Primenet eyesores

[davieddy]

The length of the tail (OK cut off the straggily bit)
of the waves (LL and DC) is perfectly natural and to be encouraged:
The more tests in progress, the more will get finished.
***king formula omitted in case you are intelligent.

Why the **** are almost no LLs being dished out TFed to 72?

David

[NBtarheel_33]

Originally Posted by davieddy

The length of the tail (OK cut off the straggily bit)
of the waves (LL and DC) is perfectly natural and to be encouraged:
The more tests in progress, the more will get finished.
***king formula omitted in case you are intelligent.

Why the **** are almost no LLs being dished out TFed to 72?

David

Give it some time. GPUto72 has only been fully operational for a couple of weeks. Remember that the exponents they prepare for LL represent only a tiny percentage of the entire exponent pool. Indeed, remember that GPUers are only a tiny percentage of the GIMPS population.

What is/are *your* GPU(s) crunching?

[davieddy]

Originally Posted by NBtarheel_33

Give it some time. GPUto72 has only been fully operational for a couple of weeks. Remember that the exponents they prepare for LL represent only a tiny percentage of the entire exponent pool. Indeed, remember that GPUers are only a tiny percentage of the GIMPS population.

What is/are *your* GPU(s) crunching?

They represent 0% of the infinite pool Uncwilly etc would
like to trawl.

TF takes about 1% of the time of an LL.

My Celeron does a LL in ~40 days (24/7). I don't mind
getting my hands dirty occasionally.

Stop f***ing about with this breadth first, arse over tip approach.

David

Already

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by davieddy

TF takes about 1% of the time of an LL.

so each participant can do 100 TF for each LL which means if 100 participants did tf we get 10000 tf results every 40 days according to your Celeron stats. so all numbers from 1 to 43112609 done tf in under 473 years and that's including composite exponents. not counting composites and assuming the average result is the same as yours we get all prime exponents under 840,354,253 but remember that's in 473 years I hope you survive it.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by davieddy

Stop [redacted] about with this breadth first, arse over tip approach.

I don't know what you're complaining about. We've already released back to PrimeNet over 1000 candidates TFed to 72 and P-1ed.

[diamonddave]

Looking only at the 50M-60M Range...

Since last week 1894 exponent have been TF to 72. Yet in that same time frame 1042 exponent got LL tested for the first time. I think it's fair to assume most of those grabbed a new exponent? But as we know, only 10-25 or 50% (I don't remember the number lets say 25%) so we can assume 4000 exponent were handed out last week, a fair amount of those exponent were TF to 72, but they will never get completed. Next time they are released to the pool, we won't have to TF them.

We will catch up to the wavefront, just need to give it time...

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I don't know what you're complaining about. We've already released back to PrimeNet over 1000 candidates TFed to 72 and P-1ed.

With 140, non-DC range, factors found.

[Christenson]

Davieddy:
This "tip over arse" effort has yielded 50 factors in the last week between 45M and 50M and another 107 between 50M and 60M. That's a very direct effect on the LL wavefront, and it's exactly the kind of thing we hoped to do...by hitting the "worst offenders first"!

Patience grasshopper...patience....

[Primeinator]

Originally Posted by Christenson

Davieddy:
This "tip over arse" effort has yielded 50 factors in the last week between 45M and 50M and another 107 between 50M and 60M. That's a very direct effect on the LL wavefront, and it's exactly the kind of thing we hoped to do...by hitting the "worst offenders first"!

Patience grasshopper...patience....

Is this to say that exponents are being eliminated prior to DC even if they have had a first time LL? Sorry...I've had a couple margaritas and now some sherry...so I may have misinterpreted the implications of the above posts!

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Primeinator

Is this to say that exponents are being eliminated prior to DC even if they have had a first time LL? Sorry...I've had a couple margaritas and now some sherry...so I may have misinterpreted the implications of the above posts!

My understanding is: there have been some P-1 and/or TF (via GPU) successes (factors found) for exponents that have been LL'ed once.

[davieddy]

Originally Posted by Primeinator

Sorry...I've had a couple margaritas and now some sherry

I find that does wonders as regards appreciation
of this forum

David