GPU to 72 status...

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Ahaaa... This would make davieddy very proud , one of the main reasons of his arguments (for which he was banned once) was that one table was sync'd from midnight and the other from midday, hehe...

LOL. And he was still wrong.

I sincerely hope he's still around (as my late father used to say) "on this bloody ball of wax".

[Chuck]

The drill-downs under "Workers' Progress" — "Overall work" — "Last day/week/month/quarter" are only returning ten names. This started a couple of days ago.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Chuck

The drill-downs under "Workers' Progress" — "Overall work" — "Last day/week/month/quarter" are only returning ten names. This started a couple of days ago.

Damn... Thanks...

Fixing one bug caused another.... (Sigh...)

[manfred4]

Am I correct, that the account "GPU Factoring" Is there to reserve TF/LL work fot the users on GPU72? I am wondering, because on the active Assignment Page I can see hundereds of Assignments blocked since many years for LL work, while there is no one working on them and they appear to not be available on the site. Is there something blocking, that shouldn't?
Here some example Assignments:
http://www.mersenne.org/report_expon...2206453&full=1: Could be given out for P-1 or LL, but hasn't been worked on for 3 years.
http://www.mersenne.org/report_expon...2212753&full=1: Same here

... I could list loads of these. They seem as if they should be released or something.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by manfred4

Am I correct, that the account "GPU Factoring" Is there to reserve TF/LL work fot the users on GPU72?

That is correct.

Originally Posted by manfred4

I am wondering, because on the active Assignment Page I can see hundereds of Assignments blocked since many years for LL work, while there is no one working on them and they appear to not be available on the site. Is there something blocking, that shouldn't?

George asked me to bring in those candidates in the 332M range which are not yet appropriately TF'ed. I brought in approximately 3,500 candidates between 332192831 and 332.6M which had not been assigned to registered users, and which were TF'ed to less than 78 bits.

Because of the way I do this, those candidates which are reserved by truly Anonymous (read: non-registered) users using the manual assignment form are transferred to the "GPU Factoring" account. These are what you are seeing -- most of the 3,500 candidates should show a registration date of 2015.05.17 and will be released for assignment once they've been TF'ed to at least 78 bits.

Please be aware that my "Observation Spider" is watching the 332M range, and will release candidates at 77 bits if any are about to be assigned to LL'ers at below that.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Please be aware that my "Observation Spider" is watching the 332M range, and will release candidates at 77 bits if any are about to be assigned to LL'ers at below that.

I have left my machines to finish the assignments that I had given them prior to the hostile take over assumption of management of the range by GPU72 .
A lot of what I am doing is 'poaching' the TF work of exponents assigned to LL workers. I understand that you have not sucked them up.
As my worktodo's get thin I will hit up the GPU72 server for new assignments.

[manfred4]

Originally Posted by chalsall

That is correct.



George asked me to bring in those candidates in the 332M range which are not yet appropriately TF'ed. I brought in approximately 3,500 candidates between 332192831 and 332.6M which had not been assigned to registered users, and which were TF'ed to less than 78 bits.

Because of the way I do this, those candidates which are reserved by truly Anonymous (read: non-registered) users using the manual assignment form are transferred to the "GPU Factoring" account. These are what you are seeing -- most of the 3,500 candidates should show a registration date of 2015.05.17 and will be released for assignment once they've been TF'ed to at least 78 bits.

Please be aware that my "Observation Spider" is watching the 332M range, and will release candidates at 77 bits if any are about to be assigned to LL'ers at below that.

That one I know about, but i was wondering about those assignments being held back since years. Before 2015-05-17 there should be no assignments, since GPU72 did not have any assignments available for some months in that range. Could you have a look into those two I posted here with links and check, if they are assigned / available from your site or if they are blocked for no reason as I supposed?

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by manfred4

Could you have a look into those two I posted here with links and check, if they are assigned / available from your site or if they are blocked for no reason as I supposed?

Please for give me for this, but connect the dots.

332206453, for example, is at 76 bits.

What part of what I said above isn't clear?

[casmith789]

Is 78 the optimal bit level for tests at 100M digits then?

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by casmith789

Is 78 the optimal bit level for tests at 100M digits then?

That is about the point where P-1 should be tried, before doing the final 2-3 bits.

Here is a chart that shows the cross stop bits for an average GPU:
http://mersenneforum.org/showpost.ph...&postcount=413

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by casmith789

Is 78 the optimal bit level for tests at 100M digits then?

As indicated by Uncwilly and James, not really -- we should be going deeper.

But, most prefer to do "breadth first" up there, which is why I only brought in those up to 332.6M at less than 78 bits. This was largely to "hold" those candidates TF'ed to less than 78 so they weren't assigned for P-1'ing nor LL'ing.

So everyone knows, this is what "Spidy" observed just now:

20150526_180503 INFO:  Category 332...
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332240089,79,1 (725E76DBE4E2A295C5925514DFEC1EF0) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332251531,79,1 (8C5AEFC4A9C359D842A9C1F920D34DC1) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332290181,79,1 (9AA1FDE57B7E7330548ADD8DD9E3217A) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332388613,79,1 (4EC5ECDEB0F09B390194E368D3CEFDC1) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332438479,79,1 (3ADB82AF6A934DD71FEED251FBEEDB5D) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332442211,79,1 (09A2E6050A4BD6CC4A38888F9D8B1196) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332466361,80,1 (AE51CBDDB07EC429197AD04591E4D025) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332466451,79,1 (24CC1498870CE1888A513A41EAF363D9) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332466457,79,1 (2710DE41DF8C594F0B4FD062D14FC802) -- Keep: 0
20150526_180504 INFO:  100: 332193109,78,0 (439A5C7B00EA224948C36664CF6B2E2D) -- Keep: 0

As in, there are a good number of candidates adequately (but not yet optimally) TF'ed ready for LL and/or P-1 assignment. Further please know, except for the occasional surge, there are very few such assignments.

For those doing TF'ing work up there, it would help the project more if you did "depth first". Although be aware that taking a candidate up to 78 or so can take a day or so even on a really good GPU.