[QUOTE=drkirkby;581394]I completed a PRP test with proof of [M]M102164971[/M]. It needs the certificate checked.[/QUOTE]That probably was a true statement at the time. But unnecessary and not useful. And imagine if every completed PRP with proof generation was accompanied by such a needless forum post, how very cluttered certain threads in the forum might become. Handling such mundane and ephemeral data is the proper function of the PrimeNet server, not appropriate to the forum threads.
[QUOTE=Uncwilly;581404]There is no need to add the M in front of the number when using the [C][M][/C] tags. [/QUOTE]I think the form M[M]102164971[/M] is best (when not a part of a work request or acceptance list in worktodo entry form). Tastes vary.

[QUOTE]Your post was not to: [C]requests for DC and TC's and claim of exponents.[/C] as in post #1 There is no cause to post this as noted below.
Because of the last sentence of the next quote.
Not only does it happen automatically, the PrimeNet server must be involved between the person that does the PRP and the one that runs the cert. But, to know that requires reading. Also, there is no manual assignment type for certs. :book::rtfm:[/QUOTE]:goodposting:... and also requires comprehension, memory, and application of good judgment.

[QUOTE=drkirkby;581407]I may have put this in the wrong thread by mistake.[/QUOTE]There appears to be a consensus, and I concur, that putting a specific request for manual undertaking, of a work type that is only available by automatic assignment, not available for manual assignment, in any forum thread is a mistake.
[QUOTE](Yes, I am human, and I do make mistakes).[/QUOTE]As do we all. And you seem sometimes to be particularly diligent about demonstrating it.
[QUOTE]There was a thread by Uncwilly requesting double-checks of some dubious exponents. ... I decided to help out and check one of the exponents on the suspect list.[/QUOTE]Effective contribution to the joint effort is always welcome.[QUOTE]I did comment that I had started the P-1 by mistake. I [B]realised[/B] (Brit spelling?) my error, but decided to let P-1 complete, as I was keen to know how much RAM would be used on stage 2. It was only 190 GB or so, which was far less than the 340 GB or so for a similar sized exponent a couple of weeks ago.[/QUOTE](Yes, you've got a lot of ram in your one expensive system. And mention the outsized ram or corecount peculiarly frequently. Why is that?)

Such extreme RAM quantity may mildly speed factoring but is unnecessary for normal or even gigabit size exponent P-1. Such large ram allocations might be useful for gigadigit or F33 P-1 stage 2 factoring when suitable software becomes available. Wavefront exponents can be satisfactorily P-1 factored in systems with as little as 2GB ram. I've run up to 1G or even M[URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/1000000007"]1G+7[/URL] P-1 on 16GB of GPU ram in a few GPU days. (Only once >1G in response to an absurdly high M52 guess. Don't do more such, as there's nowhere to report them via scripting. James Heinrich generously manually entered that high P-1 in the mersenne.ca database, on the condition that I not do it again, a very reasonable position. There are better uses for his time, than acting as a clerk for not-needed-next-century results.)
[QUOTE]I think the other one had erroneously [STRIKE]be[/STRIKE] [I]been[/I] issued by the server [STRIKE]indicting[/STRIKE] [I]indicating[/I] it would [STRIKE]safe[/STRIKE] [I]save[/I] 2 primality tests, so probably B1 and B2 were larger, requiring more RAM. I was keen to experiment, so let it run.

Personally I think the Mersenne numbers look better with the M, so I prefer [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=M102164971&full=1"]M102164971[/URL] to [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=M102164971&full=1"]102164971[/URL], So that was a conscious decision.

My comment about the certificate was just to highlight the fact that the prime/composite nature of the Mersenne number had not been fully settled at that point. I do know the server issues the certificates, so the comment about reading more was not called for.[/QUOTE]Please be open to coaching. A defensive reaction is understandable but works against hearing and taking to heart the coaching.[QUOTE]
Whilst one can't get a manual assignment of verifying the proof, I [U]suspect [/U]if one was determined to do so, one could probably get an assignment for a specific exponent n by putting the following in local.txt
[CODE]
GetMinExponent=n
GetMaxExponent=n
[/CODE][/QUOTE]Cert assignments can be quite fleeting. (Ben Delo, curtisc, and a few other top producers hoover up many of them fully automatically.) It's easy to miss the window of opportunity to obtain a handpicked exponent's Cert assignment, and leave an mprime worker idle for hours for lack of work as a result of such an attempt at capturing a specific ~1.6 GHzD Cert assignment. In the interest of productivity for the hardware and the participant, I'd advise against attempting it.

We continue to respond to your posts, with coaching posts, in the declining hope that it will pay off in the long run.

I took these:

PRP=1,2,[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=107793883&full=1"]107793883[/URL],-1
PRP=1,2,[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=107957713&full=1"]107957713[/URL],-1 (2 suspect LL's)

and

PRP=1,2,[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=90200717&full=1"]90200717[/URL],-1 (2 PRP results with shift 0)

The list has been updated.

[URL]https://mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=580729&postcount=635[/URL] done; 3 eliminated by 4 P-1 factors found, 1 of which could have been found by TF to 81 bits first. [M]332327371[/M] [M]332328103[/M] [M]332328287[/M]

Lots of new Cat 1 exponents. All above M48.

Cat 1
DoubleCheck=[M]57906071[/M],76,1 not available, drkirkby did matching TC

Took:
DoubleCheck=[M]57934507[/M],76,1
DoubleCheck=[M]57939127[/M],76,1
DoubleCheck=[M]57939169[/M],74,1
DoubleCheck=[M]57973771[/M],74,1
DoubleCheck=[M]57987997[/M],76,1
All are above Mp48*.

[QUOTE=kriesel;581980]Cat 1
DoubleCheck=[M]57906071[/M],76,1 not available, drkirkby did matching TC[/QUOTE]
When I las updated the list there was no assignment indicated on that exponent. Looks like somebody has decide to not read this thread and flout the rules. So much for the pledge to not poach.
:groan:

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;581989]When I las updated the list there was no assignment indicated on that exponent. Looks like somebody has decide to not read this thread and flout the rules. So much for the pledge to not poach.
:groan:[/QUOTE]I thought poaching was taking work assigned to someone else. I checked, and the exponent was not assigned to anyone.

I did not realise that one needed to state the exponents one was going to test. I see the text "[B][COLOR=Red][U]Always register your claims right away[/U][/COLOR][/B]. which I never understood the meaning of. I'm [B]now [/B]interpreting as meaning you want people to state the exponent they will test. Sorry, but I think that could be expressed a bit more clearly.

I assumed that the server would take care of two people trying to do the same thing, as they would not get an assignment. Maybe it's different with double-checks. Looking at my log, I don't see an assignment ID being issued, so I'm now starting to see what the problem is.

Sorry, but I think it could be clearer. Putting it in red does not help if the meaning is not clear.

I have a few Cat 2 exponents from this thread that I'm pausing work on for a week or two during the heatwave. The computer they're running on shares a circuit with my portable AC and blew the breaker last night.

You should be good. If you need to, get a manual extension to the assignments. I trust you.

Elementary my dear Watson. If you don't say loud and clear what you are doing, other people don't know, and they will do the same work. Sometimes you win, as you are faster, sometimes you lose, as the other guy is faster in reporting the results, but in any case, one of you will waste the time and inflate in vain the electricity bill.
This activity is frown about. Some people get really upset. So, please, PLEASE, say what you intend to do, and keep your commitments once you commit to something (i.e. don't reserve the work and then forget to do it). That will make everybody happy, you included.