 MB restarting at iteration 226766 (dim = 14340037) linear algebra at 85.8%, ETA 44h51mf 16723464 dimensions (85.8%, ETA 44h51m) checkpointing every 60000 dimensions 16723464 dimensions (85.8%, ETA 45h44m) linear algebra completed 16723197 of 16723464 dimensions (100.0%, ETA 0h 0m) lanczos halted after 264460 iterations (dim = 16723239) recovered 42 nontrivial dependencies BLanczosTime: 191155 commencing square root phase reading relations for dependency 1 read 8363190 cycles cycles contain 28790954 unique relations read 28790954 relations multiplying 28790954 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 763.06 million bits initial square root is modulo 7011811 GCD is N, no factor found reading relations for dependency 2 read 8364647 cycles cycles contain 28790682 unique relations read 28790682 relations multiplying 28790682 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 763.05 million bits initial square root is modulo 7010671 GCD is N, no factor found reading relations for dependency 3 read 8360340 cycles cycles contain 28784876 unique relations read 28784876 relations multiplying 28784876 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 762.90 million bits initial square root is modulo 6988483 GCD is 1, no factor found reading relations for dependency 4 read 8361206 cycles cycles contain 28781164 unique relations read 28781164 relations multiplying 28781164 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 762.82 million bits initial square root is modulo 6976267 GCD is 1, no factor found reading relations for dependency 5 read 8359772 cycles cycles contain 28776332 unique relations read 28776332 relations multiplying 28776332 relations multiply complete, coefficients have about 762.68 million bits initial square root is modulo 6956647 sqrtTime: 17485 p81 factor: 603346602623784249384664500586104939216308535845076644442470413922310180379730957 p154 factor: 1448373742983041165762521007216331738695281353809294017350861974660508985534331932389449042257589879218436355868524683515862743041649094657931369097612697 elapsed time 57:57:21[/code] [url]https://pastebin.com/yBa7KBzV[/url] A cursory search indicates C185_226741_43(b) is available. Can anyone confirm? |
[QUOTE=Dubslow;481595]
A cursory search indicates C185_226741_43(b) is available. Can anyone confirm?[/QUOTE] No it is [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=481447&postcount=2489]already reserved[/url]. |
[QUOTE=swellman;481599]No it is [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=481447&postcount=2489]already reserved[/url].[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/search.php?searchid=2208488"]The forum search lies[/URL] |
C200_213xx011_5 factored
About 48 hours to solve a 9.0M matrix using -t 4, with TD=108. (TD=112 failed)
[CODE]p76 factor: 5144702897812972712336871119687690264181833151461035003982738237800125804101 p125 factor: 10002992628750217438777813082098556508545793550535653201516360855790925531429764972498794957641052589341428122053936322007071[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/K5yjVv2e[/url] |
Taking 5869^71-1 (15e) next.
|
I’ll take 124^109+109^124 C236 cofactor. I have several numbers finishing factorization in the next few days. Thanks.
|
[QUOTE=swellman;481653]I’ll take 124^109+109^124 C236 cofactor. I have several numbers finishing factorization in the next few days. Thanks.[/QUOTE]
See [url]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=481591&postcount=2499[/url]. It has about 175 hours remaining in LA. |
My bad! I’ll take 140^67 + 67^140 C234 cofactor. Thanks.
|
My most recent request won't complete downloading until tomorrow noon. I expect that job to be several weeks. I won't be taking anything else for a while. (week+)
|
C185_226741_43b factored
Arbitrary truncation of the relations file at ~237M (unique) built an 8.3M matrix at TD=124.
I also tried maxrels=200M at TD=132 but it built a 9.1M matrix. [CODE]p84 factor: 243646972245917527398974424285777291202244037220313438186210930913596217287688957343 p101 factor: 98874508769183719658924398040077029306564101836030372142491885323002054870456564838390664756657369879[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/xzBZjrHr[/url] |
C190_659xx917_5 factors
1 Attachment(s)
[B]C190_659xx917_5[/B]
[code] p88 factor: 2198482122787599725570047016227081448627462203124419539078036192646097631052654915600231 p103 factor: 2449359543732315658566436703343001714736592747534508971148702399714198087212601423387187247655486778731 [/code]9.38M matrix, 63.5h for LA with 4 threads of i7 3770k factors reported to factordb, log attached (removed the 1000+ errors reading relations) and at [URL]https://pastebin.com/cv7LaE1X[/URL] |
C232_140_59
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
prp88 factor: 1015600794290178045339677744622444324723125512415150095366157801860497781402997662204739 prp145 factor: 2200055435966002290841779743647492015562290183672316177114480404559206587276114691892688659938155734246920493305135238670145921337830405910762743[/code] 439998409 raw / 361641852 unique log attached |
Taking C237_136_71
ETA 21st March |
L1324
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
p62 factor: 23867845640901128437130446610837855015908891381124591132474903 p184 factor: 4544958634634262592608677556779867932495767534080511993087672306260821301355028687614479388221996508357170243773850246545549773434261662731521165357567001345110809000535860833766355521 [/code] 498M raw / 384M unique |
Reserving Phi_3(Phi_29(14401)/59/523/3065713912035839) on 14d. I searched the thread so hopefully I'm not stepping on anyone's toes as I did last time reserving.
|
Reserving C237 from 131^86+86^131 once sieving is finished.
I’ll have two more factorizations next weekend. |
C233_124_115 done
1 Attachment(s)
[code]
p61 factor: 3662098611373672314480749096953214967262656179934311870303279 p64 factor: 9686855998358993472696310879136749387938566512246320006517862677 p108 factor: 518056611559100809104748888163547276352380108859955594376813575188680403872189963362336070764608419292196711 [/code] 119.7 hours on 7 threads E5-2650v2 for a 14.19M matrix at density 132 (134 didn't work). Log attached and at [url]https://pastebin.com/qDYSVwPD[/url] |
Taking C200_1888171_37 next.
|
124^109+109^124 C236 (15e) factored
178 hours to solve a 14.5M matrix using -t 4 w/ TD=136 (TD=140 failed).
269 total relations - 211 unique relations were used. [CODE]p82 factor: 7835751450587373450505052689543278104476873598700588756666427859579209229089606799 p154 factor: 5448374837185894242728176995186111573366175777842443041287932876785279823637857110411917137875480195425864589218146079601310591706819530905944521495087317[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/Lu7EwcgF[/url] |
Taking 3381863410579^19-1.
|
13*2^847-1 is complete:
[code]prp60 factor: 671926372691964944567684641921756166946583499829345780880067 prp134 factor: 62874271068225897139565845418367600949933119173992901486391553372590841575576952726428827674403663190715882560475628528422610351744209 [/code] 640-something-M raw relations yielded 538M unique relations, enough to build a 19.6M matrix of density 134. This took about 430 hours to solve on 5 threads of a busy i7-5820. log at [url]https://pastebin.com/8pGLmnDX[/url] It appears that these SNFS-250+ jobs are easier to sieve as 33LP jobs, but the matrices are 20-30% larger than similar difficulty 32LP jobs. The overall computation is easier as 33LP, but more of the work is done by the matrix solver and less by the cloud. I recently solved a GNFS-175 on my own, as a 15e/33LP job. That needed just 556M raw relations to build a 10M matrix at TD 112. My previous GNFS was C172, needed 529M raw rels to build a 9.0M matrix at TD 104. So far, looks like 33LP is helpful for GNFS much smaller than previously accepted, but for SNFS jobs the matrices might soak up the savings that sieving achieves. |
C200_1888171_37 factored
248M total relation - 206M unique relations built a 7.0M matrix using TD=132.
[CODE]p73 factor: 1576703314367157422239075629965140660678987029084985954813262185950238613 p128 factor: 37392099456849602606929719446864437703194449442724054708001523407885944513694178838756105145479220947466935923236204197060189869[/CODE] [url]https://pastebin.com/nWJy1WTU[/url] |
Taking 134^85+85^134 (15e).
|
| All times are UTC. The time now is 05:35. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.