Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2007-10-29, 17:20   #78
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

279016 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by VBCurtis Not that it matters, but I'm missing some logic here. How does us not finding a prime make you think someone else didn't find a prime before us? There's so many ways to make that sound confusing... :) Gary, I think you should continue the fun and take 900-910 when your current ranges are done. One range per 100k is active without unduly slowing your other searches. Yea, that's it.. -Curtis
I can make it more confusing...The fact that there were no searches for about 3 years plus the fact that people like to go after low k's combined with what has happened in the past on k=243 and k=289 makes the possibility highly likely that someone attempted a search on k=5 above n=470K with no success simply because the search status sat at n=470K for so long. This leads to the good possibility that someone just so happened to find primes on k=243 and k=289 but failed to find one on k=5.

Is that confusing enough?

I didn't mean this to rain on the parade of k=5. This is an awesome effort! It was just an analogy of what 'might' have happened.

I have ADHD fits having even only 2 of my cores searching at this high of n for very long. It just gets too boring! 800-820 is close to my limit. Once it goes past about 15-20 mins./search candidate, it's just too long for my tastes.

If I can get my nerve up to discretly load LLR on 2-3 machines here at work that seem to always be left on 24 hrs. in a training room and where they would be out of my site for a day or days at a time, I could more easily tolerate higher n searches. I probably won't advertise that in the forum here if I do it but I'll let someone know in a PM. I'm really more in this for large amounts of data gathering so that perhaps some future generations of mathematicians can finally 'break' the random nature of primes. You guys have this one well covered.

One more thought...Let's not do sieving overkill by Sheep on this one. I would suggest putting him on another effort at this time. Maybe some new '30 k' team drive or something. When we pass about n=1.2M in LLRing on k=5, maybe he can come back to sieving this one as needed. He has just too much firepower to put on only one k for very long.

Gary

 2007-10-30, 07:41 #79 BlisteringSheep     Oct 2006 On a Suzuki Boulevard C90 2·3·41 Posts Last update on k=5 The sieve will be complete to 150T in an hour or two. Later today I will switch to sr2sieve and the multi-k dat (5, 11, 13, 31, 45, 99, 127). And thank you all for your prime offers. They are greatly appreciated! But I'd do the sieving even without them; it's fun. So please don't feel pressured; I was really just joking around.
 2007-10-30, 10:10 #80 em99010pepe     Sep 2004 2·5·283 Posts Are we going to start a 6th RPS Drive? If so we should push hard to finish the 5th one. Last fiddled with by em99010pepe on 2007-10-30 at 10:15
2007-10-30, 15:08   #81
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo

Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

141518 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by em99010pepe Are we going to start a 6th RPS Drive? If so we should push hard to finish the 5th one.
And what about the 3rd drive? It's been sitting around for quite a while now, with about 5 reservation files left.

2007-10-30, 15:35   #82
em99010pepe

Sep 2004

2×5×283 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Anonymous And what about the 3rd drive? It's been sitting around for quite a while now, with about 5 reservation files left.
Care to help us there?

760-790 complete, no primes. Rest in progress....

2007-10-30, 16:35   #83
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo

Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

186916 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by em99010pepe Care to help us there? 760-790 complete, no primes. Rest in progress....
I would gladly do so, but right now I'm kinda waiting for some possible doublecheck LLR work from gd_barnes. If that turns out to be a no-go, though, then yes, I already was considering doing something on the 3rd drive in that case.

BTW Gary, do you have any doublecheck LLR work for me, either in the range that I sieved or elsewhere? If so, an estimated availablility date would be helpful for planning reasons--if not, then I'll grab a file from the 3rd drive. The reason why I'm holding off on grabbing a 3rd drive file is because that would tie up my resources for a couple weeks or so, and I'd kind of like to be ready for doublechecking work if it's coming. (Right now I'm just doing SR5 LLRNet work, since LLRNet deals in smaller units of one k/n pair at a time.)

2007-10-30, 17:04   #84
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

24·3·211 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Anonymous I would gladly do so, but right now I'm kinda waiting for some possible doublecheck LLR work from gd_barnes. If that turns out to be a no-go, though, then yes, I already was considering doing something on the 3rd drive in that case. BTW Gary, do you have any doublecheck LLR work for me, either in the range that I sieved or elsewhere? If so, an estimated availablility date would be helpful for planning reasons--if not, then I'll grab a file from the 3rd drive. The reason why I'm holding off on grabbing a 3rd drive file is because that would tie up my resources for a couple weeks or so, and I'd kind of like to be ready for doublechecking work if it's coming. (Right now I'm just doing SR5 LLRNet work, since LLRNet deals in smaller units of one k/n pair at a time.)
I'm sorry about that Anon. I completely forgot to respond to you. Thank you very much for your offer. I've got two dedicated cores LLRing it right now. Since it is such a large LLR effort and your machine is only on for part of the day, it would probably be more total effort for me to split off small 20K candidate pieces for you to LLR and 'combine them back in' with the mass of primes found then to LLR it all myself. But if you think you could LLR an entire set of 100 k's (115,000-120,000 candidates), then I think it would be worth it but I'd hate to take up that much of your machine for that long. If your machine is on 8-10 hrs/day, then I'm thinking about a month or so to do that many candidates.

I'm shooting to finish the effort in about 3 months. So if you'd be interested in doing 115K-120K candidates for 100 k's and could finish them over a 3-month span, then I'll send you a range. I sieved it further on up to P=30G because I was getting a 7 sec. removal rate at P=19.8G.

Whatever you decide is fine with me and I appreciate you doing the sieving.

Gary

2007-10-30, 17:12   #85
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

24×3×211 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by BlisteringSheep Last update on k=5 The sieve will be complete to 150T in an hour or two. Later today I will switch to sr2sieve and the multi-k dat (5, 11, 13, 31, 45, 99, 127).
Awesome on the multi-k sieve! You rock Sheep!

2007-10-30, 17:47   #86
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo

Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

624910 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes I'm sorry about that Anon. I completely forgot to respond to you. Thank you very much for your offer. I've got two dedicated cores LLRing it right now. Since it is such a large LLR effort and your machine is only on for part of the day, it would probably be more total effort for me to split off small 20K candidate pieces for you to LLR and 'combine them back in' with the mass of primes found then to LLR it all myself. But if you think you could LLR an entire set of 100 k's (115,000-120,000 candidates), then I think it would be worth it but I'd hate to take up that much of your machine for that long. If your machine is on 8-10 hrs/day, then I'm thinking about a month or so to do that many candidates. I'm shooting to finish the effort in about 3 months. So if you'd be interested in doing 115K-120K candidates for 100 k's and could finish them over a 3-month span, then I'll send you a range. I sieved it further on up to P=30G because I was getting a 7 sec. removal rate at P=19.8G. Whatever you decide is fine with me and I appreciate you doing the sieving. Gary
Okay, thanks. I think I'll pass on the 115-120K candidates--that would probably be a bit too much for me to handle with my current amount of computing power--but if you've got any more doublecheck efforts in the future that you could use some help on, please let me know, I'll be glad to help, either for sieving or LLR.

Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2007-10-30 at 17:48

 2007-10-31, 01:01 #87 em99010pepe     Sep 2004 2·5·283 Posts 790-800 complete, no primes. 760-800 complete, no primes. Last fiddled with by em99010pepe on 2007-10-31 at 01:03
 2007-11-01, 17:18 #88 em99010pepe     Sep 2004 2·5·283 Posts Update: 860-880 complete, 880-900 in progress...

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Kosmaj Riesel Prime Search 702 2018-04-11 07:36 Oddball Twin Prime Search 33 2012-01-20 05:37 Greenbank Octoproth Search 2 2007-12-26 09:58 Greenbank Octoproth Search 30 2006-02-09 00:33 Greenbank Octoproth Search 0 2006-01-25 13:41

All times are UTC. The time now is 04:35.

Sun May 31 04:35:21 UTC 2020 up 67 days, 2:08, 1 user, load averages: 1.67, 1.73, 1.65