Sierp base 16 - team drive #1
 

We are starting Conjectures 'R Us (CRUS) team drive #1 for Sierpinski base 16 starting at n=30K and continuing until all k's have a prime. Included in the drive are 15 of the remaining 18 k's that need a prime. A link to a sieved file is below. As we find primes, we will remove candidates from the files.

The file has been sieved for n=250K-500K and no more sieving is needed. The sieve depth is P=70T. As we find primes, we'll remove k's from the file for higher n-ranges.

[B]We are posting one large file that people can cut individual reservations out of. This should give people more flexibility with their ranges. Please reserve a range that will take no longer than ~4-6 weeks. IMPORTANT: Please reserve in multiples of n=2000 and begin your range with n=xxx001 and end with n=xxx000 to avoid missing or duplicating tests.[/B]

Please post all primes, reservations, and statuses in this thread instead of using other multiple threads. We'll be checking this thread frequently for primes so that we can quickly get candidates removed from the file that no longer need to be tested.

Here is a breakdown of the 18 k's that are remaining:
15 in the team drive for n=200K-500K
1 reserved for base 4 and searched to n>500K
2 reserved for PrimeGrid and searched to n>1M with the Seventeen-or-Bust effort

Below are primes found from the team drive plus all individual efforts for Sierp base 16 for n > 25K. [COLOR=red]Red[/COLOR] indicates top-5000 primes.

[code]
Prime found by
[COLOR=red]18598*16^484327+1 Lennart[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]31347*16^411467+1 Lennart[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]65623*16^397735+1 Lennart[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red][COLOR=red][COLOR=red][COLOR=red]35320*16^360478+1 KEP[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
[COLOR=red][COLOR=red]48697*16^350218+1 KEP[/COLOR]
[/COLOR][COLOR=red][COLOR=red]47395*16^340281+1 KEP[/COLOR]
[/COLOR][COLOR=red]16015*16^239758+1 Mini-Geek[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]23682*16^232372+1 Mini-Geek[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]63853*16^195610+1 Mini-Geek[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]47482*16^138980+1 gd_barnes[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]58855*16^138074+1 gd_barnes[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]66505*16^134956+1 gd_barnes[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]32350*16^128411+1 gd_barnes[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]19725*16^126275+1 gd_barnes[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]63405*16^123035+1 mdettweiler[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red][COLOR=red]16390*16^102651+1 gd_barnes[/COLOR]
[/COLOR][COLOR=red]13438*16^98815+1 tcadigan[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]44490*16^97806+1 em99010pepe[/COLOR]
[COLOR=red]34543*16^91225+1 tnerual[/COLOR]
39337*16^81875+1 tnerual
50863*16^77567+1 kar_bon
43468*16^75159+1 tnerual
52072*16^64816+1 tnerual
4885*16^60847+1 mdettweiler
21720*16^58990+1 kar_bon
19465*16^51462+1 kar_bon
49860*16^50809+1 kar_bon
7773*16^49946+1 tcadigan
12243*16^49693+1 tcadigan
62802*16^42004+1 geoff
58582*16^40601+1 geoff
17970*16^39540+1 tnerual
14910*16^37966+1 tcadigan
64518*16^36998+1 gd_barnes
10947*16^35687+1 tcadigan
19687*16^32360+1 kar_bon
29445*16^30066+1 kar_bon
59890*16^29827+1 tnerual
38562*16^26408+1 tnerual
24262*16^26165+1 tnerual
19122*16^25621+1 tnerual
32673*16^25481+1 tnerual
[/code]Status:
[code]
390K-500K Lennart/KEP complete 3
310K-390K KEP complete 3
260K-310K MyDogBuster complete 0
220K-260K Mini-Geek complete 2
210K-220K MyDogBuster complete 0
192K-210K Mini-Geek complete 1
172K-192K MyDogBuster complete 0
170K-172K Flatlander complete 0
166K-170K Mini-Geek complete 0
150K-166K MyDogBuster complete 0
146K-150K gd_barnes complete 0
140K-146K mdettweiler complete 0
124K-140K gd_barnes complete 5
122K-124K mdettweiler complete 1
120K-122K gd_barnes complete 0
104K-120K LLRnet complete 0
100K-104K gd_barnes complete 1
98K-100K tnerual complete 0 (1 other)
93.5K-98K em99010pepe complete 1
89K-93.5K kar_bon complete 0 (1 other)
86K-89K tnerual complete 0
83K-86K kar_bon complete 0
80K-83K tnerual complete 1
76K-80K kar_bon complete 1
72K-76K tnerual complete 1
68K-72K kar_bon complete 0
64K-68K tnerual complete 1
62K-64K kar_bon complete 0
60K-62K tnerual complete 0 (1 other)
56K-60K kar_bon complete 1
53K-56K tnerual complete 0
50K-53K kar_bon complete 2
47K-50K tcadigan complete 0 (2 other)
44K-47K kar_bon complete 0
40K-44K geoff complete 2
35K-40K tnerual complete 1 (plus 3 other)
30K-35K kar_bon complete 2
25K-30K tnerual complete 5
[/code] [B]All sieved files have been tested. Eventually we will begin sieving a higher n-range.[/B]

All primes now found will be top-5000 primes so have fun and take down some k's! :grin:


Gary

so i try the first range: 30k to 35k for me

35-40k for me

I'll take 40k-44k.

as i started the team drive a little in advance (range 25k-30k) here is the result file

[quote=geoff;122177]I'll take 40k-44k.[/quote]

Welcome to the effort Geoff!


[quote=tnerual;122179]as i started the team drive a little in advance (range 25k-30k) here is the result file[/quote]

Thanks for sending tnerual.


It looks like we're off to a quick start here! :smile: I'm currently sieving Riesel base 16 up to P=600G (currently at P=420G) and we'll start a 2nd team drive for that one sometime around Monday or Tuesday.


Gary

first prime
 

29445*16^30066+1 is prime (36208 digits)

[quote=kar_bon;122183]29445*16^30066+1 is prime (36208 digits)[/quote]

Excellent...very quick first prime!

I have removed k=29445 from all of the files for LLRing.

For those of you who have already reserved ranges, you can use srfile to remove k=29445 from your file if you want. The candidates were only about 4% of the files so not much additional testing at this low n-range. Alternatively, I decided to add back links to files already reserved that have k=29445 removed. You could use those.

One hint because I got burned on this one time. If you remove candidates from your file, be sure and change the line # that LLR restarts at or else you'll miss testing candidates. At this low n-range, it may not be worth the hassle.


Gary

range 30k to 35k complete
 

so the first range is complete and next prime:
29445*16^30066+1 (reported yet)
19687*16^32360+1 (38970 digits) also prime.

taking 44k-47k

Taking 47K-50K.

[quote=kar_bon;122198]so the first range is complete and next prime:
29445*16^30066+1 (reported yet)
19687*16^32360+1 (38970 digits) also prime.

taking 44k-47k[/quote]

Fast machine Karsten! I got 38-45 secs. testing time (vs. your 25-30 secs.) in that range when I LLR'd k=64518. The high k-value shouldn't have made any difference because LLR treats it like k=32259 since it's a multiple of 2, which is around the avg. sized k for this effort.



[quote=Anonymous;122201]Taking 47K-50K.[/quote]


Anon and Karsten, if you think it's worth your trouble, you can use srfile to remove k=19687 from your files before testing. I'll remove it from the remaining file links here shortly.

Now that we've reserved up to 50K with people knocking these out so fast, everyone can feel free to take as many files as their resources reasonably allow.

At this rate, we may have many of the files reserved on this effort before we start the Riesel Base 16 team effort early next week! :flex:


Gary

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;122207]Fast machine Karsten! I got 38-45 secs. testing time (vs. your 25 secs.) in that range when I LLR'd k=64518. The high k-value shouldn't have made any difference because LLR treats it like k=32259 since it's a multiple of 2, which is around the avg. sized k for this effort.
[/QUOTE]

i don't know wich kind of processor you use but on my side, just before 30000 i got those times:

athlon X2-4200 :190 secs
centrino 1600 :280 secs
athlon 2500+ : 260 secs

karsten machine is 10 times faster than the centrino 1600 it's incredible ...
i want to know what to buy ...

[quote=tnerual;122213]

karsten machine is 10 times faster than the centrino 1600 it's incredible ...
i want to know what to buy ...[/quote]

Intel Core 2 at 2.4 GHz but overclocked to 3.0GHz...got that timings, less to be accurate (23 sec), on the 35K-40K range.

Nothing can touch an overclocked Core2 for LLR or sieving. I have a Core2-1866 running at 2850. It runs LLR at about P4-4400 speed. An Athlon-64 runs LLR at roughly a P4 of equal clockspeed (not rating), if not slower, so an X2-4200 would LLR at less than half the rate of an overclocked Core2.
If you read the hardware discussions elsewhere on this forum, they discuss memory-bandwidth issues for Core2Quads and the difficulty in using all 4 cores fully. For LLR with FFTs smaller than 256k or so, Carlos will confirm that all 4 cores run at full speed- our small searches are perfect for a Quad.

Quads *do* overclock, too. :)
-Curtis

solve the mystery
 

ok guys,
i own a Core2Quad Q6600 at 2.4GHz, no overclocking.
it was a cheap offer i can't resist. but i read about overclocking up to 3.2GHz without problems!
the timings are quite good, because of LLR: reducing it to base 2 automatically and when k is divisible by 8 another fftlen smaller needed so the runtime was about 16s per candidate (only few ones).
for Riesel-base 6 k=1597 at n=153k it needs about 900s to complete one test.

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;122217]Nothing can touch an overclocked Core2 for LLR or sieving. I have a Core2-1866 running at 2850. It runs LLR at about P4-4400 speed.
-Curtis[/QUOTE]

yes but my P4-1600 takes about 600 secs at n=35000

so a P4-4800 would take 200 secs ... or would do your core2duo overclockerd ...

or it's 8 time faster (about 25secs) ... maybe it's because i use LLRNET in place of LLR ... will have a try to solve the mistery

edit:
LLRNET: 31347*16^36249+1 is not prime. RES64: C9DDFFA46F2BB6FB Time: 490.180 sec.
LLR 3.7.1C : 31347*2^144996+1 is not prime. Proth RES64: F25ECE59387BB41F Time: 138.144 sec.

timings are incredible ...

LLRNET uses LLR 3.5.0.

tnerual,

Use the manual client and control all your machines with [url=https://secure.logmein.com/home.asp?lang=en]LogMeIn Free Edition[/url].

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;122228]LLRNET uses LLR 3.5.0.

tnerual,

Use the manual client and control all your machines with [url=https://secure.logmein.com/home.asp?lang=en]LogMeIn Free Edition[/url].[/QUOTE]

i will do that but i like the LLRnet way : just manage on one computer ...(this way i can put LLRNET on friends computer ... )

i will keep llrnet for non power of 2 ...

44k to 47k complete, no primes

reserving 50k to 53k

[quote=gd_barnes;122207]Anon and Karsten, if you think it's worth your trouble, you can use srfile to remove k=19687 from your files before testing. I'll remove it from the remaining file links here shortly.[/quote]
No problem, actually I'd already done that before I started. :smile:

[quote=tnerual;122232]i will do that but i like the LLRnet way : just manage on one computer ...(this way i can put LLRNET on friends computer ... )

i will keep llrnet for non power of 2 ...[/quote]
Yeah, I don't think there were any speed boosts for PRP tests (non power of 2) since LLR 3.5, so that shouldn't be a problem there.

Maybe we should bug whoever wrote LLRNet to make a new version based on LLR 3.7.1c? :wink: (Hopefully it wouldn't be too hard of a job, so it could be all ready by the time we've got our upcoming Conjectures 'R Us LLRNet server running!)

Edit: I posted a [url=http://www.rieselsieve.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=12029]message[/url] about this over at the Riesel Sieve forums, since I think most of the development of LLRNet has been done there in the past. I asked how easy it would be to compile LLRNet with the LLR 3.7.1c source code--hopefully, if it's a relatively easy task, then either someone at RS will work on it, or, if they don't get around to doing it soon, maybe someone here could do it. :smile:

[QUOTE=Anonymous;122250]Yeah, I don't think there were any speed boosts for PRP tests (non power of 2) since LLR 3.5, so that shouldn't be a problem there.[/QUOTE]

Well, there has been a slight speed improvement after 3.5; nothing earth-shattering, about 5-7% (for base-2 as well as non-base-2).

[QUOTE=axn1;122267]Well, there has been a slight speed improvement after 3.5; nothing earth-shattering, about 5-7% (for base-2 as well as non-base-2).[/QUOTE]

finally i'm still using the llrnet but with a work around ...

i took the knpairs, multiplied the exponent by 4 and changed the base to 2 ..
tests are going 4 times faster !

58582*16^40601+1 is prime!

[quote=axn1;122267]Well, there has been a slight speed improvement after 3.5; nothing earth-shattering, about 5-7% (for base-2 as well as non-base-2).[/quote]
Oh, I forgot! According to LLR's changelog, the feature that automatically converts power-of-2 bases to base 2 was added [i]3.5.1[/i]! At least you can work around it by converting the sieve file to base 2. Though it would be nice if a new LLRNet based on the newer LLR could be released. :smile:

49860*16^50809+1 is prime! (61185 digits)

Great prime finding day! 5 total so far.

On primes found in higher ranges than what others are searching at the moment, (i.e. the n=50809 prime where others are searching n<50K) if people don't mind leaving the k in their lower search-ranges, I would REALLY appreciate it. :smile: I'd like to think that we found the lowest prime possible for each k and it will also correlate with my top-10 lowest k-value primes list for each k on the web pages. Just me being my anal retentive self. :grin: It shouldn't make much difference at this low n-value. Of course they can be removed at your discretion from any n-range that is higher.

I'm currently in the slow process of putting together a list of primes for all k's for both sides of all bases that have been searched so far. We'll need it for historical record as the conjectures are proven or nearly proven.

It'll be later tonight (CST US) before I can get the k's removed from the higher n-ranges for the 2 primes found here. If you reserve one, as usual, you can use srfile to remove k=49860 and 58582 from them.


Thanks,
Gary

[quote=gd_barnes;122294]Great prime finding day! 5 total so far.

On primes found in higher ranges than what others are searching at the moment, (i.e. the n=50809 prime where others are searching n<50K) if people don't mind leaving the k in their lower search-ranges, I would REALLY appreciate it. :smile: I'd like to think that we found the lowest prime possible for each k and it will also correlate with my top-10 lowest k-value primes list for each k on the web pages. Just me being my anal retentive self. :grin: It shouldn't make much difference at this low n-value. Of course they can be removed at your discretion from any n-range that is higher.[/quote]
Oh, sorry. :blush: I removed it before I even got to reading your post--and then promptly deleted the original file. So unfortunately I can't leave it in. However, if you'd like to search the n's remaining in my range for that k, the last n for that k that I tested in my range (47K-50K) was n=47819.

Hope this helps! :smile:

17970*2^158160+1 is prime! Time : 100.0 sec.

range 35k-40k finished (mix of base 16 and base 2 results in file)

i take 53k-56k

50k to 53k complete
 

two primes in this range:
49860*16^50809+1 (mentioned before)
19465*16^51462+1 (new)

taking 56k-58k

Almost everyone in on the act today!
 

[quote=tnerual;122306]17970*2^158160+1 is prime! Time : 100.0 sec.

range 35k-40k finished (mix of base 16 and base 2 results in file)

i take 53k-56k[/quote]

Good thinking on converting to base 2. It looks like just about everyone got in on the act today. Great work everyone! 7 total primes by 6 different people in 24 hours. On the team effort; 4 primes by 3 different people. :flex:


[quote=kar_bon;122307]two primes in this range:
49860*16^50809+1 (mentioned before)
19465*16^51462+1 (new)

taking 56k-58k[/quote]

Nice work Karsten! With your resources, feel free to take 2 or 3 ranges at a time if you want to. I'll be shortly updating the files to exclude the 4 primes found today for the team effort.

[quote=Anonymous;122301]Oh, sorry. :blush: I removed it before I even got to reading your post--and then promptly deleted the original file. So unfortunately I can't leave it in. However, if you'd like to search the n's remaining in my range for that k, the last n for that k that I tested in my range (47K-50K) was n=47819.

Hope this helps! :smile:[/quote]

Not a problem. I'm not quite so anal as to worry about such a small range for a single k. :wink: Thanks for letting me know.


Gary

range 56k-58k complete, no primes

taking 58k-60k

62802*16^42004+1 is prime!

taking 60-62

Statuses updated and files changed to remove today's prime for k=62802.

Riesel base 16 team drive #2 to start by Tuesday
 

Riesel base 16 has completed sieving to P=600G for all k's. I'll probably get a team drive #2 started by Tuesday.

There are not quite as many k's on the Riesel side and since we have plenty of interest, I'll make the n-ranges larger.


Gary

range 58k-60k complete
one prime: 21720*16^58990+1

taking 62k-64k

range 53k-56k completed no prime :mad:

taking 64-66 and 66-68

range 62k-64k complete, no prime

taking 68k-70k

52072*2^259264+1 is prime! Time : 280.0 sec.

and range 60k-62k is done (no prime)

I added a new piece of information to the main info. page here. It shows what k that was last removed from the files and which files it was removed from.

range 68k-70k complete, no primes

taking 70k-72k

40K-44K done, 2 primes (reported earlier).

64-66 done 1 previously posted prime

i take 72-74 and 74-76

i will email all results files later (one big file)

66K-68K completed no primes :down:

range 70k-72k complete, no prime

taking 76k-80k

72k-74k done, no primes

43468*2^300636+1 is prime! Time : 390.0 sec.

or 43468*16^75159 is prime ...

top 5000 is comming ...

edit : i will take 80k-83k (2 ranges)
edit2: next range will be in the top 5000 primes !

range 76k-78k complete, one prime:
50863*16^77567+1

range 78k-80k complete, no prime

taking 83k-86k (2 files)

47K-50K done
 

no additional primes

range 83k-84.5k complete, no prime

80K-81.5K done, no prime
taking 86K-87.5K

39337*16^81875+1 is prime! Time : 468.0 sec


edit: taking 87.5K-89K

range 84.5k-86k complete, no prime

taking 89k-92k (2 files)

[quote=tnerual;122770]39337*16^81875+1 is prime! Time : 468.0 sec


edit: taking 87.5K-89K[/quote]

Tnerual,

I'm assumng that n=74K-76K is complete. Is that correct? I didn't see a mention of it being complete.


Thanks,
Gary

Status on extending drive
 

I've been sieving the last 3 days on Sierp base 16 for n=100K-200K. I should be at P=1T by Monday morning (CST US). Removing the lower n-range of n=25K-100K as well as several k's found so far in this effort for n<100K has made the optimal sieve much lower. I'm thinking it'll be about P=1.5T at the highest; perhaps 1.3T.

I'm thinking slightly > 1 week and we'll be able to extend this effort. In the mean time, if you guys finish this up to n=100K, there's still plenty to do on Riesel base 16. There are several individual k's for the Sierp side that are only at n=30K that can be worked on.

Also, I changed the first line in the first post of this thread to make this an open-ended drive starting at n=30K. We'll just continue it until we find a prime for all k's or no one is interested in it anymore. I did the same thing for drive #2.


Gary

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;122786]Tnerual,

I'm assumng that n=74K-76K is complete. Is that correct? I didn't see a mention of it being complete.


Thanks,
Gary[/QUOTE]

correct :blush:

in the mean time, now that we are in the "top 5000 range" do you have a "project name" in the top 5000 page ?

[quote=tnerual;122791]correct :blush:

in the mean time, now that we are in the "top 5000 range" do you have a "project name" in the top 5000 page ?[/quote]

No, not yet. I wasn't actually sure at what point that needs to be done. I'll probably do it when we get our first top-5000 prime.

For now, I would suggest creating a separate prover code for them with NO PROJECT. On this team drive, the software would be srsieve for sieving and LLR or whatever other software you happened to use to search them that proved the primes.

For bases that are not powers of 2 for any sieve file that you get from a link on the site, use srsieve for the sieving software. Otherwise whatever you used for sieving. For searching, use whatever software that did the initial search AND whatever software proved the primes. So if you used LLR for seaching and PFGW for proving, report both, and each will get half credit for the find. Obviously if you searched and proved with PFGW, then only it gets credit. For bases not powers of 2, LLR can only get half credit because it can't prove them.

If and when we get a project ID, then we can have Prof. Keller add the project to the various new prover codes that were set up.


Gary

range 89k-90.5k complete, no prime

[quote]
If and when we get a project ID, then we can have Prof. Keller add the project to the various new prover codes that were set up.
[/quote]

you would say Mr. Caldwell!

range 90.5k-92k complete, no prime

taking 92k-93.5k

Taking 93.5K to 98K (3 files)

3 out of 7 cores added for now....

[quote=em99010pepe;122906]Taking 93.5K to 98K (3 files)

3 out of 7 cores added for now....[/quote]

Great! Nice to have you back Carlos. :smile: If you run out of work in this drive, there's also drive 2 for the Riesel side. Also, I'm in the process of sieving for this drive for n=100K-200K, although it will be about a week from now as I fit the sieving in around other efforts.

Quick question...did you continue on your range for Sierp base 12 k=404 at all? I show you at n=88.5K. I wasn't clear if you unreserved that one in our Email exchange.


Thanks,
Gary

Gary,

That range is paused...I'll see what I can do....:wink:
I still have work for a month on all cores. Just wanted to test a few ranges to help you.

Carlos

34543*16^91225+1 is prime :w00t:

submitted at the top 5000 page with srsieve, LLR and CRUS code

here : [url]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=83671[/url]

[quote=tnerual;122925]34543*16^91225+1 is prime :w00t:

submitted at the top 5000 page with srsieve, LLR and CRUS code

here : [URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=83671[/URL][/quote]


:george::george::george:


Congrats tnerual! Our first top-5000 prime!

Looks like I was just in time. I just created the code 6 hours ago and I wasn't even sure if it was officially accepted yet. I still have to add some project info. and links to it.

I'll post this in the news also.

For everyone's info., the project ID is CRUS.


Gary

range 92k-93.5k complete, no prime

86-89 complete
taking 98-100

93.5K-98K done, one prime found.

[quote=em99010pepe;123033]93.5K-98K done, one prime found.[/quote]

Yet another top-5000 prime! 3 in < 3 days now. Way to go team!

Drive will restart much earlier
 

After removing all of the k's where primes were found for n<100K, the optimal sieve limit for n=100K-200K has dropped to around P=1.25-1.3T. I just now finished filling the 'factor holes' up to P=1T and am continuing on.

I also had 2 cores unexpectedly free up from another effort so with 3 and sometimes 4 total cores on it for 2-3 days, I should be done this weekend.

Look for this drive to restart around Monday-Tuesday 1/21-1/22. We'll be effectively testing up to n=800K base 2. Bring on those REALLY big primes! :grin:

Jasong, if you read this, I won't need help sieving on this drive after all. But I could use help sieving on Riesel team drive #2 for n=100K-200K. I think you said it'd be a few days before you could start. That should work for me sending you the file for that one.


Gary

[quote=tcadigan;122720]no additional primes[/quote]
I see you did my reserved file--sorry for being AWOL for a while, my motherboard on my main crunching machine went kapooey. :sick: Thankfully it's fixed now, and now I've got a Core2Duo, so crunching should be much faster. :smile:

I'll be reserving a new range shortly...

[quote=Anonymous;123095]I see you did my reserved file--sorry for being AWOL for a while, my motherboard on my main crunching machine went kapooey. :sick: Thankfully it's fixed now, and now I've got a Core2Duo, so crunching should be much faster. :smile:

I'll be reserving a new range shortly...[/quote]


Hum. Not good. I made the poor assumption that he had coordinated with you since you had computer troubles.

Tcadigan, I for one can appreciate getting holes in search-ranges filled in. But if someone has a file reserved and they're out for a while, please send them or me a PM first and find out what's up.

For this project, I have no problem with people following up with others if they have something reserved but they've haven't been around for a while. Keeping the communication lines open and things moving along reasonably is the main thing. If it goes too long, information gets lost and double-work ends up being needed.


Thanks,
Gary

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;123098]Hum. Not good. I made the poor assumption that he had coordinated with you since you had computer troubles.

Tcadigan, I for one can appreciate getting holes in search-ranges filled in. But if someone has a file reserved and they're out for a while, please send them or me a PM first and find out what's up.
...

Thanks,
Gary[/QUOTE]

Sorry to all.

I read the statement "Previously reserved ranges are not finished...." incorrectly. I read it as ranges that were once reserved but now no longer are and aren't done. instead of ranges that are reserved but primes had been found earlier

should have read the actual reservations....

last ranges done (98-100) no primes :(

i will finish my reserved k (8 test)

i attach a file will all results for my ranges since last file upload :smile:

[quote=gd_barnes;123098]Hum. Not good. I made the poor assumption that he had coordinated with you since you had computer troubles.

Tcadigan, I for one can appreciate getting holes in search-ranges filled in. But if someone has a file reserved and they're out for a while, please send them or me a PM first and find out what's up.

For this project, I have no problem with people following up with others if they have something reserved but they've haven't been around for a while. Keeping the communication lines open and things moving along reasonably is the main thing. If it goes too long, information gets lost and double-work ends up being needed.


Thanks,
Gary[/quote]
Sorry, I probably should have posted in the team drive thread too, rather than just PMing Gary, when my computer went blooey. :blush:
[quote=tcadigan;123131]Sorry to all.

I read the statement "Previously reserved ranges are not finished...." incorrectly. I read it as ranges that were once reserved but now no longer are and aren't done. instead of ranges that are reserved but primes had been found earlier

should have read the actual reservations....[/quote]
Don't worry about it this time, it was easier to start afresh with a different sievefile anyway. :smile:

But hey, there's one big benefit to my computer needing repairs: This gave me a perfect opportunity to upgrade! :cool: Now I've got a Core 2 Duo 2.2Ghz (previously P4 3.2Ghz w/HT), and 2GB of DDR2 RAM (previously 1GB DDR)! :showoff:

[quote=tcadigan;123131]Sorry to all.

I read the statement "Previously reserved ranges are not finished...." incorrectly. I read it as ranges that were once reserved but now no longer are and aren't done. instead of ranges that are reserved but primes had been found earlier

should have read the actual reservations....[/quote]


OK, I'm sorry about the confusion tcadigan. It's all good! :smile:

I admit that is a little misleading. I'll do something different or word it a little differently. I put those there in case people want to get a file with a k removed that was found prime by someone else.


Gary

35320 tested up to 100k no primes :glare:

[quote=tnerual;123159]35320 tested up to 100k no primes :glare:[/quote]

Never fear...sieved files to the rescue! :grin:

Do you want to keep it reserved? If not, I'll include it in the team drive for n=100K-200K. I'm sieving ALL remaining k's including individual reservations for the range of n=100K-200K with the team drive. It's little additional time to include them. As I did before for individual reservations, I'll post them as a link on the site.

This drive will now most likely restart on Sunday with all files sieved to P=1.3T. If you want to keep it reserved, I can send you the file. As you probably know, though, n=100K-200K (400K-800K base 2) is a lot of work.


Gary

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;123165]
Do you want to keep it reserved? If not, I'll include it in the team drive for n=100K-200K.
Gary[/QUOTE]

no ... i will play with riesel now ...

[quote=tnerual;123166]no ... i will play with riesel now ...[/quote]

OK, were you done with 98k-100k for Sierp here?

[quote=gd_barnes;123167]OK, were you done with 98k-100k for Sierp here?[/quote]
Looks like you missed his earlier message. :smile:
[quote=tnerual;123137]last ranges done (98-100) no primes :(

i will finish my reserved k (8 test)

i attach a file will all results for my ranges since last file upload :smile:[/quote]

[quote=Anonymous;123168]Looks like you missed his earlier message. :smile:[/quote]

Ugh, sure did. That squeezed in there between the exchange between you and tcadigan and totally eluded me. Never mind tnerual.

Team drive #1 has restarted. I'll post more files as needed.

Please limit reservations to 2 files at a time for now. I bumped the range of each file back up to 2K.

These will be some very nice primes now.

Good luck everyone! :smile:

[B]EDIT: Ignore the file limitation. See the first message in this thread.[/B]

I'll take n=100K-104K to get us restarted.

[quote=gd_barnes;123269]...
Please limit reservations to 2 files at a time for now. I bumped the range of each file back up to 2K.
...[/quote]
Quick question: does the LLRnet server have to adhere to the 2-file limit when reserving files? In a day or two I'll be reserving some numbers for the LLRnet server from here so that Carlos can feed them in as soon as the current queue of Riesel numbers runs dry (we can't mix Riesel and Sierpinski in the LLRnet queue, nor can we mix different bases--just like regular LLR. Thus we have to let the server run dry before we can switch over.)

If it's okay with you, Gary, then I'll reserve everything up to 120K for LLRnet when I make the reservation (if there's no new reservations here between now and then, that will mean 104K-120K)--that should be enough to keep LLRnet busy for a while. :smile:

[quote=Anonymous;123477]Quick question: does the LLRnet server have to adhere to the 2-file limit when reserving files? In a day or two I'll be reserving some numbers for the LLRnet server from here so that Carlos can feed them in as soon as the current queue of Riesel numbers runs dry (we can't mix Riesel and Sierpinski in the LLRnet queue, nor can we mix different bases--just like regular LLR. Thus we have to let the server run dry before we can switch over.)

If it's okay with you, Gary, then I'll reserve everything up to 120K for LLRnet when I make the reservation (if there's no new reservations here between now and then, that will mean 104K-120K)--that should be enough to keep LLRnet busy for a while. :smile:[/quote]


I'll edit that post to tell people to ignore it. Subsequent to that after a posting by Carlos in the Sierp base 4 mini-drive, I posted the bolded type in the first message in this thread. Feeding 104K-120K to LLRNet works for me. Anyone else is free to weigh in on that here if they'd like.

At this point, I'd say let LLRNet run dry, change it over to Sierp and then run these files. We can individually reserve up to n=100K on the Riesel side. That'll give us time to sieve it above n=100K.


Gary

[quote=gd_barnes;123478]I'll edit that post to tell people to ignore it. Subsequent to that after a posting by Carlos in the Sierp base 4 mini-drive, I posted the bolded type in the first message in this thread. Feeding 104K-120K to LLRNet works for me. Anyone else is free to weight in on that here if they'd like.

At this point, I'd say let LLRNet run dry, change it over to Sierp and then run these files. We can individually reserve up to n=100K on the Riesel side. That'll give us time to sieve it above n=100K.


Gary[/quote]
Okay, sounds good. :smile:

Taking 104K-120K for LLRnet. :flex:

A
[quote=Anonymous;123544]Taking 104K-120K for LLRnet. :flex:[/quote]

Cool! Bring on those BIG primes!

Quick questions: Should I bother posting files with k's removed where a prime was found? I'm assuming that it would be a big hassle to change what was loaded to the server.

This is a nice amount of files to take for the server. As for upcoming ranges, I'd prefer that we leave SOME ranges for individual searches, especially for bases that are powers of 2. Let's handle LLRNet like a BIG searcher; kind of like a really BIG Carlos running 10 cores. :grin: In other words, let's max it at about 10 files at a time. Part of that has to do with testing k's where a prime is found in one of the first few files, which wastes CPU cycles for subsequent files but the other part has to do with people who don't have a good LLRing machine that's on 24x7.

For instance in my situation, I have only one computer that is online 24x7 and it is an Athlon...poor at LLRing but great at sieving and is what is sieving Riesel base 16 for n=100K-200K right now. Of course my work laptop, which is a nice LLRing machine and that I'm typing from now, is online from work but not from home. Others may be in a similar situation.

We may change that as we get above n=200K, which is n=800K base 2. At that point, we need all the firepower that we can get.

You guys have done a nice job in getting that going. Kudos to the computer techie guys!


Gary

[quote=gd_barnes;123550]A


Cool! Bring on those BIG primes!

Quick questions: Should I bother posting files with k's removed where a prime was found? I'm assuming that it would be a big hassle to change what was loaded to the server.

This is a nice amount of files to take for the server. As for upcoming ranges, I'd prefer that we leave SOME ranges for individual searches, especially for bases that are powers of 2. Let's handle LLRNet like a BIG searcher; kind of like a really BIG Carlos running 10 cores. :grin: In other words, let's max it at about 10 files at a time. Part of that has to do with testing k's where a prime is found in one of the first few files, which wastes CPU cycles for subsequent files but the other part has to do with people who don't have a good LLRing machine that's on 24x7.

For instance in my situation, I have only one computer that is online 24x7 and it is an Athlon...poor at LLRing but great at sieving and is what is sieving Riesel base 16 for n=100K-200K right now. Of course my work laptop, which is a nice LLRing machine and that I'm typing from now, is online from work but not from home. Others may be in a similar situation.

We may change that as we get above n=200K, which is n=800K base 2. At that point, we need all the firepower that we can get.

You guys have done a nice job in getting that going. Kudos to the computer techie guys!


Gary[/quote]
When a prime is found, the simplest thing will be just to have Carlos shutdown the LLRnet server, run a quickie srfile -d command on the knpairs.txt file, then start it up again. Thus, you don't have to worry about posting files with removed k's for LLRnet's reserved ranges. :smile:

[quote=Anonymous;123554]When a prime is found, the simplest thing will be just to have Carlos shutdown the LLRnet server, run a quickie srfile -d command on the knpairs.txt file, then start it up again. Thus, you don't have to worry about posting files with removed k's for LLRnet's reserved ranges. :smile:[/quote]

Will LLRNet know the correct line # to restart on? That's what you have to be careful of when manual LLRing and you remove a k...that you restart in the same spot, which is a different line # when candidates are removed.

I'm assuming someone would have to manually change the line #.

If I'm all wet here, let me know. Perhaps it's easier to waste a few CPU cycles then to try to mess with this. As a happy medium, perhaps 2-3 files could be loaded at a time. Letting it run dry a little more frequently may or may not waste more CPU cycles than searching a k that no longer needs a prime.

On the flip side, we could get more than one top-5000 prime from the same k-value! I guess I couldn't argue about that. :smile:

Tell you what...you guys decide what is best to do there since you'd be more aware of the hassles involved in removing a k-value.

I will now remove all past files from the first page of this thread.


Gary

[quote=gd_barnes;123562]Will LLRNet know the correct line # to restart on? That's what you have to be careful of when manual LLRing and you remove a k...that you restart in the same spot, which is a different line # when candidates are removed.

I'm assuming someone would have to manually change the line #.

If I'm all wet here, let me know. Perhaps it's easier to waste a few CPU cycles then to try to mess with this. As a happy medium, perhaps 2-3 files could be loaded at a time. Letting it run dry a little more frequently may or may not waste more CPU cycles than searching a k that no longer needs a prime.

On the flip side, we could get more than one top-5000 prime from the same k-value! I guess I couldn't argue about that. :smile:

Tell you what...you guys decide what is best to do there since you'd be more aware of the hassles involved in removing a k-value.

I will now remove all past files from the first page of this thread.


Gary[/quote]
Actually, to prevent such confusion, the LLRnet server automatically removes numbers from its input file when it hands them out to a client. :smile: Thus, srfile would only be dealing with the remaining candidates.

[quote=Anonymous;123563]Actually, to prevent such confusion, the LLRnet server automatically removes numbers from its input file when it hands them out to a client. :smile: Thus, srfile would only be dealing with the remaining candidates.[/quote]

Sounds good. You guys do what you think is best for the project in that regard.

Big one...
 

Right after posting all of the n=120K-140K files with all k-values in them...

16390*16^102651+1 is prime (123609 digits):george:

-or-

16390*2^410604+1

-or- as submitted

8195*2^410605+1


We need 1-2 more top-5000 primes to be visible in the top-20 projects.


Gary

[quote=Anonymous;123544]Taking 104K-120K for LLRnet. :flex:[/quote]

I don't know if you guys have started the LLRNet search for n=104K-120K yet. If not, I have files for that range available with k=16390 removed. The links aren't posted here but I can add them.


Gary