mersenneforum.org A computation worthy of the name
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2009-09-10, 19:44 #12 fivemack (loop (#_fork))     Feb 2006 Cambridge, England 2·7·461 Posts That looks like the right sort of timescale; I didn't expect it to make much of a difference, and the numbers are coming out as about a third of what I was getting on an otherwise-idle 64-bit C2/2400.
2009-09-11, 12:36   #13
R.D. Silverman

"Bob Silverman"
Nov 2003
North of Boston

11101010101002 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by fivemack I have spent a little while figuring out parameter choice for this; here is the polynomial for 2^941 - 1:
You may want to reserve this number with Sam.

fivemack: did this yesterday, have received a confirmation email but it's not in the list on the Web yet

Last fiddled with by fivemack on 2009-09-11 at 12:53

2009-09-11, 14:53   #14
bdodson

Jun 2005
lehigh.edu

210 Posts
ecm update

On the "how much memory" thread that preceded this one, I reported
Quote:
 PS - ecm is at 13.5*t50, mostly with p55- or p60-limits. That's past 2*t55; maybe about half of t60? (c. = 25t50). I'd consider a bit more, if we're serious, ...
I added another 4t50 (p60-limits), for a total of 17.5*t50. That's
something like 3*t55, not enough to regard a p59/p60 as a miss,
but enough to have had a fair shot at the rest of p5x < p59. And
that was before finding out just how serious we were!

-Bruce (at least 16t50 was with p60-limits, with p55 a bit past 5t50).

Last fiddled with by bdodson on 2009-09-11 at 14:58 Reason: recount/limits

2009-09-11, 15:00   #15
R.D. Silverman

"Bob Silverman"
Nov 2003
North of Boston

22·1,877 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by bdodson And that was before finding out just how serious we were!
Absolutely! Let us all B. cereus.

2009-09-11, 17:42   #16
CRGreathouse

Aug 2006

5,987 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman Absolutely! Let us all B. cereus.
I could find a Cereus b. but not a B. cereus.

2009-09-11, 17:43   #17
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))

Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

193616 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by CRGreathouse I could find a Cereus b. but not a B. cereus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacillus_cereus

2009-09-11, 18:15   #18
CRGreathouse

Aug 2006

5,987 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by fivemack http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacillus_cereus
I'm awed by your ability to find useless information. (I'll stop thread-jacking now.)

 2009-09-15, 20:28 #19 J.F.     Jun 2008 23·32 Posts I'm having trouble finding a 16e binary... Would someone help me out?
 2009-09-15, 22:27 #20 fivemack (loop (#_fork))     Feb 2006 Cambridge, England 11001001101102 Posts http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~t...sm64latest.zip has the full set from 11 to 16
 2009-09-16, 01:42 #21 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 32·1,117 Posts We will have to slightly update that file, because the binaries in it are dated Apr/15 ("the tax day special edition"), but later in the process of preliminary sieiving for the 5,398+ two new infinite loops were found and ad hoc patches were applied, around Jun/10/2009. All of them are in the SVN tree. (Oh, no, I haven't added them; I remember now, I was waiting for the large-scale tests to finish at Lehigh.edu. I'll add these two patches as SVN revision 367, right now.) So far the binaries that I use even in the dangerous region (around the power of two) didn't have any problems. Tom, let me email you a replacement ZIP file, so you could replace the chiark mirror file, ok?
 2009-09-16, 08:24 #22 fivemack (loop (#_fork))     Feb 2006 Cambridge, England 645410 Posts http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~t...updated16e.zip has the new version of the 16e binary (dated June 10th) in it, and I'll put up one with the new versions of all the binaries when batalov sends it to me.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post jasong jasong 3 2012-12-27 16:40 JohnFullspeed Miscellaneous Math 8 2011-07-13 10:54 ldesnogu Lounge 11 2010-01-07 14:42 fivemack Lounge 0 2008-09-05 20:23 dave_dm Factoring 8 2004-06-12 14:18

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:39.

Mon Jan 30 21:39:33 UTC 2023 up 165 days, 19:08, 0 users, load averages: 1.35, 1.36, 1.15