Software/instructions/questions - Page 11

kar_bon · 2012-06-22, 07:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by grobie

Still no luck. all that is in the pfgw.log is the 1 prp but for the life of me cant get it to test it.

The *.log-file contains the PRPs found and the *-prime.log the primes found, don't mix it.

Example:
the testfile "test.txt" contains two entries:

Code:

3999*130^72-1
100542585*2^35-1

Calling "pfgw -l -f test.txt" will produce these:
Screen output:

Code:

Output logging to file pfgw.out
No factoring at all, not even trivial division
Switching to Exponentiating using GMP
3999*130^72-1 is 3-PRP! (0.0046s+0.0008s)
100542585*2^35-1 is 3-PRP! (0.0000s+0.0033s)

Because only PRPs found, there is "pfgw.log", which contains:

Code:

3999*130^72-1
100542585*2^35-1

"pfgw.out" contains all processed candidates.

The "pfgw.ini" contains a line with

Code:

CurLineNum=3

which says, all is done.

Calling "pfgw -l -tp -f test.txt" will produce these:
Screen output:

Code:

Output logging to file pfgw.out
No factoring at all, not even trivial division
Primality testing 3999*130^72-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 7, base 1+sqrt(7)
Calling Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge with factored part 51.45%
3999*130^72-1 is prime! (0.0257s+0.0031s)
Primality testing 100542585*2^35-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 7, base 1+sqrt(7)
Calling Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge with factored part 57.38%
100542585*2^35-1 is prime! (0.0058s+0.0046s)

Now 2 primes were found and "pfgw-prime.log" contains:

Code:

3999*130^72-1
100542585*2^35-1

There's no "pfgw.log" because no PRPs were found!

Before running pfgw.exe, delete all files or copy them in another folder.

grobie · 2012-06-22, 12:19

Thanks everyone. What I did was delete my .ini file then I had to copy and paste the pfgw.log with my prp's to a new file test.txt then it worked.

CGKIII · 2012-08-28, 01:18

After lurking a bit and getting tired of BOINC doing its own thing, I've come to CRUS to do some cool stuff.

Once I get all the software and such figured out, I'd like to wind up reserving one of the recommended bases (S391 to 25k). However, I've got a couple questions.

First, I can't seem to get the {number_primes,$a,1} option working correctly.

I'm using the following input file (modified to test just this functionality)

-------------

ABCD 1456*391^$a+1 [2529] // {number_primes,$a,1}
1539
8
3
7
20
7
30
2
1
14
6
7
6
9

And then I throw this into WinPFGW:
pfgw -f0 -l -t sieve-sierp-base391-2.5K-25Kcgk2.txt

My understanding of the {number_primes} functionality is that it should stop after the third test (where it finds that 1456*391^4076+1 is a prime), but it doesn't.

With the standard screen logging, it says that "ABCD File Processing for at most 1 Primes."

If someone could explain where my error is here, that would be fantastic.

Secondly, how do I leverage multiple cores? Is it as simple as splitting up the range and opening multiple instances of WinPFGW?

Thanks a lot,
Caz

Mathew · 2012-08-28, 03:10

Welcome CGKIII,

I am not sure if pfgw likes the .abcd fromat (this is the one you are currently using). What you can do instead of using the .abcd format is use the pfgw format by doing the following command:

Code:

srfile -w sieve-sierp-base391-2.5K-25Kcgk2.txt

This will create a file called sr_391.pfgw (you can rename it to what you like). Edit the first line of this file to have

Code:

//{number_primes,$a,1}

same as you did with the .abcd

This will then stop on:

Code:

1456*391^4076+1 is 3-PRP!

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGKIII

Secondly, how do I leverage multiple cores? Is it as simple as splitting up the range and opening multiple instances of WinPFGW?

Yes this is one method and the method I would recommend for understanding the software. Another method is using PRPnet, but it may not be the efficient method for the S391 2.5K-25K reservation.

Also,
You do not want to do

Code:

pfgw -f0 -l -t pfgw_filename

You would want to do

Code:

pfgw -f0 -l pfgw_filename

without the -t. You only want to do the -t option on the numbers found in the pfgw.log file.

Hope this helps,

Mathew

CGKIII · 2012-08-28, 04:15

Got it. Thanks a lot Mathew. Currently up and running on 2 cores with a manual split. Later this week I'll look more into PRPNet, since I've got another machine or two and would like to get things a bit more automated.

MyDogBuster · 2012-08-28, 04:26

Welcome CGKIII. There are many ways to do this testing. I personally use PRPNET, but is is tricky to set up unless you already know how to install MYSQL.

An alternative is that we do have private PRPNET ports set up for the server side of PRPNET. You would only have to get the client side running pointing to that port. You could then have multiple cores going against your range.

I have done ranges for 2.5K-25K using this method and it works just fine as long as you configure the clients for at least a cache of 10. Any lower and the server will get bogged down because the tests @ 2.5 k are only about 1 sec in duration.

I am not a PFGW or WinPFGW guru but I'm sure there are enough people around that can get you rolling if that's what you choose. I do know that if you bust it into multiple cores, all tests for a k must stay together otherwise if you find a prime on one core, the other cores won't know about it. //(number_primes,$a,1) is telling PFGW to flag the primedk and don't test that k anymore. The program doesn't actually stop.

Again, welcome and ask all the questions you need to.

gd_barnes · 2012-08-28, 04:38

Hi CGK,

I'm sorry I didn't respond to your PM. I was out of town until late yesterday with limited online time.

It looks like Ian (MyDogBuster) and Mathew got you started. I wanted to add one more thing: If you decide to reserve S391, there is a sieve file already available. The file will probably need to be sieved further but it would be a very good start. Take a look at our Sierp reservations page at http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/cru...e-reserves.htm. Go down to base 391 and there will be a link to the file out to the right. To make your reservation "official", just post it in the bases 251-500 thread.

Good luck!

Gary

MyDogBuster · 2012-08-28, 04:51

I also need to point out that PRPNET will run on Linux or Windows. I know nothing of Linux but could probably get you started on Windows. Another poster here, Rogue, actually wrote PRPNET so we have the ultimate source of knowledge.

CGKIII · 2012-09-15, 21:58

Is sieving machine-dependent?

So I've run the new base script on S282 to n = 2500 (going to take it to n = 25,000). Now, it's my understanding that I run srsieve for the remaining k's up to - P 100e6 (magic number I saw somewhere and wrote down). And then I run sr2sieve until I get to a removal rate ~ time it takes to do an LLR test at about 60/70% of the range, for an "average" k.

I've got four machines with four different average testing times. If I sieve on one machine and stop at the average testing time for that one, will that roughly correspond to the same sieve depth, had I used another machine? I assume so, because we have sieve files that get passed back and forth between people, but if that's not the case, then I'd like to figure out how to choose which machine will do the sieving.

gd_barnes · 2012-09-15, 23:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGKIII

Is sieving machine-dependent?

So I've run the new base script on S282 to n = 2500 (going to take it to n = 25,000). Now, it's my understanding that I run srsieve for the remaining k's up to - P 100e6 (magic number I saw somewhere and wrote down). And then I run sr2sieve until I get to a removal rate ~ time it takes to do an LLR test at about 60/70% of the range, for an "average" k.

I've got four machines with four different average testing times. If I sieve on one machine and stop at the average testing time for that one, will that roughly correspond to the same sieve depth, had I used another machine? I assume so, because we have sieve files that get passed back and forth between people, but if that's not the case, then I'd like to figure out how to choose which machine will do the sieving.

Not necessarily. Others can elaborate more but I can say that some machines are better for sieving and others for primality testing. Choose which machine is the fastest siever for all sieving. To be more specific, you should probably choose to calculate the optimum sieve depth while sieving on your fastest sieving machine with test times gleaned from your average primality testing machine. You only want to sieve on your fastest sieving machine because sieving is only about 5-10% of the total effort. I personally have only one machine that I sieve on most of the time and it can easily keep the other 11 machines busy with primality testing work. Doing it that way minimizes the overall CPU effort needed.

CGKIII · 2012-09-21, 09:03

I'd like to modify the new base script to handle not-quite-new bases, since it seems to do a bunch of nice things already.

Is it as simple as adding "DIM min_n, xxxx" to the section where all the variables are declared, and then change "SET n, 0" to "SET n, min_n"

Testing it myself might be the way to go, but I'll be out of town this weekend and won't have time to troubleshoot.

I want to get more granular with my sieving (rather than optimizing sr2sieve removal rates for a large range, chunk it better and optimize within those smaller chunks), but I don't currently have a good way to use PFGW to test from A to B, where A != 0.

2012-08-28, 01:18	#113
CGKIII Aug 2012 5² Posts	Trouble with {number_primes} option in PFGW After lurking a bit and getting tired of BOINC doing its own thing, I've come to CRUS to do some cool stuff. Once I get all the software and such figured out, I'd like to wind up reserving one of the recommended bases (S391 to 25k). However, I've got a couple questions. First, I can't seem to get the {number_primes,$a,1} option working correctly. I'm using the following input file (modified to test just this functionality) ------------- ABCD 1456391^$a+1 [2529] // {number_primes,$a,1} 1539 8 3 7 20 7 30 2 1 14 6 7 6 9 And then I throw this into WinPFGW: pfgw -f0 -l -t sieve-sierp-base391-2.5K-25Kcgk2.txt My understanding of the {number_primes} functionality is that it should stop after the third test (where it finds that 1456391^4076+1 is a prime), but it doesn't. With the standard screen logging, it says that "ABCD File Processing for at most 1 Primes." If someone could explain where my error is here, that would be fantastic. Secondly, how do I leverage multiple cores? Is it as simple as splitting up the range and opening multiple instances of WinPFGW? Thanks a lot, Caz

2012-08-28, 04:51	#118
MyDogBuster May 2008 Wilmington, DE 2²·23·31 Posts	I also need to point out that PRPNET will run on Linux or Windows. I know nothing of Linux but could probably get you started on Windows. Another poster here, Rogue, actually wrote PRPNET so we have the ultimate source of knowledge. Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 2012-08-28 at 04:51

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Useless SSE instructions	__HRB__	Programming	41	2012-07-07 17:43
Questions about software licenses...	WraithX	GMP-ECM	37	2011-10-28 01:04
Software/instructions/questions	gd_barnes	No Prime Left Behind	48	2009-07-31 01:44
Instructions to manual LLR?	OmbooHankvald	PSearch	3	2005-08-05 20:28
Instructions please?	jasong	Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5	10	2005-03-14 04:03

2012-06-22, 12:19	#112
grobie Sep 2005 Raleigh, North Carolina 337 Posts	Thanks everyone. What I did was delete my .ini file then I had to copy and paste the pfgw.log with my prp's to a new file test.txt then it worked.

2012-08-28, 04:15	#115
CGKIII Aug 2012 5² Posts	Got it. Thanks a lot Mathew. Currently up and running on 2 cores with a manual split. Later this week I'll look more into PRPNet, since I've got another machine or two and would like to get things a bit more automated.

2012-08-28, 04:26	#116
MyDogBuster May 2008 Wilmington, DE 2852₁₀ Posts	Welcome CGKIII. There are many ways to do this testing. I personally use PRPNET, but is is tricky to set up unless you already know how to install MYSQL. An alternative is that we do have private PRPNET ports set up for the server side of PRPNET. You would only have to get the client side running pointing to that port. You could then have multiple cores going against your range. I have done ranges for 2.5K-25K using this method and it works just fine as long as you configure the clients for at least a cache of 10. Any lower and the server will get bogged down because the tests @ 2.5 k are only about 1 sec in duration. I am not a PFGW or WinPFGW guru but I'm sure there are enough people around that can get you rolling if that's what you choose. I do know that if you bust it into multiple cores, all tests for a k must stay together otherwise if you find a prime on one core, the other cores won't know about it. //(number_primes,$a,1) is telling PFGW to flag the primedk and don't test that k anymore. The program doesn't actually stop. Again, welcome and ask all the questions you need to.

2012-08-28, 04:38	#117
gd_barnes May 2007 Kansas; USA 10395₁₀ Posts	Hi CGK, I'm sorry I didn't respond to your PM. I was out of town until late yesterday with limited online time. It looks like Ian (MyDogBuster) and Mathew got you started. I wanted to add one more thing: If you decide to reserve S391, there is a sieve file already available. The file will probably need to be sieved further but it would be a very good start. Take a look at our Sierp reservations page at http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/cru...e-reserves.htm. Go down to base 391 and there will be a link to the file out to the right. To make your reservation "official", just post it in the bases 251-500 thread. Good luck! Gary

2012-09-15, 21:58	#119
CGKIII Aug 2012 5² Posts	Is sieving machine-dependent? So I've run the new base script on S282 to n = 2500 (going to take it to n = 25,000). Now, it's my understanding that I run srsieve for the remaining k's up to - P 100e6 (magic number I saw somewhere and wrote down). And then I run sr2sieve until I get to a removal rate ~ time it takes to do an LLR test at about 60/70% of the range, for an "average" k. I've got four machines with four different average testing times. If I sieve on one machine and stop at the average testing time for that one, will that roughly correspond to the same sieve depth, had I used another machine? I assume so, because we have sieve files that get passed back and forth between people, but if that's not the case, then I'd like to figure out how to choose which machine will do the sieving.

2012-09-21, 09:03	#121
CGKIII Aug 2012 5² Posts	I'd like to modify the new base script to handle not-quite-new bases, since it seems to do a bunch of nice things already. Is it as simple as adding "DIM min_n, xxxx" to the section where all the variables are declared, and then change "SET n, 0" to "SET n, min_n" Testing it myself might be the way to go, but I'll be out of town this weekend and won't have time to troubleshoot. I want to get more granular with my sieving (rather than optimizing sr2sieve removal rates for a large range, chunk it better and optimize within those smaller chunks), but I don't currently have a good way to use PFGW to test from A to B, where A != 0.