Reserving numbers in advance

[Batalov]

Should be fairly feasible with NFS @ Home already in business for many of them:

165     6       338     +       242.7   0.68    /13/Wanted/resvd
171     5       377     +       243.2   0.703   /13/Wanted/resvd
225     3       559     +       246.1   0.913   /13/resvd/Wanted
197     3       548     +       261.4   0.753   /resvd/Wanted
225     7       311     -       262.8   0.856   /resvd/Wanted
228     11      254     +       264.5   0.861   /Wanted/resvd
190     2       881     +       265.2   0.716   /resvd/Wanted
215     7       314     +       265.3   0.810   /resvd/Wanted
172     5       382     +       267.0   0.644   /Wanted/gnfs/resvd
207     2       887     +       267.0   0.775   /resvd/Wanted
210     2       887     -       267.0   0.786   /resvd/Wanted
190     6       344     +       267.6   0.709
226     11      257     -       267.6   0.844   /Wanted/resvd
183     5       383     -       267.7   0.683   /Wanted/resvd
243     10      268     +       268     0.906   /resvd/Wanted
255     3       562     +       268.1   0.950
199     3       563     -       268.6   0.740
239     3       563     +       268.6   0.889
241     6       346     +       269.2   0.895
223     5       386     +       269.8   0.826
196     6       347     +       270.0   0.725
185     2       899     -       270.6   0.683   /resvd/Wanted

The last two are towards the re-phrased goal -- "the 900-bit limit" (which is only 3 bits above the 270-basic-digit goal line).

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by bdodson

On second thought, in view of the most recent timing estimates
for linear algebra, two months may not be the correct time frame
for viewing NFS@Home reservations. The more wanted 7, 314+
C215 is a case in point, with more than two months estimated
for the linear algebra alone (at least Jan 22 to March 28).
waiting to run. -Bruce

My guess is that Greg handed the LA for 7,314+ to a slower
(perhaps single threaded?) machine owing to lack of resources.
Maybe some of the others as well.?????

[frmky]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

My guess is that Greg handed the LA for 7,314+ to a slower
(perhaps single threaded?) machine owing to lack of resources.
Maybe some of the others as well.?????

It's actually a bit low on memory, and is swapping during the matrix checkpoints. I'm hoping that'll be fixed with a memory upgrade in the next week or two, in which case the ETA will be updated.

[Raman]

Originally Posted by bdodson

So Sam intended a distinction "basic difficulty" and "actual difficulty".

Also, sounds like Bob wins the "extending tables" question; empty
first-five-holes entries don't matter, entirely empty 3- table wouldn't
matter either. We're waiting for client requests; mostly likely from
base-2 or base-10! -Bruce

Still wondering about who are the people who use the factors of these
Cunningham tables in other mathematical works, in what way.

Who are the clients, why they demand much about the base-2 and then
the base-10 tables only, while the others are only rarely being used up?

Please think about 6,349- as well. It has been standing up as a first hole
for a very long time, ever since 6,347- has been done up... 3,569- 5,389-
are of equivalent difficulty levels only... 6,299- should have been suggested up by me only, much before itself.

[bdodson]

Originally Posted by Raman

Please think about 6,349- as well. It has been standing up as a first hole
for a very long time, ...

Rather difficult. Not a wanted (or even more wanted) number. The
sieving for 6, 371- will finish in a few hours; tasks for 2, 913+ are
queued for early afternoon. -bd

(with 2, 913+ a more wanted number ...)

[Raman]

Exactly, one more week has to go off before your 60th birthday, right? http://aliquot.googlegroups.com/web/...jgD81CgvOrArSH

--
There were too many good smilies that were being provided up by petrw1 only
at http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=12829
Birthday, Too much of information, Crutch, etc.
but one of the administrators have to take them up.

Can we have beautiful smilies for disappointment, idea, information,
thumbs down, etc., some of which I got from other forums, as well as
them being fitting up well within the other forums only?

[bdodson]

Originally Posted by Raman

Exactly, one more week has to go off before your 60th birthday, right?

Our son's 30th is somewhat sooner than that; we're celebrating
30-60. -bd

[Raman]

The post could have been created in such a way that
the image is embedded well within that post itself.

For example:
Many happy returns of the day! http://aliquot.googlegroups.com/web/...jgD81CgvOrArSH

This is only being done by combining up both of the URL and then the IMG tags.

Lots of beautiful emoctions (smilies) are there, but it is being left over to one of those gerbils to adopt them up!

http://aliquot.googlegroups.com/web/...raGdxlZulaYnsh

[Raman]

Originally Posted by Batalov

Quintic will be very slow. Sextic will be better. Want to try?

Is 6,385- easier by quartic or sextic? It is again a dual case, similarly.
But that GNFS is much harder in this case unlike 2,980+
I encountered about that a few days back. Since that 385 is divisible by 35,
we could eliminate 5 and then use a quartic, or eliminate 7 with a sextic.

Quartic SNFS is of difficulty 239.67
Sextic SNFS is of difficulty 256.79

No, that this number is not anywhere within my near term planned candidates at all.
Others can feel free to reserve it up, if they have the sufficient resources to crack up this number.

[smh]

Originally Posted by Raman

Others can feel free to reserve it up, if they have the sufficient resources to crack up this number.

Can you:
a) Stop using the color white for no reason?
b) Stop using the word "up"?

[Batalov]

Originally Posted by Raman

Is 6,385- easier by quartic or sextic?
Quartic SNFS is of difficulty 239.67
Sextic SNFS is of difficulty 256.79

Sextic. Too far to be wanted, but quite doable.
Quartic will sieve much worse (like a sextic with diff.>270).