[QUOTE=jyb;519601]Given the high duplicate rate,[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't think a GNFS job would have a high duplicate rate but I really don't know. I'm just starting to dabble with 32-bit jobs.

[QUOTE=RichD;519622]I wouldn't think a GNFS job would have a high duplicate rate but I really don't know. I'm just starting to dabble with 32-bit jobs.[/QUOTE]

I can't really comment on the theory here. But whether or not there [I]should[/I] be a lot of duplicates, there unquestionably [I]are[/I] a lot of duplicates.

I have noticed in the past that the relations produced by NFS@Home sieving seem to have way more bad lines and duplicates than I get when I do jobs myself. Perhaps there are some benign explanations for this, but I have heard it suggested that it may be caused by various forms of "cheating" when people returns relations to the server.

In any case, when I submit jobs I tend to suggest special-q ranges that produce way more relations than I would try for if I were doing the sieving myself, as a way of getting around this problem.

[QUOTE=jyb;519651]I can't really comment on the theory here. But whether or not there [I]should[/I] be a lot of duplicates, there unquestionably [I]are[/I] a lot of duplicates.

I have noticed in the past that the relations produced by NFS@Home sieving seem to have way more bad lines and duplicates than I get when I do jobs myself. Perhaps there are some benign explanations for this, but I have heard it suggested that it may be caused by various forms of "cheating" when people returns relations to the server.

In any case, when I submit jobs I tend to suggest special-q ranges that produce way more relations than I would try for if I were doing the sieving myself, as a way of getting around this problem.[/QUOTE]

Ah, yes, I am starting to notice that. The bigger the job the more garbage it collects. The longer it is in the queue the more likelihood of mistreatment.

31-bit jobs need more than the expected.

BTW, my 3372531985651_19m1 job built a matrix at TD=132 and should complete on or about Friday, 5 July if all goes well.

Taking C180_159978_10330.

C182_M17_k98 factored
 

[QUOTE=richs;519405]Reserving C182_M17_k98[/QUOTE]

[CODE]p56 factor: 76895458070627070525007761656219867594868038627047528439
p126 factor: 194670777427975176331993953351170360734240081917106572346085377818707289417171889284456923645153422980830974783021883407250207[/CODE]

Approximately 25.7 hours on 2 threads Core i3-2310M with 4 GB memory for a 3.45M matrix at TD = 100.

Full log attached and redacted log (due to numerous relation errors from some cheater) at [URL="https://pastebin.com/xfaHqcLe"]https://pastebin.com/xfaHqcLe[/URL]

Factors added to FDB.

38160408950501_17m1 needs more sieving. Over 35% of the relations are duplicates, and msieve doesn't get very far in filtering before it complains. I'd probably add another 40M.

[B]Done.[/B]

Taking 10m9_251

Taking 10p9_263

Taking C164_3366_2191.

C166_M19_k74 is complete:


[CODE]p54 factor: 387184084614656438987154506853071394996491008532723507
p112 factor: 7858374697721506817025694875934862172411858587345378675715373341089477652165751964689422482397011529641725140733[/CODE]
TD = 122 built a 4.56 M matrix (not TD 125) which took 8h 37m to solve. Log posted at [URL]https://pastebin.com/jN9TzLfp[/URL] and [URL]https://github.com/Dylan1496/nfs-at-home-logs/blob/master/C166_M19_k74.log[/URL].
Reserving 5p3_1425M for post processing.

C164_3366_2191 factored
 

[code]
p54 factor: 308312007300944575027791293633536467795756007147545161
p110 factor: 36997115764656058946624603757199691170627538192760153675664831011355819056889320458078857874833318561030674629
[/code]

[url]https://pastebin.com/N2qMrvy9[/url]