mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-10-19, 22:28   #34
Viliam Furik
 
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

25110 Posts
Default

May I ask you to discuss here only the topic of the thread, please?
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-19, 22:55   #35
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

41·109 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
May I ask you to discuss here only the topic of the thread, please?
The topic of the thread as suggested in the first post is so utterly hopeless that the rest of the discussion is the only useful content. OP's idea was debunked by multiple people, who gave data and probabilities.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-19, 23:43   #36
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
U.S.A.

32·11·17 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
May I ask you to discuss here only the topic of the thread, please?
This is a discussion about M1277. The OP introduced it. Anything reasonable and relative should go.

The downside to mtee is that everything written to the screen is captured. This can result in many megabytes of text. GMP-ECM places a group of asterisks before any line containing found factor information. This makes for a quick search with something like Notepad++.
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 10:47   #37
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"π’‰Ίπ’ŒŒπ’‡·π’†·π’€­"
May 2003
Down not across

100111110011112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storm5510 View Post
If he was not using it on long runs. Not using it would allow a found factor to roll off the top of the screen as the program continued to run.

A minor workaround would be to use something to capture every line appearing on the screen and writing it into a text file. I believe Linux may have something like this built in. In the past, I have used a little program called mtee. It does the same thing. Then a person would have to do a manual search of each capture file.



I am not sure I follow. "ecm ? factorint" produces an error message.

Edit: I just sent a message to PhilF to see if he was using the -one option in his processes.
Please pay attention.

I specifically wrote in gp.
xilman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 13:45   #38
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
U.S.A.

32·11·17 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xilman View Post
Please pay attention.

I specifically wrote in gp.
Apologies. I am not familiar with gp.
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 14:24   #39
mathwiz
 
Mar 2019

2×32×7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
The topic of the thread as suggested in the first post is so utterly hopeless that the rest of the discussion is the only useful content. OP's idea was debunked by multiple people, who gave data and probabilities.
Maybe a mod can change the topic to "Python script to needlessly waste energy and compute cycles".
mathwiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 15:48   #40
Viliam Furik
 
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

FB16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathwiz View Post
Maybe a mod can change the topic to "Python script to needlessly waste energy and compute cycles".
That's not nice of you...
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 16:30   #41
mathwiz
 
Mar 2019

2·32·7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
That's not nice of you...
Perhaps a bit snarky, but is the topic of this thread "general efforts to factor M1277" or just the original Python script? If the latter, then wasting energy and compute is all that would be accomplished.
mathwiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-21, 07:18   #42
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

22·7·11·29 Posts
Default

For fun, I just timed factor5 (the old version from 2009, I don't have newer) and it is about few thousand times faster compared with the script (slow laptop, 6 threads in 2 cores to feed the cpu 100%, P95 running in background, i.e. doing nothing due to priority limit, computer still normally responsive).

Edit: that was for fun! TF on this exponent is totally pointless. Unless you consider yourself extremely lucky guy (like we Romanians would say, you stepped on a shit or put your hand in it, or one shit fell on your head, or something).

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2020-10-21 at 07:23
LaurV is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-21, 16:32   #43
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
U.S.A.

32·11·17 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
For fun, I just timed factor5 (the old version from 2009, I don't have newer) and it is about few thousand times faster compared with the script (slow laptop, 6 threads in 2 cores to feed the cpu 100%, P95 running in background, i.e. doing nothing due to priority limit, computer still normally responsive).
I believe M1277 has been factored to 2^67. I have both the old and the new factor5 here somewhere. The new doesn't know from 2^? It uses k only. Somewhere in my notebook I keep, there is a conversion formula I scratched down a long time ago. Someone here presented the formula. Who or when, I cannot remember.

After doing a little searching in my notes, I believe I found it. It looks like so: k = 2x / 2p. The x would be replaced with 67 then 68. 2p is 2*1277. If this is correct, the lower k would be 57,781,500,622,426,160, and the upper is 115,563,001,244,852,320. I do not believe it multi-threads, so it could take decades, if not centuries, to run.

I found the archive. It is attached below if anyone wants to mess with it. It produces a results file, but no interim screen output. Luigi Morelli wrote this in 2018. I believe many here know who Luigi is.
Attached Files
File Type: zip factor5j.zip (1.17 MB, 5 views)
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-21, 16:56   #44
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

213448 Posts
Default

This is (as the readme says) the version optimized for large p and small k. It is too slow for small p, and would not worth anyhow, even if the TF would be indicated (but as I said, and everybody said, it is NOT! Don't waste your time with TF).

I downloaded it and deleted it without launch (why the exe only, and not the sources? - rhetoric question, no need answer).
LaurV is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
inconsistent timestamp intervals in prime.log ixfd64 Software 1 2020-11-01 20:27
Could I run this py python script on a supercomputer? Ghost Information & Answers 4 2018-11-30 04:07
M1277 - no factors below 2^65? DanielBamberger Data 17 2018-01-28 04:21
search for MMM127 small factors? Orgasmic Troll Miscellaneous Math 7 2006-06-11 15:38
Random numbers and proper factors mfgoode Math 20 2006-02-05 02:09

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:05.

Wed Nov 25 10:05:38 UTC 2020 up 76 days, 7:16, 4 users, load averages: 1.74, 1.78, 1.66

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.