mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > No Prime Left Behind

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-04-19, 20:45   #243
Mini-Geek
Account Deleted
 
Mini-Geek's Avatar
 
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA

17×251 Posts
Default

I have resumed work on k=349 and 353 at n=750K. ETA for n=800K is 5/13.
Mini-Geek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-23, 07:17   #244
MyDogBuster
 
MyDogBuster's Avatar
 
May 2008
Wilmington, DE

22×23×31 Posts
Default

k369 ---- Tested to n=668K
k371 ---- Tested to n=749K
k375 ---- Tested to n=720K
k377 ---- Tested to n=727K
k379 ---- Tested to n=723K
k381 ---- Tested to n=723K
k383 ---- Tested to n=761K
k385 ---- Tested to n=749K
k391 ---- Tested to n=724K

All but k369 over n=700k Chugging right along
MyDogBuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-23, 08:02   #245
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

101·103 Posts
Default

Excellent. My 6 k's just started about 1-1/2 days ago. They're ranging in completion from about n=625K to 632K right now on 1 core each.

So now all k<=1001 are at n>=625K.

We're filling in those holes! :-)
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-23, 08:27   #246
MyDogBuster
 
MyDogBuster's Avatar
 
May 2008
Wilmington, DE

22×23×31 Posts
Default

Gary,

It sure would be nice to finish the individual k effort by year end.

Any thoughts on what would be next?

Ian
MyDogBuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-23, 08:56   #247
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

101·103 Posts
Default

Like David said, I'm pretty democratic on this stuff as long as it fits within the very general parameters of the direction of the project. There is k=2000-3000 up to n=1M, there's n=1M-2M on our current drives (this one would be a good starting point), there's even k>3000 if we wanted to find gobs of primes within each n-range that we search. For that matter, I could see the project ultimately filling in all k<10000 but I won't even go there right now. People could ultimately chime in on the direction of how they would like to go.

I just now got a PM from Vaughan expressing an interest in some variety with smaller and larger tests. I've referenced him here for larger tests and port 9000 for smaller tests. I told him he could take my k's from n=700K-1M or just n=900K-1M if he wants to. Regardless, if he throws a fair # of his mean machines on this effort, we should easily clear it out to n=1M by year end. I also suggested for variety that he could help us sieve. If he did that, helping you with n=1M-2M for k=300-400 would be a good place to start or...we could have him start on k=400-1001 (or k=400-2000) for n=1M-2M and then you guys could ultimately combine your sieves. But to do the larger k-range combined would cause k=300-400 to take much longer so we might want to keep them separate. If we got k=300-400 for n=1M-2M fully sieved by year end (optimum depth likely P=150T-200T), that would make things more interesting for the people who like larger tests and have more resources.


Gary

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-04-23 at 08:58
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-23, 09:18   #248
MyDogBuster
 
MyDogBuster's Avatar
 
May 2008
Wilmington, DE

B2416 Posts
Default

Sounds like a nice set of choices. I'm game for anything.

Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 2009-04-23 at 09:20
MyDogBuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-23, 10:59   #249
MrOzzy
 
MrOzzy's Avatar
 
Apr 2008
Antwerp, Belgium

718 Posts
Default

What about Sierpinski primes for k=1-1000 or so, or is that way off track?
MrOzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-23, 12:15   #250
Mini-Geek
Account Deleted
 
Mini-Geek's Avatar
 
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA

426710 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gd_barnes View Post
[bunch of stuff about raising k or n] People could ultimately chime in on the direction of how they would like to go.

[bigger bunch of stuff]


Gary
Hm...this project started to fill in the gaps in ranges, and I think that should still be our priority when possible. Are there any other gaps that we should fill in? If there's no abandoned gaps to attend to, I think we should generally keep with relatively small n's, since we're one of the very few prime-search projects that searches numbers small enough that even people with small resources (like me) will find a prime pretty soon if they stick at it. Besides, even people with larger resources, like you and Free-DC, have fun finding a bunch of primes.
I'm starting to sound a little like Gary!
In short: I vote we first fill gaps where needed, and then raise k instead of n.

Last fiddled with by Mini-Geek on 2009-04-23 at 12:25
Mini-Geek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-24, 22:27   #251
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

101×103 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrOzzy View Post
What about Sierpinski primes for k=1-1000 or so, or is that way off track?

That was mentioned at some point and subsequent to that, PrimeGrid took over the effort. It has since vaulted them to #3 in total primes. I believe they are testing something like k=3-1200 up to n=800K and may have extended that

Basically they either already had the idea or picked up on our idea for the Proth side. It crossed my mind to do it but ultimately I thought it was too big to do both sides for the resources that we had at the time. Had they not picked up such an effort, with our now much larger resources, I'd definitely do it.

Something that I suppose could be considered would be to do the Proth side for k=1200-2000 (assuming PrimeGrid isn't currently considering or started such an effort) but we'd really need to change our project definition to go that route and I wouldn't want our Riesel side to bog down too much as a result of it.

Reference Mini's thoughts, it's a bit of a tough balancing act. I've gotten 2-3 requests and suggestions about doing larger n-ranges, mainly of course from larger searchers. The project does kind of have a "glass cealing" of n<=1M and there really isn't a huge variety of n-ranges to search. (Currently from n=200K to n=~750K on the 6k drive.) But as he said, the design of the original project was to "fiil in" where primes have been missed so expanding upwards by k-value fits a little more the definition of the project. That said...definitions and times do change and to not change with them will cause a project to languish. I'd like to think that we could do both. Karsten is sieving k=2000-3000 for n<1M and Ian is sieving k=300-400 for n=1M-2M, both as low priority "side efforts" at this point.

At this point, we haven't even hit n=650K on all k<=1001 yet. n=650K-1M is a HUGE range...far more time-consuming than what we have tested so far so for now, we can keep all of this in the discussion and "low priority" phase.


Gary

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-04-24 at 22:28
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-24, 22:42   #252
kar_bon
 
kar_bon's Avatar
 
Mar 2006
Germany

B5B16 Posts
Default

that're my thoughts too:

no '+'-side for now. it's much work enough NPLB has reserved plus doublechecks.
another point is, there's no such collection of information of the Sierp-side like mine on Riesel!
and i'm not doing such new collection in the near future because i got work for a long time.

to complete the existing drives will take months of work.

after that (or better just before that point) an expansion upto higher n-level or k-level is the best choice for our work!

the 2000<k<3000 range is searched in these days by many contributors and again many gaps will be left there! so this could be one of our next goals.
kar_bon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-27, 03:55   #253
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

101·103 Posts
Default

Ian, you can mark all of my 6 k's as complete to n=640K. Some are somewhat higher but n=640K is their minimum. No primes found since by start on them at n=620K.
When the 6th drive completes k=600-800 to n=640K, which will happen within about 1 day, all k<=1001 will be complete to n=640K!

Edited by MyDogBuster: Done

Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 2009-04-27 at 04:03
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Individual-k reservations k=300-400 n=1M-3M gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 273 2021-01-26 12:08
Individual overall statistics graphs Chuck GPU to 72 4 2012-08-20 23:58
Distinquishing Team from Individual accounts strates Teams 5 2006-12-17 20:50
What is the largest individual effort currently under way? Gary Edstrom Lounge 10 2004-04-20 19:55
Individual Account Report queries shu_the_genius PrimeNet 5 2003-12-19 18:00

All times are UTC. The time now is 09:22.


Tue Jul 27 09:22:28 UTC 2021 up 4 days, 3:51, 0 users, load averages: 2.11, 1.98, 1.78

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.