Sieving Drive all base 2/4 k's worked by CRUS - Page 9

Lennart · 2014-05-18, 08:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lennart

600k-800k done nothing found

Starting 800K-1M

Lennart

All test up to n<1M are done .. Nothing found

Lennart

gd_barnes · 2014-05-18, 08:55

It may not make much sense to you but I've always felt that it makes a lot of sense to sieve a large n-range to the optimum depth of sieving a small (nmax/nmin > 2) range so that the testing part of the effort doesn't have to take so long to get off the ground and we still get long term sieving efficiency gains. (I'm not sure what optimum would be here for only an n=2M-5M file but my guess is that it would be much less than the P=650T that we are doing here.) That is, why sieve n=2M-5M as it resides in a n=0-16.77M file to a greater depth then what the optimum depth would be for an n=2M-5M stand alone file? After all, these sieve ranges that are chosen are mostly arbitrary anyway. I just used the range originally chosen by Jean Penne for the base 2 even-n/odd-n k's. You'll have to admit that sieving this large n-range is much more efficient in the long run than sieving only n=2M-5M and then starting a new effort for n=5M-10M, etc., even if we're not sieving it to what the optimum would be over a 5-10 year sieving/testing effort for n<16.77M.

Breaking off the file in n=1M increments is too much hassle when you're running a project with 2000+ bases and multiple team drives.

Agreed that we could remove n=0M-1M now that Lennart has double-checked that range. Thanks again Lennart!

KEP · 2014-05-18, 12:55

A little off topic, however still worth mentioning:

On my SR383 search, I have been sieving n=1 to n=50M on all initially 52 k's remaining. The reason I ended up choosing to sieve from n=1 to n=50M, in stead of sieving from n=100K to n=200K is as follows:

Your sievespeed for the entire range of n=1 to n=50M is reduced to about 1/10th compared to your sievespeed for n=100K to n=200K. However your search range is also 500 times larger. So overall even though you are sieving 10 times slower, you are still 50 times faster at your overall sieving, since you wont have to sieve 50 ranges of 100K n's.

On a final note, completely off topic, I'm going to give a status on SR383 in about 2-3 weeks, as my doublecheck for SR383 for n<=100K is complete.

Take care

Kenneth

VBCurtis · 2014-05-18, 17:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

(I'm not sure what optimum would be here for only an n=2M-5M file but my guess is that it would be much less than the P=650T that we are doing here.) That is, why sieve n=2M-5M as it resides in a n=0-16.77M file to a greater depth then what the optimum depth would be for an n=2M-5M stand alone file?

I didn't pull 1000T out of thin air; I believe that would have been optimal for sieving 2-5M on its own. By sieving a larger file to a lower depth, you are trading sieve efficiency for LLR efficiency. Which saves more time: a sieve 50% more efficient, or LLRing 2% fewer numbers? Hint: sieve time is roughly 5% of LLR time.

As it turns out, that tradeoff is nearly even, so either choice is fine- but to think the sieve efficiency is such a big deal is an illusion, one which slows the onset of finding primes.

Lennart · 2014-05-21, 14:06

Complete 400T-410T

I will take a break now, I have some DC work todo.

Lennart

TheCount · 2014-06-03, 11:39

Reserving 410T-415T

5 cores:
sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 410e12 -P 411e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt
sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 411e12 -P 412e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt
sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 412e12 -P 413e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt
sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 413e12 -P 414e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt
sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 414e12 -P 415e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt

TheCount

TheCount · 2014-06-03, 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Reserving 410T-415T

2.08M p/sec

ETA 09 Jun 08:49 (WST)

TheCount

Lennart · 2014-06-03, 19:23

Reserving 415T-420T

Lennart

Lennart · 2014-06-07, 09:14

415T-420T Complete

Lennart

TheCount · 2014-06-10, 10:59

410T-415T Complete (516 factors found)
Average time 480437 seconds per core, 5 cores

Roger

gd_barnes · 2014-06-10, 19:32

I have posted a new sieve file in the 1st post here. It has k=60849 and n<=1M removed as well as all factors up to P=420T. k=60849 was primed yesterday by Jene Penne and Lennart previously doublechecked n<=1M. Please use the file for future sieving. It is ~12-13% smaller and so will sieve a little faster.

Lennart, do you have the residues for n<=1M?

2014-05-18, 08:55	#90
gd_barnes May 2007 Kansas; USA 101×103 Posts	It may not make much sense to you but I've always felt that it makes a lot of sense to sieve a large n-range to the optimum depth of sieving a small (nmax/nmin > 2) range so that the testing part of the effort doesn't have to take so long to get off the ground and we still get long term sieving efficiency gains. (I'm not sure what optimum would be here for only an n=2M-5M file but my guess is that it would be much less than the P=650T that we are doing here.) That is, why sieve n=2M-5M as it resides in a n=0-16.77M file to a greater depth then what the optimum depth would be for an n=2M-5M stand alone file? After all, these sieve ranges that are chosen are mostly arbitrary anyway. I just used the range originally chosen by Jean Penne for the base 2 even-n/odd-n k's. You'll have to admit that sieving this large n-range is much more efficient in the long run than sieving only n=2M-5M and then starting a new effort for n=5M-10M, etc., even if we're not sieving it to what the optimum would be over a 5-10 year sieving/testing effort for n<16.77M. Breaking off the file in n=1M increments is too much hassle when you're running a project with 2000+ bases and multiple team drives. Agreed that we could remove n=0M-1M now that Lennart has double-checked that range. Thanks again Lennart! Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2014-05-18 at 08:58

2014-05-18, 12:55	#91
KEP Quasi Admin Thing May 2005 2×3×7×23 Posts	A little off topic, however still worth mentioning: On my SR383 search, I have been sieving n=1 to n=50M on all initially 52 k's remaining. The reason I ended up choosing to sieve from n=1 to n=50M, in stead of sieving from n=100K to n=200K is as follows: Your sievespeed for the entire range of n=1 to n=50M is reduced to about 1/10th compared to your sievespeed for n=100K to n=200K. However your search range is also 500 times larger. So overall even though you are sieving 10 times slower, you are still 50 times faster at your overall sieving, since you wont have to sieve 50 ranges of 100K n's. On a final note, completely off topic, I'm going to give a status on SR383 in about 2-3 weeks, as my doublecheck for SR383 for n<=100K is complete. Take care Kenneth Last fiddled with by KEP on 2014-05-18 at 12:55

2014-06-03, 19:23	#96
Lennart "Lennart" Jun 2007 2⁵×5×7 Posts	Reserving 415T-420T Lennart Last fiddled with by Lennart on 2014-06-03 at 19:24

2014-06-10, 19:32	#99
gd_barnes May 2007 Kansas; USA 101×103 Posts	I have posted a new sieve file in the 1st post here. It has k=60849 and n<=1M removed as well as all factors up to P=420T. k=60849 was primed yesterday by Jene Penne and Lennart previously doublechecked n<=1M. Please use the file for future sieving. It is ~12-13% smaller and so will sieve a little faster. Lennart, do you have the residues for n<=1M? Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2014-06-10 at 19:34

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sieving for CRUS	rebirther	Conjectures 'R Us	638	2021-06-15 07:55
CRUS-like sieving challenge	CRGreathouse	Puzzles	24	2011-10-28 18:30
PRPnet 1st drive-R/S base 2 even-k/even-n/odd-n	mdettweiler	Conjectures 'R Us	153	2011-08-10 06:54
Sieving drive Riesel base 6 n=1M-2M	gd_barnes	Conjectures 'R Us	40	2011-01-22 08:10
Sieving drive Riesel base 6 n=150K-1M	gd_barnes	Conjectures 'R Us	27	2009-10-08 21:49

2014-06-03, 11:39	#94
TheCount Sep 2013 Perth, Au. 62₁₆ Posts	Reserving 410T-415T 5 cores: sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 410e12 -P 411e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 411e12 -P 412e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 412e12 -P 413e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 413e12 -P 414e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt sr2sieve-x86_64-windows.exe -p 414e12 -P 415e12 -i sieve-riesel-sierp-even-odd-k-n.txt TheCount