Sierp. base 6 team sieve - Page 9

gd_barnes · 2008-04-07, 15:42

Anon,

P=6T (6000G) is almost right at optimal sieve depth for n=100K-150K.

Analysis for P=6T-6.1T:

Given by you:
Expected factors: 82.98
P-range: 0.1T (100G)
P-rate/sec: 1338246

Time to complete range: 100G / 1338246 secs. = 74725 secs.

Removal rate: 74725 secs. / 82.98 facs. = 900.5 secs. / fac.

LLR test at n=135K: 876.5 secs.

We're just slightly past optimal depth at P=6T, which is the way I think it should be. I was thinking it would be a little higher but finding the prime for k=66520 helped reduce it a little bit.

Go ahead and remove n=100K-150K from the big sieved file that has had all its factors removed to P=6T and re-post a new file for n=150K-400K only. People with current reservations can decide if they want to use the new file for continuing in the middle of their reservation.

Since Beyond is still working on his machines or doing other work, there's still a fair amount of LLRnet work for n<100K so you can hold off on adding it to the LLRnet queue for now. See next para. I've had 2 cores on it over the weekend and at this moment, it's almost right at n=99K but then there are 3 k's for n=60K-100K that are in the queue that still need to be processed; which is a lot of work.

Can I get some opinions on whether we should post manual reservations for Sierp base 6? Does anyone feel that there are some people that would work on this base using manual reservations? The response to the manual reservations for n<100K was rather tepid, although I/we didn't promote it much.

Thanks,
Gary

mdettweiler · 2008-04-07, 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

Anon,

P=6T (6000G) is almost right at optimal sieve depth for n=100K-150K.

Analysis for P=6T-6.1T:

Given by you:
Expected factors: 82.98
P-range: 0.1T (100G)
P-rate/sec: 1338246

Time to complete range: 100G / 1338246 secs. = 74725 secs.

Removal rate: 74725 secs. / 82.98 facs. = 900.5 secs. / fac.

LLR test at n=135K: 876.5 secs.

We're just slightly past optimal depth at P=6T, which is the way I think it should be. I was thinking it would be a little higher but finding the prime for k=66520 helped reduce it a little bit.

Go ahead and remove n=100K-150K from the big sieved file that has had all its factors removed to P=6T and re-post a new file for n=150K-400K only. People with current reservations can decide if they want to use the new file for continuing in the middle of their reservation.

Okay, I'll do that.

Quote:

Since Beyond is still working on his machines or doing other work, there's still a fair amount of LLRnet work for n<100K so you can hold off on adding it to the LLRnet queue for now. See next para. I've had 2 cores on it over the weekend and at this moment, it's almost right at n=99K but then there are 3 k's for n=60K-100K that are in the queue that still need to be processed; which is a lot of work.

Okay, got it.

Quote:

Can I get some opinions on whether we should post manual reservations for Sierp base 6? Does anyone feel that there are some people that would work on this base using manual reservations? The response to the manual reservations for n<100K was rather tepid, although I/we didn't promote it much.

I'm thinking that with all the recent attention surrounding phrot, we might get some interest in individual k reservations for Sierp. base 6; thus, how about we leave two k's open for manual reservation? Then, if nobody takes them, maybe you or I can get them caught up to a level where we can include them in the team drive.

As soon as you give the all-clear on whether leaving 2 k's for manual reservation is OK, I'll go ahead and split up the 100K-150K chunk of the sieve file for PRPing and post some files in the Drive #3 thread.

mdettweiler · 2008-04-07, 16:41

Hi all,

Here's a new sieve file, with the range 100K-150K removed now that we've broken it off for PRPing. Thus, this sieve file contains a total range of 150K-400K.

It is highly recommended that you switch to this new sieve file, even in the middle of a range--it should have a noticeable speed increase over the old one, because of the smaller range. You can continue running your range with the old one if you want, but you'll probably want to switch to the new one.

Just download the zip file, replace sr2data.txt in your sr2sieve folder with the one in the new zip file, and stop and restart sr2sieve.

Anon

mdettweiler · 2008-04-07, 16:46

Gary, I sent you the 100K-150K portion of the sieve file that I broke off, so now both you and I have a copy.

gd_barnes · 2008-04-08, 06:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Okay, I'll do that.

Okay, got it.

I'm thinking that with all the recent attention surrounding phrot, we might get some interest in individual k reservations for Sierp. base 6; thus, how about we leave two k's open for manual reservation? Then, if nobody takes them, maybe you or I can get them caught up to a level where we can include them in the team drive.

As soon as you give the all-clear on whether leaving 2 k's for manual reservation is OK, I'll go ahead and split up the 100K-150K chunk of the sieve file for PRPing and post some files in the Drive #3 thread.

Good point about the interest in Phrot. Let's do 3 individual k reservations...the 3 lowest k's...10107, 13215, and 14505, like we did up to n=100K until we recently added them at the end of the LLRnet server.

Don't post any n>100K files for anything yet until LLRnet has tested everything to n=100K including the 3 k's above. It'd be duplicate work to be testing the same k's at 2 different n-values.

Edit: You could go ahead and have IronBits load n=100K-110K in the server for all k's except the 3 above but it should still be a while until that is needed.

Gary

mdettweiler · 2008-04-08, 06:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

Good point about the interest in Phrot. Let's do 3 individual k reservations...the 3 lowest k's...10107, 13215, and 14505, like we did up to n=100K until we recently added them at the end of the LLRnet server.

Don't post any n>100 files for anything yet until LLRnet has tested everything to n=100K including the 3 k's above. It'd be duplicate work to be testing the same k's at 2 different n-values.

Edit: You could go ahead and have IronBits load n=100K-110K in the server for all k's except the 3 above but it should still be a while until that is needed.

Gary

Okay, that sounds good. I'll hold off on giving 100K-110K to IronBits--as you said, we don't need to put it in the server quite yet, especially with all the attention on port 5000 at NPLB right now.

gd_barnes · 2008-04-08, 06:51

P=6510G-6600G complete; factors sent.

Reserving P=6600G-7000G.

KriZp · 2008-04-08, 15:18

6000G-6500G KriZp complete
reserving 7000G-8000G

gd_barnes · 2008-04-08, 15:57

Anon,

Like before, when you have received all of the factors up to P=8T and have removed them, please run a quickie test for P=8T-8.1T and post the same stats as before. I like doing the math but if you want to do the calculation, that works for me.

An educated guess says the optimal for n=150K-200K will be P=~9T-10T.

Gary

mdettweiler · 2008-04-08, 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

Anon,

Like before, when you have received all of the factors up to P=8T and have removed them, please run a quickie test for P=8T-8.1T and post the same stats as before. I like doing the math but if you want to do the calculation, that works for me.

An educated guess says the optimal for n=150K-200K will be P=~9T-10T.

Gary

Okay, will do.

mdettweiler · 2008-04-10, 16:58

As some of you may have noticed in the Drive #3 thread, there's been a little bit of a mix-up regarding one of the k's in this sieve. We forgot to include one of the k's in the sieve that we were supposed to, and instead accidentally left in one that we had already found a prime on. I'll be posting a sieve file with the left-in k removed later today (don't have time right now); meanwhile, Gary is sieving the missing k to get it caught up with this sieve.

If all of you would please refrain from making reservations on this sieve for p>8T for the time being, that would be great, as it would make the catch-up operation for the missing k go a lot easier. I'll be sure to post here as soon as it's all clear to make further reservations.

2008-04-07, 16:41	#91
mdettweiler A Sunny Moo Aug 2007 USA (GMT-5) 14151₈ Posts	Hi all, Here's a new sieve file, with the range 100K-150K removed now that we've broken it off for PRPing. Thus, this sieve file contains a total range of 150K-400K. It is highly recommended that you switch to this new sieve file, even in the middle of a range--it should have a noticeable speed increase over the old one, because of the smaller range. You can continue running your range with the old one if you want, but you'll probably want to switch to the new one. Just download the zip file, replace sr2data.txt in your sr2sieve folder with the one in the new zip file, and stop and restart sr2sieve. Anon Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2008-04-24 at 04:52

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Bases 2 & 4 reservations/statuses/primes	Jean Penné	Conjectures 'R Us	466	2021-07-25 04:05
Sierp base 6 - team drive #3	gd_barnes	Conjectures 'R Us	373	2014-06-11 21:31
Sierp base 16 - team drive #1	gd_barnes	Conjectures 'R Us	254	2014-06-10 16:00
Sierp base 63 - team drive #5	rogue	Conjectures 'R Us	146	2011-04-20 05:12
Sierp base 3 - mini-drive Ib	gd_barnes	Conjectures 'R Us	43	2009-03-06 08:41

2008-04-07, 15:42	#89
gd_barnes May 2007 Kansas; USA 28A3₁₆ Posts	Anon, P=6T (6000G) is almost right at optimal sieve depth for n=100K-150K. Analysis for P=6T-6.1T: Given by you: Expected factors: 82.98 P-range: 0.1T (100G) P-rate/sec: 1338246 Time to complete range: 100G / 1338246 secs. = 74725 secs. Removal rate: 74725 secs. / 82.98 facs. = 900.5 secs. / fac. LLR test at n=135K: 876.5 secs. We're just slightly past optimal depth at P=6T, which is the way I think it should be. I was thinking it would be a little higher but finding the prime for k=66520 helped reduce it a little bit. Go ahead and remove n=100K-150K from the big sieved file that has had all its factors removed to P=6T and re-post a new file for n=150K-400K only. People with current reservations can decide if they want to use the new file for continuing in the middle of their reservation. Since Beyond is still working on his machines or doing other work, there's still a fair amount of LLRnet work for n<100K so you can hold off on adding it to the LLRnet queue for now. See next para. I've had 2 cores on it over the weekend and at this moment, it's almost right at n=99K but then there are 3 k's for n=60K-100K that are in the queue that still need to be processed; which is a lot of work. Can I get some opinions on whether we should post manual reservations for Sierp base 6? Does anyone feel that there are some people that would work on this base using manual reservations? The response to the manual reservations for n<100K was rather tepid, although I/we didn't promote it much. Thanks, Gary

2008-04-07, 16:46	#92
mdettweiler A Sunny Moo Aug 2007 USA (GMT-5) 3×2,083 Posts	Gary, I sent you the 100K-150K portion of the sieve file that I broke off, so now both you and I have a copy.

2008-04-08, 06:51	#95
gd_barnes May 2007 Kansas; USA 101·103 Posts	P=6510G-6600G complete; factors sent. Reserving P=6600G-7000G.

2008-04-08, 15:18	#96
KriZp Feb 2007 10000111₂ Posts	6000G-6500G KriZp complete reserving 7000G-8000G

2008-04-08, 15:57	#97
gd_barnes May 2007 Kansas; USA 101×103 Posts	Anon, Like before, when you have received all of the factors up to P=8T and have removed them, please run a quickie test for P=8T-8.1T and post the same stats as before. I like doing the math but if you want to do the calculation, that works for me. An educated guess says the optimal for n=150K-200K will be P=~9T-10T. Gary

2008-04-10, 16:58	#99
mdettweiler A Sunny Moo Aug 2007 USA (GMT-5) 6249₁₀ Posts	As some of you may have noticed in the Drive #3 thread, there's been a little bit of a mix-up regarding one of the k's in this sieve. We forgot to include one of the k's in the sieve that we were supposed to, and instead accidentally left in one that we had already found a prime on. I'll be posting a sieve file with the left-in k removed later today (don't have time right now); meanwhile, Gary is sieving the missing k to get it caught up with this sieve. If all of you would please refrain from making reservations on this sieve for p>8T for the time being, that would be great, as it would make the catch-up operation for the missing k go a lot easier. I'll be sure to post here as soon as it's all clear to make further reservations.