n=390000 discussions and old reservations

[10metreh]

Originally Posted by Oddball

Hmmm, it looks like I can't edit the first post. Maybe that's because I'm not a mod.

Yep, editing expires after 60 mins unless you're a mod. You can always PM Xyzzy and ask to become one...

[Oddball]

Originally Posted by 10metreh

Yep, editing expires after 60 mins unless you're a mod. You can always PM Xyzzy and ask to become one...

I see. PM to Xyzzy sent.

[Oddball]

Originally Posted by Oddball

I see. PM to Xyzzy sent.

He responded that I'll need three long term members to support me being mod, since I'm a newcomer here. Could some of you post on this thread and indicate that you wish to see me become moderator of this forum?

Thanks in advance.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Oddball

He responded that I'll need three long term members to support me being mod, since I'm a newcomer here. Could some of you post on this thread and indicate that you wish to see me become moderator of this forum?

Thanks in advance.

Well, I'll say that by now you definitely seem legit and interested in keeping the project going, so I'd definitely support your being promoted to mod, given that MooMoo seems to be gone for good. No reason to let a perfectly good project go to waste due to the disappearance of its original leader--the Riesel Sieve project was in a similar boat until recently, when it was picked up by PrimeGrid after over a year (was it two?) since its primary leader disappeared, and that seems to now be flourishing with new life. Hopefully TPS will do the same now that you're working to get it back on track.

I must say, I personally do think the variable-n search being attempted before may have a better chance of finding a bigger twin than a fixed-n search as is being started now. I'm not an expert on the mathematics involved and in fact I can't find the thread where all that was originally discussed, though I imagine one or two others should be able to turn it up. Since this n=390000 effort is still in its inception, it may be worth still considering which is the best way to proceed in the long term.

That said, the choice of fixed-n vs. variable-n is a matter of preference, and does not have any bearing on whether I feel you will be a dedicated and able leader for this project, which I do.

Max

[KEP]

Originally Posted by Oddball

He responded that I'll need three long term members to support me being mod, since I'm a newcomer here. Could some of you post on this thread and indicate that you wish to see me become moderator of this forum?

Thanks in advance.

Due to our PM communication, I feel just like Max. And Max, it was almost 2 years before PrimeGrid picked up the RieselSieve challenge. This project is interesting, not only because it bears the hope of finding a new and big Twin, but because it can show what a combined force of thousands of processors can come up with in very short time. Last but not least, since I'm an IRL twin, I'll of course support anyone trying to find a world record mathematical brother of me. So of course I support you Oddball being the new moderator of this project. Btw, if you look at MooMooos profile, it has not been active since August 2009, so whoever you saw as green the other day, it can't have been MooMooo. Personally I had hoped that those who decided to revive this project, would have picked up the n=480K-500K range search and continued it till it was completed. Just my two cents, as mentioned previously no ressources to spare, but good luck on your efforts.

Regards

KEP

[TimSorbet]

Originally Posted by KEP

Btw, if you look at MooMooos profile, it has not been active since August 2009, so whoever you saw as green the other day, it can't have been MooMooo.

He meant that MooooMoo's name was green, which means that that user is a moderator in one or more subforums (e.g. my name), and now it is blue, meaning that it's just a normal user (e.g. your name). Not anything related to the online status, which is shown by a green or gray light next to the user's posts.

Originally Posted by KEP

Personally I had hoped that those who decided to revive this project, would have picked up the n=480K-500K range search and continued it till it was completed. Just my two cents, as mentioned previously no ressources to spare, but good luck on your efforts.

I think the problem with that is that MooooMoo was collecting the factors and such, and so it might not be very easy to continue, as opposed to restarting, that search. I haven't really looked at it, though. If the work can be recovered without too much trouble, I would definitely support that, as a good deal of work was put into that by many contributors, including myself.

[gribozavr]

I was collecting factors and doing all data-related bookkeeping. All files are still here on my hdd.

[Oddball]

Originally Posted by mdettweiler

I must say, I personally do think the variable-n search being attempted before may have a better chance of finding a bigger twin than a fixed-n search as is being started now.
...
That said, the choice of fixed-n vs. variable-n is a matter of preference, and does not have any bearing on whether I feel you will be a dedicated and able leader for this project, which I do.

Max

Personally I had hoped that those who decided to revive this project, would have picked up the n=480K-500K range search and continued it till it was completed.

I was collecting factors and doing all data-related bookkeeping. All files are still here on my hdd.

I've just re-opened the variable n range reservations because the files are there and because there's some interest in it. Once again, thanks for your support, and I'll see what Xyzzy says about me becoming mod.

[Historian]

Any updates on the sieving status for this n? The last I've heard was Oddball's 8.1T sieve from 1-10G. It might be helpful to sort out the confusion because Oddball and gribozavr might be working on 10G-150G at the same time. Can one or both of you explain what's going on here?

[gribozavr]

Yes, I'm working on 10G-150G, currently @ 46T. tpsieve needs 2.7 Gb of RAM. I started working on it when nobody talked about continuing previous search. Not much CPU time spent (a few days), so I can cancel it altogether if we decide that it is useless.

While we are talking about it, I want to ask a question. I've got a 4-core i5-750 and I start tpsieve with "-t 4". But top shows that it uses only 50% available time of each core. Why? RAM bandwidth is not enough?

[Lennart]

Originally Posted by gribozavr

Yes, I'm working on 10G-150G, currently @ 46T. tpsieve needs 2.7 Gb of RAM. I started working on it when nobody talked about continuing previous search. Not much CPU time spent (a few days), so I can cancel it altogether if we decide that it is useless.

While we are talking about it, I want to ask a question. I've got a 4-core i5-750 and I start tpsieve with "-t 4". But top shows that it uses only 50% available time of each core. Why? RAM bandwidth is not enough?

How does your tpconfig looks like ?

# Configuration file for tpsieve.
#
# option=arg in this file is overridden by --option=arg on the command-line.
#

# Time between checkpoints, in seconds.
checkpoint=300

# Time between status reports, in seconds.
report=60

# Process priority: idle,low,normal,none, or a number 0 (normal) to 19 (idle).
priority=low

# Sieve block size, in bytes. Should not exceed L2 cache size.
blocksize=512k

# Sieve chunk size, in bytes. Smaller chunks require more communication
# between threads but result in less time wasted when threads must
# synchronise, e.g. for checkpoints and program termination.
chunksize=32k

# Sieve candidate factors using primes up to qmax. Default is sqrt(pmax).
#qmax=10e6

# Uncomment to prevent printing of factors to STDOUT
#quiet

Lennart