[QUOTE=MisterBitcoin;461410]
It hurts that such an stupid thing an occur twice. I hope you still thrust me.[/QUOTE]
What is it that happened, twice? Can you explain more detail than "some kind of bug"? I'm not aware of any bugs in the srsieve family.
Edit: Never mind, I saw the discussion in the 100-250 reservation thread. Strange.

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;461437]What is it that happened, twice? Can you explain more detail than "some kind of bug"? I'm not aware of any bugs in the srsieve family.[/QUOTE]


After some tests I can say it wasn´t a bug. While making the sieve-init file (which holds the sequences) I must have a "+" setted instead of an "-".

My first guess was, that this was caused by a bug, because I was sure that I haven´t maked any typos. (Well, I´m also douple checking my files. In this two cases I must have missed that.)


Anyway it´s not a bug.

I wasted 3 month worth CPU time.

I´ll restart my work on SR30, this might take some time.

OK I have changed RS218 back to "in progress" in the first post here. I have left RS30 as "in progress". I have removed RS218 sieve files from the pages.

Reserving R708 for sieving from n=30k to 50k.

Quick update on my sieving work.

I was focusing on my R3 reservation, so any other reservations were a bit delayed.
The new SR 218 should be done in a few days (74,6%) and SR30 will be restarted after this is finished.
R880 is running, I´ll also check for alg. factors which seems to occur on that base. (using the script from batalov.)

SR 218 reached p=35T, booth files attached.

Restarting SR 30, this should take 2-3 months.

R708
 

R708 is sieved to P=5e12. The sec/factor from sieving is sufficiently high to warrant switching to prp testing.

[QUOTE=MisterBitcoin;463151]SR 218 reached p=35T, booth files attached.

Restarting SR 30, this should take 2-3 months.[/QUOTE]

MisterBitcoin,

I/we have been noticing some various problems with your sieve files. Most of the time it is incorrect sieve depths. The first time with Riesel/Sierp base 218, you had the k's reversed and the files had to be completely resieved. This 2nd time it appears that you only have the headers in the files flipped. The k's for the Riesel file should be for the Sierp file and the k's for the Sierp file should be for the Riesel file. This is the second time that BOINC has tried to test base 218 and it was still incorrect.

As an FYI 35000000000000:P:1:218:257 is for Sierp base 218 and 35000000000000:M:1:218:258 is for Riesel base 218.

Unfortunately I must reject your base 218 files once again and remove them from the pages. It appears that they might be correct if the headers are flipped but I cannot accept them as they may contain other problems. I'll leave it up to you if you want to sieve them a 3rd time starting from scratch.

Please take more time and be more careful when posting things as it causes BOINC and me more work. I'm going to suggest that you not reserve so much work at a time. In the future I will be inspecting your sieving work much more closely before posting it on the web pages.


Thank you,
Gary

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;464992]MisterBitcoin,

I/we have been noticing some various problems with your sieve files. Most of the time it is incorrect sieve depths. The first time with Riesel/Sierp base 218, you had the k's reversed and the files had to be completely resieved. This 2nd time it appears that you only have the headers in the files flipped. The k's for the Riesel file should be for the Sierp file and the k's for the Sierp file should be for the Riesel file. This is the second time that BOINC has tried to test base 218 and it was still incorrect.

As an FYI 35000000000000:P:1:218:257 is for Sierp base 218 and 35000000000000:M:1:218:258 is for Riesel base 218.

Unfortunately I must reject your base 218 files once again and remove them from the pages. It appears that they might be correct if the headers are flipped but I cannot accept them as they may contain other problems. I'll leave it up to you if you want to sieve them a 3rd time starting from scratch.

Please take more time and be more careful when posting things as it causes BOINC and me more work. I'm going to suggest that you not reserve so much work at a time. In the future I will be inspecting your sieving work much more closely before posting it on the web pages.


Thank you,
Gary[/QUOTE]

Luckily no tests were being made. I only tested some runtimes of different ranges on local side.

Can I reserve that ranges ( both S/R) side: it is too hot for me to make LLR but sieve is much colder: It will be done in 10-15 days from now

[QUOTE=pepi37;465029]Can I reserve that ranges ( both S/R) side: it is too hot for me to make LLR but sieve is much colder: It will be done in 10-15 days from now[/QUOTE]

OK I am reserving sieving only for R218 and S218 for n=200K-500K for you.