sieving blunder - Page 2

geoff · 2009-03-13, 01:30

Rincewind, you could try checking that you can re-find each of the missed factors by running sr5sieve on a small range that includes that factor. For example to refind the factor

93001206872143 | 30994*5^893457-1

run

sr5sieve -p 93001206e6 -P 93001207e6

If a factor was missed while sieving a long range but found in this short range then most likely there is a sporadic hardware problem of some sort, but if it is not found in the short range after repeated attempts then it is more likely a software problem or a corrupted sr5data.txt file.

Rincewind · 2009-03-13, 06:52

@geoff: Thanks, that's a good Idea.

I'll try this with some of the missed factors (I think masser and themerril submitted their factors) to check my system before I submit my factors for the reserved range.

Rincewind · 2009-03-16, 14:41

I finished my range, found 14 factors (11,xx expected) and I checked some of the other missed factors. Everything looks great.

masser · 2009-03-27, 18:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rincewind

By the way, I think with this title you make look lake a "traitor" or something.
An in my opinion you should never open a threat under another users name. But that's only my opinion.

I hope you give me "another chance"

First of all, no one is implying that anyone is being a "traitor." If I wanted to be mean, I could have titled the thread "Rincewind's Sieving Blunder." I think it is fair to assume that if you are going to participate in a project, you will at least pay some attention to the project's forum.

Several times in the past I have started threads under other user's name. The reason this happens is because a user posts about an important topic in one of the permanent (stickied) threads. The important topic needs to be moved from the permanent thread to a new thread for that one topic. That is all I did in this case.

Now that you are paying attention to the forum and have noticed that you have either hardware/software issues, you are free to participate again.

Rincewind · 2009-04-06, 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by masser

...
Now that you are paying attention to the forum and have noticed that you have either hardware/software issues, you are free to participate again.

Sounds good to me ; )
So, ill be back, but at the moment I have to finish some other DC-Work.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Going over 100% during sieving	wombatman	Msieve	4	2013-07-11 15:41
Line sieving vs. lattice sieving	JHansen	NFSNET Discussion	9	2010-06-09 19:25
10^420 + 1 sieving	juno1369	Factoring	20	2010-04-28 01:11
Sieving	OmbooHankvald	Prime Sierpinski Project	4	2005-06-30 07:51
Sieving	robert44444uk	Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5	8	2005-04-02 22:30

2009-03-13, 01:30	#12
geoff Mar 2003 New Zealand 13×89 Posts	Rincewind, you could try checking that you can re-find each of the missed factors by running sr5sieve on a small range that includes that factor. For example to refind the factor 93001206872143 \| 30994*5^893457-1 run sr5sieve -p 93001206e6 -P 93001207e6 If a factor was missed while sieving a long range but found in this short range then most likely there is a sporadic hardware problem of some sort, but if it is not found in the short range after repeated attempts then it is more likely a software problem or a corrupted sr5data.txt file.

2009-03-13, 06:52	#13
Rincewind Oct 2006 1100111₂ Posts	@geoff: Thanks, that's a good Idea. I'll try this with some of the missed factors (I think masser and themerril submitted their factors) to check my system before I submit my factors for the reserved range.

2009-03-16, 14:41	#14
Rincewind Oct 2006 103 Posts	I finished my range, found 14 factors (11,xx expected) and I checked some of the other missed factors. Everything looks great.