Results not needed?
 

I have been getting warnings from MISFIT with messages similar to the following:

[CODE]
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93701833[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M[M]93701833[/M] WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93701837[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93701869[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
[/CODE]

[CODE]PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93443533[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M[M]93443533[/M] WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93443663[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93443677[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.[/CODE]

It seems like sometimes part or all of the result submitted are return as "not needed." All of the assignments I've been getting lately are fetched by MISFIT. When I re-submit these manually, it seems like GIMPS still gives me the "not needed" message but the result was accepted.

This issue happened at least twice on 2 of the 3 computers running MISFIT w/ MFAKTC.

Anyone familiar with what the problem is, am I missing something? My best theory would be either someone else already submitted it, or MISFIT actually tried to submit the same result twice over a very short amount of time.

Thanks!

It looks like you already turned in 93443533 on May 23. So if you resubmitted it, today, it was not needed.

5/19 6/5
 

The first 3 were logged 6/5, in which I discovered today, hence GIMPS shows 6/6.
[CODE]
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93701833[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M[M]93701833[/M] WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93701837[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93701869[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4160 GHZ-DAYS.
[/CODE]

These 3 were logged 5/19, I'm assuming I discovered it on 5/25 and submitted manually.
[CODE]PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93443533[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M[M]93443533[/M] WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93443663[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M[M]93443677[/M] FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
CPU CREDIT IS 20.4725 GHZ-DAYS.[/CODE]

Sorry for the confusion there :yucky: was just wondering if this is a common problem.

This has happened to me also a couple of times. Even though MISFIT reports a "not needed" result, it still is recorded in the exponent status results same as the previous poster.

In addition, when I look at my PrimeNet work results details, the assigned credit for the factoring work is ZERO GHz-Days.

The two exponents were [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=55542469&full=1"]55542469[/URL] and [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=55560221&full=1"]55560221[/URL]

[QUOTE=Chuck;518696]This has happened to me also a couple of times. Even though MISFIT reports a "not needed" result, it still is recorded in the exponent status results same as the previous poster.

In addition, when I look at my PrimeNet work results details, the assigned credit for the factoring work is ZERO GHz-Days.

The two exponents were [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=55542469&full=1"]55542469[/URL] and [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=55560221&full=1"]55560221[/URL][/QUOTE]

Wonder why this happens. I guess just have to manually upload the ones that was rejected by the server every once in a while :smile:

[QUOTE=dcheuk;518841]Wonder why this happens.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure why this is happening. But just to put on the table, GPU72 will never assign a duplicate candidate. The only exception to this is if someone un-reserves an assignment, but then submits the results afterwards.

[QUOTE=chalsall;518883]I'm not sure why this is happening. But just to put on the table, GPU72 will never assign a duplicate candidate. The only exception to this is if someone un-reserves an assignment, but then submits the results afterwards.[/QUOTE]

Next time when I encounter this I'm going to check the exponent status before manually resubmitting it.

Thanks guys.

Apparently over the spread of last 24-48 hours, almost if not all the results submitted by one of my computers (thru MISFIT) was rejected by the server deemed 'result not necessary.' I put it in on manual result page manually and then realized someone has already submitted these results so I didn't submit it twice.

The assignments were obtained thru MISFIT/GPU72 so I was assuming it was 'assigned to me.' Upon checking all these assignments were completed yesterday by a user named 'Nesowa.'

I don't mind poaching (even though it is kind of rude to some degree if this is what it is) but it also seem like a waste of computing time.

So did the server double assigned these assignments or is it just this guy working on his own agenda?

[CODE]NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300089[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300193[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300349[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300853[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300811[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300967[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300437[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300631[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69301201[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69301247[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69301301[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS][/CODE]

[QUOTE=dcheuk;525126]Apparently over the spread of last 24-48 hours, almost if not all the results submitted by one of my computers (thru MISFIT) was rejected by the server deemed 'result not necessary.' I put it in on manual result page manually and then realized someone has already submitted these results so I didn't submit it twice.

The assignments were obtained thru MISFIT/GPU72 so I was assuming it was 'assigned to me.' Upon checking all these assignments were completed yesterday by a user named 'Nesowa.'

I don't mind poaching (even though it is kind of rude to some degree if this is what it is) but it also seem like a waste of computing time.

So did the server double assigned these assignments or is it just this guy working on his own agenda?

[CODE]NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300089[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300193[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300349[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300853[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300811[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300967[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300437[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69300631[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69301201[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69301247[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
NO FACTOR FOR M[M]69301301[/M] FROM 2^74 TO 2^75 [MFAKTC 0.21 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS][/CODE][/QUOTE]

Out of curiousity I pulled the worktodo file in the MISFIT folder from the same computer, and to my (not) surprise, the work that was fetched on 9-1-2019 from GPU72 has already been completed by the same user named 'Nesowa':

[CODE]Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301549[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301627[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301697[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301733[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301789[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301927[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301937[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69301951[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69302027[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69302033[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69302117[/M],74,75
Factor=2019-9-1,[M]69302327[/M],74,75[/CODE]

I have erased the worktodo file since these assignments has been completed. For now I will have MISFIT fetch work from GIMPS instead.

[QUOTE=dcheuk;525126]I don't mind poaching (even though it is kind of rude to some degree if this is what it is) but it also seem like a waste of computing time. So did the server double assigned these assignments or is it just this guy working on his own agenda?[/QUOTE]

The latter.

Once the DCTF work to 74 bits in 53M was fully assigned, I brought in candidates in 69M to take up to 75. These were properly registered with Primenet, and at the time no TF'ing work was being done in the 6xM ranges by anyone except Wayne.

You were assigned a batch at 2019-09-01 15:22:13 UTC. And then the next day Nesowa completed a bunch. The good news is it appears this was a one-off; he's not completed any additional work there.

Sorry about that, although there's not much I can do when people work "off-the-books". Again, these were reserved from Primenet before being given to you, so even getting the work from Primenet would not have prevented this.

Lastly, if it's any consolation, you did get the credit on GPU72 for the work wasted.

[QUOTE=chalsall;525130]The latter.

Once the DCTF work to 74 bits in 53M was fully assigned, I brought in candidates in 69M to take up to 75. These were properly registered with Primenet, and at the time no TF'ing work was being done in the 6xM ranges by anyone except Wayne.

You were assigned a batch at 2019-09-01 15:22:13 UTC. And then the next day Nesowa completed a bunch. The good news is it appears this was a one-off; he's not completed any additional work there.

Sorry about that, although there's not much I can do when people work "off-the-books". Again, these were reserved from Primenet before being given to you, so even getting the work from Primenet would not have prevented this.

Lastly, if it's any consolation, you did get the credit on GPU72 for the work wasted.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for clearing that up.

Yep I see it on GPU72 I got the credit for the work for both lists above. Lol

As a note, the server will accept overlapping TF results as long as you increase the bit level. In other words, you will still get credit by submitting "no factor from 2^74 to 2^76" results. Just make sure you actually factor to 76 bits because submitting fake results isn't cool.

Or if you don't want to factor to 76 bits, you could ask George to manually insert the results into the database. Just keep in mind that it sometimes takes a while for him to respond to these requests.

[QUOTE=ixfd64;525140]As a note, the server will accept overlapping TF results as long as you increase the bit level. In other words, you will still get credit by submitting "no factor from 2^74 to 2^76" results. Just make sure you actually factor to 76 bits because submitting fake results isn't cool.

Or if you don't want to factor to 76 bits, you could ask George to manually insert the results into the database. Just keep in mind that it sometimes takes a while for him to respond to these requests.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for pointing it out. Didn't know that, guess I could have done that. :yucky:

Nesowa is kinda (in)famous for doing that. It happened in the past few times, fortunately he doesn't do it too often.

Someone might want to nicely ask him to refrain from poaching exponents. Anyone know his forum username?

[QUOTE=ixfd64;525437]Someone might want to nicely ask him to refrain from poaching exponents. Anyone know his forum username?[/QUOTE]Aaron could provide data via PM to a mod that would open the possibility of find the user.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;525443]Aaron could provide data via PM to a mod that would open the possibility of find the user.[/QUOTE]

Why not cut out the middle man and have Aaron directly email the user? I'm sure GIMPS has an email for all registered users.

[QUOTE=axn;525448]Why not cut out the middle man and have Aaron directly email the user? I'm sure GIMPS has an email for all registered users.[/QUOTE]I am not sure that Aaron has access to the data needed on the forum side. (He is not a super mod, just a moderate mod).

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;525467]I am not sure that Aaron has access to the data needed on the forum side. (He is not a super mod, just a moderate mod).[/QUOTE]

That's my point - forum is the middleman here.

EDIT:- IMO, this is not forum's business, this is GIMPS business. The user might not even be registered on the forum.