[QUOTE=Madpoo;391216]I'm going to give the web server a quick reboot. I was waiting for a nice quiet time post-Christmas, this seems like it.

It'll be down in about 5 minutes from now (midnight PST) and I think it'll be about 5-10 minutes before it's back up.[/QUOTE]

It's back online. I really need to work on my estimates of how long these things take. It was more like 20-25 minutes. Oh well, enjoy! :smile:

Why would a result be apparently duplicated?
[url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=1304129&exp_hi=&text=1&full=1[/url]

[CODE]Exponent Status Data
1304129 Factored 4600967113;11853991159525255209823127;57897752996678449646117743
1304129 History 2015-01-12;alpertron;F-PM1;Factor: 686319452179003194869464323300598630359933246442361 / (P-1, B1=500000, B2=15000000, E=12)
1304129 History 2015-01-12;alpertron;F-PM1;Factor: 686319452179003194869464323300598630359933246442361 / (P-1, B1=500000, B2=15000000, E=12)[/CODE]
Also, I didn't see that big factor listed in the summary of factors.
Perhaps this is another problem related to recent restyling?

Also since the latest version of the HTML
 

If I have duplicate assignments (these are valid).... duplicate ECM assignments; it only lists it once with the Completion date of the last.

Looks composite
 

[QUOTE=snme2pm1;392295]
Also, I didn't see that big factor listed in the summary of factors.[/QUOTE]

Looks like it's composite...
[url]http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/1304129[/url]

It's a side effect of the way the results are parsed for submitted composite factors: the composite factor is broken into component prime factors and recorded as two prime-factor submissions. That, in combination with how the detailed result history is shown, shows two submissions for a 168-bit factor, when it would be more clear if it showed the two entries as being for the 83- and 85-bit factors.

It is not just you, mersenne.ca seems down from [URL="http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.mersenne.ca"]here[/URL] too.

[QUOTE=LaurV;393490]It is not just you, mersenne.ca seems down from [URL="http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.mersenne.ca"]here[/URL] too.[/QUOTE]

It's just you. [url]http://www.mersenne.ca[/url] is up.

When using the form

[url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/[/url]

and ticking the box to activate the 'Output TF worktodo format' option and TF to 2^ is set to SOME_VALUE the result seems to be in the form of

[CODE]Factor=N/A,exponent,SOME_VALUE-1,SOME_VALUE[/CODE]

whereas one would expect it to be

[CODE]Factor=N/A,exponent,LOWER_CURRENT_VALUE_FACTORED_TO,SOME_VALUE[/CODE]

As a result now some exponents may now be factored up to certain values with missing blocks like:

exponent factored from 1 bit up to 69 bits and from 70 bits to 71 bits.

Can someone run a check on the database to see how many exponents have missing ranges?

Actually, this is only a database record issue. I think that the server will never accept your result, if it is not the next bitlevel (you cannot successfully submit TF123-124 if an exponent is Tfed to 64) - hence the problem is only with lost records for intermediate bitlevels, but not with the actual work done there. This is not missing work. Or do you just want to know how frequent the problem is? Quite common :smile:.

[QUOTE=tha;394118]the result seems to be in the form of[CODE]Factor=N/A,exponent,SOME_VALUE-1,SOME_VALUE[/CODE]whereas one would expect it to be[CODE]Factor=N/A,exponent,LOWER_CURRENT_VALUE_FACTORED_TO,SOME_VALUE[/CODE][/QUOTE]Looking at the code that generates the worktodo line, I don't believe you're correct:[code]if ($row['no_factor_to_bits'] < $_REQUEST['tftobits']) {
$output .= 'Factor=N/A'.','.$row['exponent'].','.$row['no_factor_to_bits'].','.$_REQUEST['tftobits']."\r\n";[/code]It's generating the worktodo line from the current factoring limit to the level specified (assuming that's higher than the current TF).

I don't have ready access to the database to check for missing ranges. Do you have a specific example of one such exponent?

Ah, I now see. It was late last night when I posted it. Some data is missing in the mersenne.ca database, but not in the mersenne.org database. We should still find a way to synchronize these databases better now that mersenne.org has been upgraded, or copy more of the .ca functionality to the .org server.