[QUOTE=Thomas11;289708]Yes, the "progress.txt" file is updated every minute.
So after stopping it automatically restarts from where it was interrupted.[/QUOTE]

That was a really nice stupid question I made, sorry.
I'm running the new version but I can't tell if it is quicker.

R 173209662066983 66 100/7120 110/10000 K=96802205629261512580025459205 iteration=60 I=18431 Fri Feb 17 18:25:37 2012

That's already a very nice sequence.
Well done, Carlos!

Now try to find some more and perhaps some 115+/10000 sequences.
The best known sequence is a 121/10000, found by Robert.
Try to beet this!

[QUOTE=Thomas11;289850]That's already a very nice sequence.
Well done, Carlos!

Now try to find some more and perhaps some 115+/10000 sequences.
The best known sequence is a 121/10000, found by Robert.
Try to beet this![/QUOTE]

Thomas,

I think that's my highest so far but I only have been running E=66 for the last 20 hours or so, so I am not expecting nothing exciting.
Let's see what happens in the future. Expect every week a backup of my work folder.

Carlos

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;289853]Expect every week a backup of my work folder.
[/QUOTE]

A status report once in a week is okay.

Also do not underestimate the value of the "recordtable" files.
We are still hoping for a Cunningham Chain of length 12.
So, if you see a "12 12" in one of your recordtables -- that's it!

[QUOTE=Thomas11;289855]A status report once in a week is okay.

Also do not underestimate the value of the "recordtable" files.
We are still hoping for a Cunningham Chain of length 12.
So, if you see a "12 12" in one of your recordtables -- that's it![/QUOTE]

No "12 12" yet in my recordtables.

I got a 13/13 a little while back, so it is 14/14 we would like to see.

Nice start, pinhodecarlos. From the tables you will see 110+/10000 only 120 times or so. Taken higher it might improve. My cut offs for higher checking are:

107/10000 - brutal
120/20000 - even more brutal
126/30000
130/40000
136/50000

I don't have the resources to take above 100000.

I think you stand a good chance of setting some real records on E66 especially if you cover 80 iterations

[QUOTE=robert44444uk;289879]I got a 13/13 a little while back, so it is 14/14 we would like to see.

Nice start, pinhodecarlos. From the tables you will see 110+/10000 only 120 times or so. Taken higher it might improve. My cut offs for higher checking are:

107/10000 - brutal
120/20000 - even more brutal
126/30000
130/40000
136/50000

I don't have the resources to take above 100000.

I think you stand a good chance of setting some real records on E66 especially if you cover 80 iterations[/QUOTE]

It's my intention to cover all 80 iterations. Soon I hope to bring another quad-core to the fun.

I created a little tool which I call the "RecordtableCombinator", actually my first attempt to write a program in C#.
Please find it attached. It should work on any Windows machine (given the .NET framework is installed).

The program allows you to merge your record tables and to save the combined table.
So far it supports the two different recordtable "styles" in use, e.g. the default one as produced by the Payam program (dubbed "Gerbicz type"):

112 9906 92709691604123 S 58

and the other style preferred by you (Robert), called the "Smith type":

S 92709691604123 58 112/9906

Usage is quite simple: Just select one or more recordtable files (of either type) to be read.
You may repeat this until all recordtables are merged.
Finally you can save the merged table into a different file.
There is also the option to copy and paste the content of the textbox into a different program (your favorite spreed sheet or the like...).

The "merging rule" is just to store the sequence having the smallest "n" at a given level. If there are two or more sequences sharing the same n (e.g. for prime counts < 12), then it keeps the one with the smallest "y".

Please report any problems you may encounter.

Where can I find the list of all Sierpinski and Riesel VPS?

Send me a PM with your email and I can send you the list of known Riesel VPS.