srsieve/sr2sieve enhancements - Page 5

rogue · 2012-09-11, 13:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by henryzz

I just ran the sieve file in the attachment passed the error and it ran fine. However, a subsequence had been removed so the test wasn't exactly the same. I am running the sieving job again with the new binary.
The faulty binary missed several factors before and after 4302594733 | 20097212*7^23221-1 in addition to having the error. It looks like the 64-bit sieve was completly messed up. Strangely it did manage to find that one factor before finding an error.

Is the new build working correctly? If so, let me know and I'll rebuild srsieve/sr1sieve/sr2sieve for Windows.

henryzz · 2012-09-11, 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogue

Is the new build working correctly? If so, let me know and I'll rebuild srsieve/sr1sieve/sr2sieve for Windows.

I have had a bit of a strange time. The new build worked. I ran it again from the attached file and it worked with the old. I started it again from the start with the old binary and didn't get a chance to finish before I reinstalled windows on a new ssd and accidentally messed up the old partition. Currently I have to visit safe mode on the new installation to access the files on it.
Also yesterday afternoon I was having problems with sr2sieve. Acording to srfile it was producing extra factors. I ran this twice with 18.10 before realizing that it wasn't the latest. I updated and ran again. It still produced the exact same extra factors. This was on a similar type of file to the other(100 ks instead of 37 but still riesel7 and ks around 20M). I didn't update because the srsieve run hadn't finished. Today is my birthday so I have been avoiding bug-tracking today. I ended up messing up my windows partition instead.

rogue · 2012-09-11, 21:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by henryzz

I have had a bit of a strange time. The new build worked. I ran it again from the attached file and it worked with the old. I started it again from the start with the old binary and didn't get a chance to finish before I reinstalled windows on a new ssd and accidentally messed up the old partition. Currently I have to visit safe mode on the new installation to access the files on it.
Also yesterday afternoon I was having problems with sr2sieve. Acording to srfile it was producing extra factors. I ran this twice with 18.10 before realizing that it wasn't the latest. I updated and ran again. It still produced the exact same extra factors. This was on a similar type of file to the other(100 ks instead of 37 but still riesel7 and ks around 20M). I didn't update because the srsieve run hadn't finished. Today is my birthday so I have been avoiding bug-tracking today. I ended up messing up my windows partition instead.

srfile, sr1sieve, and sr2sieve need to be rebuilt as well. Any one of those could have the same compilation issue that srsieve had.

henryzz · 2012-09-11, 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogue

srfile, sr1sieve, and sr2sieve need to be rebuilt as well. Any one of those could have the same compilation issue that srsieve had.

If it is the old bug then sr1sieve and sr2sieve had it fixed. srsieve just wasn't used enough to bother fixing considering it was just the 64-bit version.

LaurV · 2012-09-12, 03:24

happy birthday!

rogue · 2012-09-12, 16:06

I have posted srsieve (v 1.0.5), sr2sieve (v 1.9.1), and sr1sieve (v 1.4.3)

The only change is a rebuilt Win64 executable with the latest MinGW. Hopefully the compiler errors caused by the previous builds with MinGW have been resolved.

henryzz · 2012-09-15, 21:53

I finally got to testing the new sr2sieve. It turns out it was srfile that had the problem. The factors were actually fine. As far as I can tell all the new binaries are fine.

rogue · 2012-09-15, 21:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by henryzz

I finally got to testing the new sr2sieve. It turns out it was srfile that had the problem. The factors were actually fine. As far as I can tell all the new binaries are fine.

That is what I had suspected. Thanks for giving them a test run.

Antonio · 2012-10-24, 17:46

I use sr1sieve a fair bit so thanks for the work done.

Would it be possible to add extra command line options so that rather than specifying Pmin and Pmax one could specify the bit depth of the sieve?

For example -b30 -B37 would sieve from 2^30 to 2^37.

I do this manually at the moment (blame to much Prime95 sieving

), well to 3 digits, rounded up, anyway.

rogue · 2012-10-24, 18:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antonio

I use sr1sieve a fair bit so thanks for the work done.

Would it be possible to add extra command line options so that rather than specifying Pmin and Pmax one could specify the bit depth of the sieve?

For example -b30 -B37 would sieve from 2^30 to 2^37.

I do this manually at the moment (blame to much Prime95 sieving

), well to 3 digits, rounded up, anyway.

I believe that is already supported, but I haven't tested it out. Try -p2b30 -P2b37.

Antonio · 2012-10-24, 19:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogue

I believe that is already supported, but I haven't tested it out. Try -p2b30 -P2b37.

Tried that (for -P anyway), but no joy - just returns 'argument malformed'.
Tried it as -P2b37, -P 2b37, -P2b 37, all variations return the same error.

I noticed it will accept -P137e9 (ie standard decimal form) which makes life easier.

2012-10-24, 17:46	#53
Antonio "Antonio Key" Sep 2011 UK 213₁₆ Posts	Request for enhancement I use sr1sieve a fair bit so thanks for the work done. Would it be possible to add extra command line options so that rather than specifying Pmin and Pmax one could specify the bit depth of the sieve? For example -b30 -B37 would sieve from 2^30 to 2^37. I do this manually at the moment (blame to much Prime95 sieving ), well to 3 digits, rounded up, anyway.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sieving twins with srsieve	henryzz	Twin Prime Search	0	2014-03-18 12:44
Intel announces multi-core enhancements for Haswell chips	ixfd64	Hardware	8	2012-02-10 20:32
LLRnet enhancements	kar_bon	No Prime Left Behind	10	2008-03-28 11:21
TODO list and suggestions/comments/enhancements	Greenbank	Octoproth Search	2	2006-12-03 17:28
Suggestions for future enhancements	Reboot It	Software	16	2003-10-17 01:31

2012-09-12, 03:24	#49
LaurV Romulan Interpreter "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 2833₁₆ Posts	happy birthday!

2012-09-12, 16:06	#50
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 7341₁₀ Posts	I have posted srsieve (v 1.0.5), sr2sieve (v 1.9.1), and sr1sieve (v 1.4.3) The only change is a rebuilt Win64 executable with the latest MinGW. Hopefully the compiler errors caused by the previous builds with MinGW have been resolved.

2012-09-15, 21:53	#51
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Liverpool (GMT/BST) 1011111111101₂ Posts	I finally got to testing the new sr2sieve. It turns out it was srfile that had the problem. The factors were actually fine. As far as I can tell all the new binaries are fine.