7,3,184+ factored (program: msieve / QS)

Tue Jul 17 20:27:52 2007 prp45 factor: 230211712456086727236098740431820326848865169
Tue Jul 17 20:27:52 2007 prp53 factor: 21747690924422572095566504596391783935025569690433377

Is there a point to using the server at this point since there are 99 digit numbers in it? And one of the factor's ive found has already been found before. Some of the numbers in the ecm server are already factored without being marked as such.

[QUOTE=antiroach;110581]Is there a point to using the server at this point since there are 99 digit numbers in it? And one of the factor's ive found has already been found before. Some of the numbers in the ecm server are already factored without being marked as such.[/QUOTE]I'm on vacation with no access either to my home machines (where all the tables are maintained) or the ECMnet server. I can see dozens of emails piling up but no way of dealing with the factors they contain until I return.

I hope to be able to clear the backlog this coming Sunday when I return home.

(It's not clear whether by "the server" you mean the ECMnet server or Tom's allocation server. I can't make meaningful comments about the status of the latter.)


Paul

Oh ok i see. Thanks for the update. And yes i meant the ECMnet server.

It seems that I'm going to have to rid up some connection between the sieving-reservations server and the ECMnet server; I haven't been keeping exact statistics, but it seems that more often than not an ECMnet factor with a cofactor of less than seventy digits has already been found by sieve methods.

Should numbers be removed from ECMnet on reservation-for-sieving or only on complete factorisation?

In the last ten days ECMnet has sent me four factored-with-cofactor and 35 factored-to-completion messages; I suspect the sievers have done about the same. I'm averaging one sieve run a day, but my resources are mostly devoted to SNFS on Fib(1009) at the moment.

[QUOTE=fivemack;110862]It seems that I'm going to have to rid up some connection between the sieving-reservations server and the ECMnet server; I haven't been keeping exact statistics, but it seems that more often than not an ECMnet factor with a cofactor of less than seventy digits has already been found by sieve methods.

Should numbers be removed from ECMnet on reservation-for-sieving or only on complete factorisation?

In the last ten days ECMnet has sent me four factored-with-cofactor and 35 factored-to-completion messages; I suspect the sievers have done about the same. I'm averaging one sieve run a day, but my resources are mostly devoted to SNFS on Fib(1009) at the moment.[/QUOTE]I've been back home for less than an hour and have just powered up a few of my systems. The update is still planned for tomorrow.

For the record, I try to disable the composites on the ECMnet server when they are reserved (but this can be unreliable --- I have to check Tom's page interactively because it does not email me with reservation requests) and certainly when they have been factored by other means.

However, this necessarily breaks down when I'm unavailable to maintain tables and servers with updated information. Unfortunate, but if you want 24/7/365 coverage you're going to have to pay for someone to provide that service. I can only offer a "best efforts" service.


Paul

[QUOTE=xilman;110874]I've been back home for less than an hour and have just powered up a few of my systems. The update is still planned for tomorrow.

For the record, I try to disable the composites on the ECMnet server when they are reserved (but this can be unreliable --- I have to check Tom's page interactively because it does not email me with reservation requests) and certainly when they have been factored by other means.

However, this necessarily breaks down when I'm unavailable to maintain tables and servers with updated information. Unfortunate, but if you want 24/7/365 coverage you're going to have to pay for someone to provide that service. I can only offer a "best efforts" service.


Paul[/QUOTE]The update has been posted and the ECMnet server mostly updated. That is, I've removed all the factored numbers except for the 9,x tables. Sorry, but I ran out of time. I'll clean up the remaining ones later.


There are now 190 composites left to be completed, which should be enough to keep people busy for a few weeks.


Paul

[QUOTE=xilman;110964]The update has been posted and the ECMnet server mostly updated. That is, I've removed all the factored numbers except for the 9,x tables. Sorry, but I ran out of time. I'll clean up the remaining ones later.[/QUOTE]Now cleaned up.

Another half-dozen or so factorizations have come in since this morning. I'll deal with them once 've caught up with some other business.


Paul

8,7,157+.c105 factored.
[CODE]Number: 8_7_157P
N=658903490198935205525951576469328883746065168247752150558345579207942320285005726159192414625392142023591
( 105 digits)
SNFS difficulty: 141 digits.
Divisors found:
r1=4977069513434478523994025955580250388877503 (pp43)
r2=132387841564272628942153061778842444431327990843955299641468697 (pp63)
Version: GGNFS-0.77.1-20060722-pentium4
Total time: 14.46 hours.
Scaled time: 9.22 units (timescale=0.638).[/CODE]

sqrt do behave much better on quintics...

7,2,205+ is completely factored
 

c117 | 7,2,205+

[code]
N=200333876727702416788441685966101816553391147071699098321848838093217586751673364308339934862156931586785039120417591
( 117 digits)
SNFS difficulty: 138 digits.
Divisors found:
r1=195230019724624241448488942462665763233447036929497842201 (pp57)
r2=1026142787929219417160397911500069982694489087989919406717391 (pp61)
Version: GGNFS-0.77.1-20060513-pentium4
Total time: 48.70 hours.
Scaled time: 61.70 units (timescale=1.267).
[/code]

ECM MISSS
 

[QUOTE=VolMike;111472]

<snip>

[/QUOTE]

Here's an ECM MISS

9,8,149+ C134 = p38.p97

p38 = 36615299050092870810410952296103455323


We should not be missing factors under 40 digits......