Strategic Double Clicking

[GP2]

Originally Posted by petrw1

He seems to have access to a LOT!!! of computers.

It's this guy. 120 [cores?] and 6TB of memory!

[moebius]

44585069 needs a triple check.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by moebius

44585069 needs a triple check.

I got this one.

[GP2]

Originally Posted by endless mike

I do wonder about the seven assignments that were being worked on during the freezes. Those are here.

DoubleCheck=70328581,75,1
DoubleCheck=70804673,75,1
DoubleCheck=71705971,75,1
DoubleCheck=71909627,75,1
DoubleCheck=72813683,75,1
DoubleCheck=73910377,75,1
DoubleCheck=74177821,75,1

All seven are verified good.

[ixfd64]

Originally Posted by GP2

All seven are verified good.

A little off-topic, but I assume your PrimeNet name is "kkmrkkblmbrbk"? If so, does it stand for anything?

[GP2]

Originally Posted by ixfd64

A little off-topic, but I assume your PrimeNet name is "kkmrkkblmbrbk"? If so, does it stand for anything?

It's a disemvoweled phrase from a secret language so secret that even the inventors refused to figure out what it means.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by moebius

44585069 needs a triple check.

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

I got this one.

I matched with the most recent other check.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by GP2

It's a disemvoweled phrase from a secret language so secret that even the inventors refused to figure out what it means.

ROFL!

[Mark Rose]

Madpoo, some new missed factors have identified a couple of users whose CPUs may have been misbehaving: http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...&postcount=452

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

Madpoo, some new missed factors have identified a couple of users whose CPUs may have been misbehaving: http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...&postcount=452

Hmm... interesting. It's a bunch of users too.

My queries aren't really setup to find users who missed factors unfortunately. I took a look at that once, but the way the historic data is stored, it would take a lot of extra parsing to dig into that and figure out which range a user did and whether a factor in that same range was found later by someone else. it's easy to spot for humans, but yeah, doing it in a program is just one of those things I didn't have time to work on in depth.

[Mark Rose]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

Hmm... interesting. It's a bunch of users too.

My queries aren't really setup to find users who missed factors unfortunately. I took a look at that once, but the way the historic data is stored, it would take a lot of extra parsing to dig into that and figure out which range a user did and whether a factor in that same range was found later by someone else. it's easy to spot for humans, but yeah, doing it in a program is just one of those things I didn't have time to work on in depth.

I know George was able to figure out which CPUs did previously poor TF, and we both redid the TF work from those CPUs and DC'ed work from those CPUs. As far as I know, the CPU that reported work isn't available through the XML, so it has to be someone on the inside who figures out what work should be redone.