Noticed that sometimes I getting the same TF-LMH exponent twice. Wondering if these exponents are being double-checked. If yes, then shouldn't another CPU do double-check and not the original CPU? All of this is under login of Squeeky-Squirrel (yep there was a typo when the account was created).

[QUOTE=harlee;119294]Noticed that sometimes I getting the same TF-LMH exponent twice. Wondering if these exponents are being double-checked. If yes, then shouldn't another CPU do double-check and not the original CPU? All of this is under login of Squeeky-Squirrel (yep there was a typo when the account was created).[/QUOTE]


I supposedly fixed this about 6 hours ago.

[QUOTE=Prime95;119296]I supposedly fixed this about 6 hours ago.[/QUOTE]

OK, my message was based on last night's data. I'll let you know if it continues or not.

I haven't been able to get work all day today (14+ hours)... should I email Scott?[code]
[Nov 26 19:22]
[Nov 26 19:22] == Info: Closing connection #0
[Nov 26 19:22] RESPONSE:
[Nov 26 19:22] pnErrorResult=
[Nov 26 19:22] pnErrorDetail=ar Insert t_gimps_results_log failed: JamesHeinrich GUID: c4c1132ea5fa74fce4c0e3712cb9ed2d, exponent: 1270097, C2D_CPU_GHz_days:
[Nov 26 19:22] ==END==
[Nov 26 19:22]
[Nov 26 19:22] PnErrorResult value missing. Full response was:
[Nov 26 19:22] pnErrorResult=
[Nov 26 19:22] pnErrorDetail=ar Insert t_gimps_results_log failed: JamesHeinrich GUID: c4c1132ea5fa74fce4c0e3712cb9ed2d, exponent: 1270097, C2D_CPU_GHz_days:
[Nov 26 19:22] ==END==
[Nov 26 19:22]
[Nov 26 19:22] Visit http://mersenneforum.org for help.
[Nov 26 19:22] Will try contacting server again in 8 minutes.
[/code]

I cant send a PM or email to u.. System ownt let me.. I'd like a code please..

[QUOTE=Storm;119305]I cant send a PM or email to u.. System ownt let me.. I'd like a code please..[/QUOTE]

To stress test or use the old v4 primenet server, no special code is needed.

To beta test the new server, create a file called prime.txt and put the line "UseV4=0" in it. You can choose any work preference except double-checking.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;119303]I haven't been able to get work all day today (14+ hours)... should I email Scott?[/QUOTE]

I haven't had any troubles. I'll email Scott for you.

I fixed the blank error result value. Email to me the prime.log http URL for these kinds of errors.

I've completed two P-1 tests: I found a factor in one, and didn't find a factor in the other. The factor I found was worth 1.4583GHz-days; the 2 days I spent looking (but not finding) the other factor was worth 0.0000GHz-days. Is that the intended value of NF-PM1? If so, that'll greatly discourage users from doing P-1 since it's so "unprofitable".

[quote=James Heinrich;119333]I've completed two P-1 tests: I found a factor in one, and didn't find a factor in the other. The factor I found was worth 1.4583GHz-days; the 2 days I spent looking (but not finding) the other factor was worth 0.0000GHz-days. Is that the intended value of NF-PM1? If so, that'll greatly discourage users from doing P-1 since it's so "unprofitable".[/quote]
That reminds me of another credit-related problem with TF-LMH. For example, I have 1828 numbers that have found factors, and 1477 that haven't. It gives 0.0016 GHz days for all of the ones with factors, and .1815 for the ones without factors. I know it's a good bit less processing power to find a factor than to not (since, on average, you would find factors earlier than even half way...with P-1 would you find factors, on average, half way through? Where is that point with TF?), but it seems to assume you found something very early, and awards you accordingly, instead of even considering that you spent a while on it before you found it.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;119081]M46000231 has a factor: 64450044967347486511[/QUOTE]hmmm... I was (somewhat) certain this exponent was doing P-1 under the assumption that no factors < 2^66, and yet the factor found is 65.8 bits :unsure: