Why does this user have so many repeated assignments?

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

... next time they expire, one of y'all needs to step up and grab 'em quick. If the user is reading this forum, then maybe they'll be motivated to figure out what their machine(s) are doing, and if not, then there's no harm in me saying ahead of time that I'll try to run the expiration earlier than usual to give others more time to grab any.

They have been expired. Get 'em while they're hot.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

They have been expired. Get 'em while they're hot.

Still 25 available in the 85M-86M range...

This is why the user kept getting them reassigned - they'd expire but nobody else would pick them up in the meantime until they checked in again and got the same ones because they were already in their queue.

[GP2]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

This is why the user kept getting them reassigned - they'd expire but nobody else would pick them up in the meantime until they checked in again and got the same ones because they were already in their queue.

That's odd. Maybe all the big guns have moved on to doing PRP instead of LL?

[kriesel]

Originally Posted by GP2

That's odd. Maybe all the big guns have moved on to doing PRP instead of LL?

There has been some shifting. Define big guns. curtisc and others have recent LL results in 85-86M.

As for myself, all primenet-connected production cpu cores have been switched to PRP.
Gpus are mixed. I have a 100Mdigit LL completing tonight. Some gpus can't run PRP (gpuowl) so will stay TF P-1 and LL. Others will run PRP in the future not LL.
Most cpus and gpus are running subprojects for a while yet. Gpus are manual assign only so can't get cat 0 assignments anyway.

The countdown to 86M first test milestone is now 132 active (distributed among about 80 usernames) plus 20 available. Most have updated recently. Each username completing two exponents will wrap it up. Number available will probably jump again when Daniel Procopio's batch expire.

[hansl]

I would try to grab a few, but I don't have any machines that qualify for Cat 0 yet.

Is there any way to see specifically which of the assignment requirements are met/failed for one's computers?
I get up to Cat 1 currently, but one thing I'm not clear about is how the various "in the last 120 days" related rules for Cat 0 are calculated, if the computer has not been registered that long yet.

Do these rules imply that the computer must have been returning results for at least 120 days?

[kriesel]

Originally Posted by GP2

That's odd. Maybe all the big guns have moved on to doing PRP instead of LL?

If the LL first-test assignment expires, that should not prevent someone from getting a PRP first-test assignment on the same exponent. It may be less desirable, if the expired LL eventually completes, to have differing type runs. And that issue also can arise with PRP residue types. But the higher reliability of PRP/GEC is likely worth it.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by kriesel

If the LL first-test assignment expires, that should not prevent someone from getting a PRP first-test assignment on the same exponent. It may be less desirable, if the expired LL eventually completes, to have differing type runs.

It is for that exact reason that rules are in place to prevent PRP testers from getting expired LL assignments. I'd have to look at the server's PHP code for the exact rule. I presume a PRP tester could get the assignment if the expiration on the LL test was several months ago (won't happen for a cat 0 assignment).

[patgie]

I like to test Mp with (p+1)/6=p* for prime p*

[scan80269]

I noticed one of my machines recently completed a PRP of an exponent below 90M that got expired from this user: 89773741. This is the only Cat 0 PRP assignment I'm aware of that any of my Prime95 machines ever received from PrimeNet.

A quick check within the GIMPS Milestones page revealed 6 exponents under 90M assigned to this user back in July last year, with 5 of them showing blank under the "Stage, %" column, along with ETA (days) all in the -240 range. Are these OK from GIMPS perspective? It seems to me this user may interfere with the timely completion of an upcoming milestone for GIMPS: "All exponents below 90 million tested at least once".

I'm just curious as to whether anything can be done about such "zombie" exponents.

[kriesel]

Originally Posted by patgie

I like to test Mp with (p+1)/6=p* for prime p*

Well, then, TEST them already. Or unreserve them, so someone responsible can finish them.

It's counterproductive to hoard them and do little or nothing with them for several months, keep them reserved until they expire, renew them, again do nothing with them, hoard yet longer, etc.

Exponent  Work Type   Stage %   expires (days)  ETA (days)   Assigned    Last update   Next update    Completion     User
89900149    PRP                   14              -250      2019-07-08    2020-03-02    2020-04-25    2019-07-14    patgie
89906359    PRP    PRP, 8.80%     16              -247      2019-07-10    2020-03-02    2020-04-28    2019-07-17    patgie
89903273    PRP                   17              -245      2019-07-11    2020-03-02    2020-04-28    2019-07-19    patgie
89935537    PRP                   21              -244      2019-07-15    2020-03-02    2020-04-30    2019-07-20    patgie
89936059    PRP                   21              -244      2019-07-15    2020-03-02    2020-04-30    2019-07-20    patgie
89986801    PRP                   29              -236      2019-07-23    2020-03-18    2020-05-08    2019-07-28    patgie

https://www.mersenne.org/assignments...xtf=1&exdchk=1

[Chuck]

Originally Posted by kriesel

Well, then, TEST them already. Or unreserve them, so someone responsible can finish them.

It's counterproductive to hoard them and do little or nothing with them for several months, keep them reserved until they expire, renew them, again do nothing with them, hoard yet longer, etc.

Exponent  Work Type   Stage %   expires (days)  ETA (days)   Assigned    Last update   Next update    Completion     User
89900149    PRP                   14              -250      2019-07-08    2020-03-02    2020-04-25    2019-07-14    patgie
89906359    PRP    PRP, 8.80%     16              -247      2019-07-10    2020-03-02    2020-04-28    2019-07-17    patgie
89903273    PRP                   17              -245      2019-07-11    2020-03-02    2020-04-28    2019-07-19    patgie
89935537    PRP                   21              -244      2019-07-15    2020-03-02    2020-04-30    2019-07-20    patgie
89936059    PRP                   21              -244      2019-07-15    2020-03-02    2020-04-30    2019-07-20    patgie
89986801    PRP                   29              -236      2019-07-23    2020-03-18    2020-05-08    2019-07-28    patgie

https://www.mersenne.org/assignments...xtf=1&exdchk=1

These should all be immediately poached.