mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2008-05-17, 02:39   #1
markg
 
Apr 2008

33 Posts
Default Random " % complete" ??

i just started getting what seems to be a random % complete message; see pic below. is this a problem? what if anything should i do?

thanks.

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...08/prime95.jpg
markg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-19, 11:56   #2
Nelson
 
Nelson's Avatar
 
Apr 2008
Regensburg..^~^..Plzeň

5×17 Posts
Default

One thing you haven't told us is which version of Prime95 you are using but on a wild guess it is 25.x. Running two instances of factoring the same number on a pentium 4 would probably give similar results. Try giving a bit more info when asking that is pertinent to the question at hand.

nelson
Nelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-19, 13:54   #3
markg
 
Apr 2008

33 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelson View Post
One thing you haven't told us is which version of Prime95 you are using but on a wild guess it is 25.x. Running two instances of factoring the same number on a pentium 4 would probably give similar results. Try giving a bit more info when asking that is pertinent to the question at hand.

nelson
i am using the current version, 24.14
if i was using anything OTHER than the current version, i would have mentioned it.

now that you know what version it is, and that i am not running two instances of factoring the same number, any ideas of whats wrong?
markg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-19, 16:39   #4
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
"Jacob"
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

111001011102 Posts
Default

Nelson is just trying to help and since your first inquiry was not very informative...

The % complete numbers are not completely random : one part of them progress from 32,29% to 35,14%, the other from 38,39% to 41,38%...

Both progressed by a similar amount. The time interval between screen output seems to fluctuate quite a lot.

That interval depends on the number of iterations you set int the adhoc menu of Prime95 (Options / Preferences / Iterations between screen outputs) What is your setting there ?

Are you running heavy programs at the same time ? Is it a hyperthreaded machine ? Are you running more than one instance of Prime95 ? What happenned when the low numbers (32,29% to 35,14% and onwards) reached the starting points of the high numbers (38,39%) ?

Those are all questions that come to my mind.

It is a strange behaviour indeed...

Jacob
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-19, 18:24   #5
Nelson
 
Nelson's Avatar
 
Apr 2008
Regensburg..^~^..Plzeň

10101012 Posts
Default

Thanks Kubik(CZ),

Quote:
Originally Posted by S485122 View Post
The % complete numbers are not completely random : one part of them progress from 32,29% to 35,14%, the other from 38,39% to 41,38%...

Both progressed by a similar amount. The time interval between screen output seems to fluctuate quite a lot.

That interval depends on the number of iterations you set int the adhoc menu of Prime95 (Options / Preferences / Iterations between screen outputs) What is your setting there ?

Are you running heavy programs at the same time ? Is it a hyperthreaded machine ? Are you running more than one instance of Prime95 ? What happenned when the low numbers (32,29% to 35,14% and onwards) reached the starting points of the high numbers (38,39%) ?

Those are all questions that come to my mind.

It is a strange behaviour indeed...

Jacob
That was what made me think it might be 25.x even though the window looked like 24.x. it still looks like 2 instances are running in the same window and on a hyperthreaded machine I don't know how 24.14 would do that unless the Ax option was being used, when I tried that I had two instances of Prime 95 with separate windows. Iteration speeds were comparable though.

mfg nelson

P.S. might just try stopping so that interim files are saved and exit. Then look in Prime95 directory and check how many versions of Px00000 and qx00000 are present more than one of each is a sure indicator of something buggy. if only the two are there restart and see if the behavior continues.

wnp

Last fiddled with by Nelson on 2008-05-19 at 18:38 Reason: spelling
Nelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-20, 17:21   #6
markg
 
Apr 2008

2710 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S485122 View Post
That interval depends on the number of iterations you set int the adhoc menu of Prime95 (Options / Preferences / Iterations between screen outputs) What is your setting there ?

Are you running heavy programs at the same time ? Is it a hyperthreaded machine ? Are you running more than one instance of Prime95 ? What happenned when the low numbers (32,29% to 35,14% and onwards) reached the starting points of the high numbers (38,39%) ?
everything was set to the default except user information and primenet options.

specifically; iterations is set to 10000 (default)
there is only one m and one p file
not running heavy programs; in fact this is the ONLY program running other than virus etc. background stuff
it is not hyperthreaded; 5 year old machine.
there seems to be two sets of numbers running PLUS another seemingly random numbers; one set in the 80's, one in the 90's, and a few turned up in the mid 70's (which seemingly already completed before it hit the 80s).

also, the time to complete the iterations seem strange; one string is high, the other low.

i figured i would let it run a bit and see if it finishes off, but it makes little sense. the other machines work fine.

latest screen shot follows

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...8/prime952.jpg
markg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-20, 18:02   #7
Nelson
 
Nelson's Avatar
 
Apr 2008
Regensburg..^~^..Plzeň

8510 Posts
Default

Gosh Mark,

I'm as stumped as you are. Is this by any chance your T40p mentioned in another thread actually the only important thing is why two processes at the same time. They are definintely factoring the same number. That still doesn't explain two instances and/or the wide discrepancy in timing.

There appear to be at least two cores in operation which doesn't make sense. AFAIK ver 24.14 must be started twice to get to simultaneous operation with the affinity parameter A- to define which core to use. The only other explanation with one core would be that one test stops while the other one takes over but that wouldn't account for outputs at exactly the same time even as much as 60 seconds apart.

Starting a second Prime95 instance results with a second tray icon and two separate windows. Even at that I would expect timings on two cores on the same number to be very similar if not exactly the same. One instance appears about to end so maybe it will correct itself but that may require some input from Prime95 himself. I can't figure out how to reproduce this situation with the current information. ???does worktodo.ini have two jobs or more in it or two with the same number or any thing so bizarre.

could you give a screen shot of Procexp or task manager I guess we'd need the processes tab with "Show processes from all users" box checked and window stretched vertically to show all active processes.

nelson

Last fiddled with by Nelson on 2008-05-20 at 18:12 Reason: additional req
Nelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-20, 18:40   #8
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
"Jacob"
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

72E16 Posts
Default

Mark,

It is a bit as if Prime95 was working from two start points at the same time in one instance. Did you try Menu / Test / Status to see the estimated endtime ? I think that exponent is to near to completion. Once it is finished, if it finishes at all, I Would save the result.txt, prime.log an wortodo.ini files. Remove all files, uninstall and reinstal the software. If you keep the local.ini and prime.ini I presume they hold the key to the explanation. You could post them here (if you whish you can remove the password from prime.ini : the line starting with "UserPWD=")

Jacob

Last fiddled with by S485122 on 2008-05-20 at 18:42 Reason: punctuation
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-21, 02:54   #9
markr
 
markr's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Feb 2003
Sydney

10001111012 Posts
Default

Mark,

a real puzzle!

Are any files in prime95's folder readonly or with permissions that would stop prime95 writing to them? Just a thought - not sure if that would cause what you're seeing.

After you open prime95's window to see progress, is there indeed only one instance of prime95 in task manager?

I ask this because a few months ago I saw some occasional odd behaviour on a WinXP machine. Prime95 was starting as a service. Occasionally when I opened its window, a second instance would appear in task manager, with ~0% cpu. Using prime95's menu to exit would close the window & remove the new instance but leave the first running. When I killed the first instance from task manager, not only did it not save, but I found it had not saved any progress since the machine started...

I have no idea what caused it. It was only a few times, and I have not seen it recently, and I've been checking!

Mark
markr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-21, 05:00   #10
markg
 
Apr 2008

33 Posts
Default

only one instance running; i had checked this.

and this was the same machine i had an issue with described on another thread; i deinstalled/reinstalled EVERYTHING; ie all new options files etc., then selected factoring only under configure primenet (the machine is kind of slow, so i figured this was better work)

the factoring (the one at issue) finished ok (according to the results file, but didnt give me credit on the primenet status page), started a new factor, found a factor almost immediately (did give me credit for this one), then started yet another which it is working on now.

here is the results page: (i xxxx out any personal data)

[Wed May 07 10:52:33 2008]
Self-test 2560K passed!
[Thu May 08 05:50:13 2008]
UID: markg, User: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Change UID from S818510 to markg
[Tue May 13 12:55:40 2008]
UID: markg/IBM-T40p, M48210497 no factor to 2^69, Wc1: CED140D7
[Tue May 20 15:48:48 2008]
UID: markg/IBM-T40p, M48486617 no factor to 2^69, Wc1: D16542AB
[Tue May 20 17:14:59 2008]
UID: markg/IBM-T40p, M48491761 has a factor: 21780543116224729279


prime.ini:

UsePrimenet=1
DialUp=0
DaysOfWork=1
WorkPreference=1
AskedAboutMemory=1
OldUserID=
OldUserPWD=
UserID=markg
UserPWD=xxxxxxxx
UserName=xxxxxxxxxx
UserEmailAddr=xxxxxxxxxxx
Newsletters=0
OutputIterations=10000
ResultsFileIterations=999999999
DiskWriteTime=30
NetworkRetryTime=2
NetworkRetryTime2=60
DaysBetweenCheckins=28
TwoBackupFiles=1
SilentVictory=0
Left=811
Top=515
Right=1395
Bottom=803
Windows95Service=1

local.ini

OldCpuType=12
OldCpuSpeed=598
CPUHours=20
DayMemory=64
NightMemory=256
DayStartTime=450
DayEndTime=1410
Affinity=99
ComputerID=IBM-T40p
LastEndDatesSent=1210681625
RollingStartTime=0
SelfTest2560Passed=1
RunOnBattery=0
RollingAverage=1000
VacationEnd=0
VacationOn=1

Last fiddled with by markg on 2008-05-21 at 05:07
markg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-21, 06:14   #11
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
"Jacob"
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

2×919 Posts
Default

I see one funny item in your local.ini :
Affinity=99
You can remove that line.

Not getting credit for your exponent 48486617 is strange... You can check if your result shows up on the V5 server in the comming days : http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_fac...99&B1=Get+Data

Since you are using Prime95 v24.14 I don't think George Woltman will be interested in debugging what happened.

Jacob

Last fiddled with by S485122 on 2008-05-21 at 06:15 Reason: changed line breaks
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aouessare-El Haddouchi-Essaaidi "test": "if Mp has no factor, it is prime!" wildrabbitt Miscellaneous Math 11 2015-03-06 08:17
"Better than pseudo-random" iterator for Pollard's Rho? mickfrancis Factoring 7 2014-12-11 22:32
Is copying my complete "p95v285" folder to my new pc enough to continue? RienS Information & Answers 1 2014-11-14 21:47
Getting "?% complete" Fenris1010 Prime Sierpinski Project 2 2007-02-17 17:51
Would Minimizing "iterations between results file" may reveal "is not prime" earlier? nitai1999 Software 7 2004-08-26 18:12

All times are UTC. The time now is 14:17.


Thu Oct 6 14:17:46 UTC 2022 up 49 days, 11:46, 0 users, load averages: 1.44, 1.40, 1.36

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