mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > CADO-NFS

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2022-04-24, 00:20   #34
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

13D816 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
Please try A=28 separately from strat 2. I'd like to know the speed gained from start 2 on I=14.
I expect A=28 would be slower than I=14 here, anyway; perhaps we can test-sieve that rather than run a full job.
OK. I have a c164 (685...) candidate and I should be able to start it running tomorrow. I'll run I=14 with adjust_strategy=2.

(For some reason, I had it in the back of my head that strategy=2 wouldn't work with I=14.)
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-24, 01:21   #35
charybdis
 
charybdis's Avatar
 
Apr 2020

53×7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
I expect A=28 would be slower than I=14 here, anyway; perhaps we can test-sieve that rather than run a full job.
Unfortunately I don't think that's something you can figure out by test-sieving, because A=28 should have a lower duplication rate. The crossover point for "time to find rels_wanted raw relations" is probably a few digits higher than the true crossover.

@EdH: I think you might need to take a look at your script, as all your summaries seem to include
Code:
Found 149733097 unique, 40170110 duplicate, and 0 bad relations.
charybdis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-24, 02:38   #36
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

508010 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charybdis View Post
. . .
@EdH: I think you might need to take a look at your script, as all your summaries seem to include
Code:
Found 149733097 unique, 40170110 duplicate, and 0 bad relations.
Indeed! I can't find where the report gets written in any of my scripts, but I do have a file with those values from sometime, that I harvest for each run. Thanks for catching that. I will definitely have to work on it. I might have to skip remdups4 and let Msieve report duplication and harvest the values from there.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-24, 11:36   #37
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

23×5×127 Posts
Default

OK, I'm losing it! The new candidate is the one I just factored. It got mixed into the list because it wasn't finished yet. I need to do some more work before I get to the next candidate.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-24, 14:21   #38
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

23×5×127 Posts
Default

I have a c164 underway:
Code:
N = 712...<164 digits>
tasks.I = 14
tasks.lim0 = 60000000
tasks.lim1 = 40000000
tasks.lpb0 = 31
tasks.lpb1 = 31
tasks.qmin = 10000000
tasks.sieve.adjust_strategy = 2
tasks.sieve.lambda0 = 1.83
tasks.sieve.mfb0 = 58
tasks.sieve.mfb1 = 88
tasks.sieve.ncurves0 = 18
tasks.sieve.ncurves1 = 10
tasks.sieve.qrange = 5000
tasks.sieve.rels_wanted = 175000000
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-25, 13:19   #39
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

23·5·127 Posts
Default

Here's the next c164 (I=14 and adjust_strategy=2):
Code:
N = 712... <164 digits>
tasks.I = 14
tasks.lim0 = 60000000
tasks.lim1 = 40000000
tasks.lpb0 = 31
tasks.lpb1 = 31
tasks.qmin = 10000000
tasks.filter.target_density = 170.0
tasks.filter.purge.keep = 160
tasks.sieve.adjust_strategy = 2
tasks.sieve.lambda0 = 1.83
tasks.sieve.mfb0 = 58
tasks.sieve.mfb1 = 88
tasks.sieve.ncurves0 = 18
tasks.sieve.ncurves1 = 10
tasks.sieve.qrange = 5000
Polynomial Selection (size optimized): Total time: 524425
Polynomial Selection (root optimized): Total time: 30333.8
Lattice Sieving: Total time: 4.46548e+06s (all clients used 4 threads)
Lattice Sieving: Total number of relations: 175001545
Found 122488916 unique, 45564734 duplicate, and 0 bad relations.
cownoise Best MurphyE for polynomial is 8.11818879e-13
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-25, 14:18   #40
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·3·52·37 Posts
Default

Poly score 2.5% worse, but sieve time roughly 5% better. Nice!

The next settings to test are A=28 and mfb1 = 89. A=28 is more important a test (mfb should not change sieve time very much).
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-25, 16:12   #41
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

13D816 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
. . .
The next settings to test are A=28 and mfb1 = 89. A=28 is more important a test (mfb should not change sieve time very much).
Are you saying I should only change to A=28 first, or go ahead and change both, and with or without strategy=2?
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-25, 16:18   #42
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·3·52·37 Posts
Default

I think / hope each change should be independent- that is, you have determined strat 2 is faster (really, Charybdis determined this over a year ago), now it's the default. Next, try A = 28; once we know the best setting there, try mfb's.

One change at a time with A/B comparisons give us "clear" evidence for what to use; once the big settings like A and lp are set, the little settings (mfb, starting Q, lambda, target rels) can be dialed in hopes of finding a few more % of speed.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-25, 16:55   #43
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

23×5×127 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
I think / hope each change should be independent- that is, you have determined strat 2 is faster (really, Charybdis determined this over a year ago), now it's the default. Next, try A = 28; once we know the best setting there, try mfb's.

One change at a time with A/B comparisons give us "clear" evidence for what to use; once the big settings like A and lp are set, the little settings (mfb, starting Q, lambda, target rels) can be dialed in hopes of finding a few more % of speed.
I just wanted to make sure I'm on the same page. The only thing I'll change for next time is A=28.

Again, I'm out of c164 candidates, I may have some lower c165s.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-25, 17:34   #44
charybdis
 
charybdis's Avatar
 
Apr 2020

53·7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdH View Post
I just wanted to make sure I'm on the same page. The only thing I'll change for next time is A=28.
A=28 should probably have a slightly lower qmin - maybe 7M? - as you'll be sieving a smaller range of Q. We'll see what Curtis says.
charybdis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CADO help henryzz CADO-NFS 6 2022-09-13 23:11
CADO NFS Shaopu Lin CADO-NFS 522 2021-05-04 18:28
CADO-NFS Timing Data For Many Factorizations EdH EdH 8 2019-05-20 15:07
CADO-NFS skan Information & Answers 1 2013-10-22 07:00
CADO R.D. Silverman Factoring 4 2008-11-06 12:35

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:46.


Wed Nov 30 10:46:22 UTC 2022 up 104 days, 8:14, 0 users, load averages: 0.77, 0.90, 0.98

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔