All residues for the interval 100-200k are attached (some are DC'd).
There are no primes in the first 200,000 terms.

Just FYI something is wrong with counting of completed units on the server (if I understand right how this works). I had 7 assignments from which I finished 4 (and another 2 will be finished in minutes). After the first 2 reported, my counter was 2. The third report brought the counter to 7 (?!?) and the forth to 8, which is actual value.

Yeah, thanks, I know. I'll talk to Mark about that - this happens when I call "91" or "92" (I run "5" periodically, as the sieves are still running...):
[QUOTE]PRPNet Admin menu
==========
1. Enter new server address (localhost)
2. Enter new server port # (1200)
3. Enter admin password
4. Add new candidates from ABC file
[B]5. Remove candidates based upon factors file [/B] [ <-- very helpful. Kudos to Mark!]
6. Add search ranges
10. Expire work unit
[B]91. Recompute user and team statistics[/B]
92. Recompute server statistics[/QUOTE]
I think all the work in progress is counted as done, if I manually call 91. If tasks come in gradually, the stats are growing differently.

I would have to see the series of updates made to the database for each completed test.

I'll send you the log... I have the server's output on screen, I think it is likely mirrored into the log file, right?

As for the code, I haven't looked in this part. The priority of this issue is very low; I am fine with giving users credit for the work in progress! :rolleyes: It is only on the website and measured in magic blueballstones, anyway!

[QUOTE=Batalov;413662]I'll send you the log... I have the server's output on screen, I think it is likely mirrored into the log file, right?

As for the code, I haven't looked in this part. The priority of this issue is very low; I am fine with giving users credit for the work in progress! :rolleyes: It is only on the website and measured in magic blueballstones, anyway![/QUOTE]

You'll need to set the appropriate debug level when starting the server so that it outputs the SQL that is executed.

Ok, will do at some point.

The candidate pool count crossed the 1% boundary (that's [URL="http://99.121.249.54:1200/server_stats.html"]7998 candidates[/URL] now in the 800k interval - [200000,999999]), going south.
Still sieving some more.

The search slowly continues (thanks to all contributors!)
The current watermark is around 458,000 --
[URL]http://smarandache.ddns.net:1200/pending_tests.html[/URL]

(the IP is the same; for those who run clients - no need to change)

A little bird tells me that some time soon the candidates for the range Sm(1,xxx,xxx) might be needed. In preparation for that, I fired up some new sieving (up to n<2,000,000)...
[CODE]52221149 | Sm(1000291)
192261497 | Sm(1000183)
600085427 | Sm(1204867)
616573151 | Sm(1041769)
1061345891 | Sm(1000207)
...[/CODE]

This is the least Smarandache prime to base b = 2 to 75. I checked the n (the number for consecutive numbers) to 1024, no primes found for b = 4, 10, 13, 18, 19, 22, ...

Also see [URL]http://oeis.org/A244424[/URL], smallest n such that the number formed by concatenating n consecutive natural numbers beginning with k (in base 10) is prime, no primes found for k = 1, 10, 21, 22, 24, ...

Also see [URL]http://oeis.org/A262300[/URL], smallest n such that the number formed by concatenating the decimal numbers 1, 2, 3, ..., n (in base 10), but omitting k, is prime, no primes found for k = 13, 15, ...