Several Assignments not automatically unreserved

sixblueboxes · 2014-03-04, 12:57

I removed two machines from GIMPS in December, and normally when I do that, their exponents are unreserved. However for these two computers, the exponents are still there:

http://i.imgur.com/DVffsQD.jpg

even after 60 days of inactivity. Should I manually unreserve them, or just keep waiting?

chalsall · 2014-03-04, 14:02

And possibly related George / James, or perhaps something completely different...

One of my R720s was working on 49139413. Out for only 3 days. I took a look at the Assignment report for low LL candidates, and noticed a second entry in the list for this candidate -- picked up by "Spidy" this morning.

Code:

49139413	LL	LL, 10.50%	3	2	2014-03-06	2014-03-04	2014-03-04	2014-03-01	wabbit	R720_4
49139413	LL			0	79	2014-05-22	2014-03-05	2014-03-04	2014-03-04	wabbit	R720_5

As an experiment, I updated the worktodo.txt entry for this candidate with the new AID, and had the client report to Primenet. The second entry was then updated:

Code:

49139413	LL	LL, 10.50%	3	2	2014-03-06	2014-03-04	2014-03-04	2014-03-01	wabbit	R720_4
49139413	LL	LL, 10.90%	0	2	2014-03-06	2014-03-04	2014-03-04	2014-03-04	wabbit	R720_4

So, this suggests to me that these are indeed two different LL assignments for this single candidate.

Is this a bug George? Or are you so sure it's a MP that you want it checked and double checked ASAP?

Prime95 · 2014-03-04, 17:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixblueboxes

However for these two computers, the exponents are still there

When exponents are expired the reservation now stays in the database. This helps in the case where the computer eventually returns a result, we can better give proper CPU credit. Your assignments did expire on March 1st.

I've changed the workload report to not display these expired assignments. Someday, I might create a report to show expired and poached assignments and let you really delete them. Pretty low priority.

chalsall · 2014-03-04, 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

When exponents are expired the reservation now stays in the database. This helps in the case where the computer eventually returns a result, we can better give proper CPU credit.

Does this explain the reassignment of 49139413?

Prime95 · 2014-03-04, 19:19

No. I presume prime.log doesn't show anything interesting (like an unexplained unreserve of the exponent).

There are about 14 exponents that are either double-assigned or assigned-and-available. So, there is a leak somewhere that needs to be plugged.

chalsall · 2014-03-04, 19:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

No. I presume prime.log doesn't show anything interesting (like an unexplained unreserve of the exponent).

Nope. Nothing interesting. Primenet was very happy to receive updates under the original AID, but signed it out again (it was only by chance that "Spidy" captured this assignment, which I was then able to experiment with).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

There are about 14 exponents that are either double-assigned or assigned-and-available. So, there is a leak somewhere that needs to be plugged.

AKA, a bug.

This is not unexpected, and really not a big deal. When changes happen unexpected results can occur. Thanks for working this.

Prime95 · 2014-03-04, 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

Is this a bug George?

Yes. Your Mar 1 assignment was due to expiring an old assignment.

The expired assignment reported a result on Mar 4. If the LL result had been clean, your assignment would have been demoted to a DC. However, the LL result was suspect. Instead of doing nothing, the server erroneously made the exponent available for a first LL test.

Prime95 · 2014-03-05, 21:55

I fixed chashall's bug. However, the 8 exponents that were double-assigned remain double-assigned. I don't think this will cause any problems other than screwing up the counts on the work distribution web page.

chalsall · 2014-03-05, 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

I fixed chashall's bug. However, the 8 exponents that were double-assigned remain double-assigned. I don't think this will cause any problems other than screwing up the counts on the work distribution web page.

It was actually your bug, I just very carefully documented it.

Thanks George. We're all having fun here.

2014-03-04, 12:57	#1
sixblueboxes Feb 2013 Charlotte, North Carolina 1F₁₆ Posts	Several Assignments not automatically unreserved I removed two machines from GIMPS in December, and normally when I do that, their exponents are unreserved. However for these two computers, the exponents are still there: http://i.imgur.com/DVffsQD.jpg even after 60 days of inactivity. Should I manually unreserve them, or just keep waiting?

2014-03-04, 14:02	#2
chalsall If I May "Chris Halsall" Sep 2002 Barbados 23003₈ Posts	And possibly related George / James, or perhaps something completely different... One of my R720s was working on 49139413. Out for only 3 days. I took a look at the Assignment report for low LL candidates, and noticed a second entry in the list for this candidate -- picked up by "Spidy" this morning. Code: 49139413 LL LL, 10.50% 3 2 2014-03-06 2014-03-04 2014-03-04 2014-03-01 wabbit R720_4 49139413 LL 0 79 2014-05-22 2014-03-05 2014-03-04 2014-03-04 wabbit R720_5 As an experiment, I updated the worktodo.txt entry for this candidate with the new AID, and had the client report to Primenet. The second entry was then updated: Code: 49139413 LL LL, 10.50% 3 2 2014-03-06 2014-03-04 2014-03-04 2014-03-01 wabbit R720_4 49139413 LL LL, 10.90% 0 2 2014-03-06 2014-03-04 2014-03-04 2014-03-04 wabbit R720_4 So, this suggests to me that these are indeed two different LL assignments for this single candidate. Is this a bug George? Or are you so sure it's a MP that you want it checked and double checked ASAP?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Automatically stopping P-1 to benchmark? Why?	Uncwilly	Software	2	2018-02-23 05:24
Automatically updating factordb	chris2be8	FactorDB	9	2012-05-03 10:20
Automatically start Prime95 on the mac	koekie	Software	2	2012-02-06 15:39
accidentally unreserved exponent	ixfd64	PrimeNet	4	2011-12-13 10:27
Exponent unreserved but still computing?	PrimeCroat	PrimeNet	5	2004-03-09 00:28

2014-03-04, 19:19	#5
Prime95 P90 years forever! Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 2·53·71 Posts	No. I presume prime.log doesn't show anything interesting (like an unexplained unreserve of the exponent). There are about 14 exponents that are either double-assigned or assigned-and-available. So, there is a leak somewhere that needs to be plugged.

2014-03-05, 21:55	#8
Prime95 P90 years forever! Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 2×53×71 Posts	I fixed chashall's bug. However, the 8 exponents that were double-assigned remain double-assigned. I don't think this will cause any problems other than screwing up the counts on the work distribution web page.