mersenneforum.org Assignment Problem?
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2012-02-06, 16:03 #1 bcp19     Oct 2011 7×97 Posts Assignment Problem? I have a machine set to TF to low limits and was given several 450M and 469M exp's to TF from 64 to 65. I'm wondering if there was a glitch and primenet gave out some of these assignments twice cause I keep getting not needed on the results, and hate to be duplicating work. Code: [Comm thread Feb 6 04:17] Result was not needed. TF on M450491927, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 04:17] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 04:17] Result was not needed. TF on M450491929, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 04:17] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 04:27] Result was not needed. TF on M450492247, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 04:27] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 04:55] Result was not needed. TF on M450492277, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 04:55] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 05:23] Result was not needed. TF on M450492487, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 05:23] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 05:50] Result was not needed. TF on M450492587, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 05:50] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 06:19] Result was not needed. TF on M450492593, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 06:19] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 06:47] Result was not needed. TF on M450492619, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 06:47] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 06:49] Result was not needed. TF on M469457977, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 06:49] CPU credit is 0.0080 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 06:56] Result was not needed. TF on M469530781, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 06:56] CPU credit is 0.0080 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 07:02] Result was not needed. TF on M469535623, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 07:02] CPU credit is 0.0080 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 07:09] Result was not needed. TF on M469550189, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 07:09] CPU credit is 0.0080 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 07:15] Result was not needed. TF on M450492631, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 07:15] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 07:15] Result was not needed. TF on M469587029, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 07:15] CPU credit is 0.0080 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 07:43] Result was not needed. TF on M450492787, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 07:43] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 08:11] Result was not needed. TF on M450493037, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 08:11] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 08:39] Result was not needed. TF on M450493061, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 08:39] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 09:08] Result was not needed. TF on M450493079, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 09:08] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days. [Comm thread Feb 6 09:35] Result was not needed. TF on M450493231, sf: 64, ef: 65 [Comm thread Feb 6 09:35] CPU credit is 0.0083 GHz-days.
2012-02-06, 16:12   #2
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!

"Wayne"
Nov 2006

2×5×499 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by bcp19 I have a machine set to TF to low limits and was given several 450M and 469M exp's to TF from 64 to 65. I'm wondering if there was a glitch and primenet gave out some of these assignments twice cause I keep getting not needed on the results, and hate to be duplicating work. Code: [Comm thread Feb 6 04:17] Result was not needed. TF on M450491927, sf: 64, ef: 65 ...
Could be...or could be a case of someone seeing them undone and grabbing them manually at the same time as you got them assigned automatically.

Depends when you were assigned them...
For example this shows who completed the first one...Feb 01.
http://www.mersenne.org/report_expon...&B1=Get+status
...which also depends on when this user was assigned them.
ie who was first.

2012-02-06, 16:19   #3
chalsall
If I May

"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002

61×167 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by petrw1 Could be...or could be a case of someone seeing them undone and grabbing them manually at the same time as you got them assigned automatically. ...which also depends on when this user was assigned them. ie who was first.
Third possibility (which petrw1 alluded to but didn't explicitly state): the user who completed the work was legitimately assigned them, but didn't check in for two months. PrimeNet then reassigned them to you, and then the original assignee submitted the work before you did.

Only George or Scott (or possibly James) could say for sure.

2012-02-06, 17:12   #4
bcp19

Oct 2011

10101001112 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by petrw1 Could be...or could be a case of someone seeing them undone and grabbing them manually at the same time as you got them assigned automatically. Depends when you were assigned them... For example this shows who completed the first one...Feb 01. http://www.mersenne.org/report_expon...&B1=Get+status ...which also depends on when this user was assigned them. ie who was first.
I was given the assignments on 1-26. I'd had the days of work to queue a bit high when I first got them got them, and still have several waiting. I just used the Exponent Status and selected to show mine, and the first 100 of them listed so far are completed and list me as having them assigned 1-26.

2012-02-06, 17:22   #5
chalsall
If I May

"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002

1018710 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by bcp19 I just used the Exponent Status and selected to show mine, and the first 100 of them listed so far are completed and list me as having them assigned 1-26.
That's because the PrimeNet database is reporting what it knows -- that they've been completed, *and* that they are still assigned to you.

2012-02-06, 17:25   #6
bcp19

Oct 2011

7×97 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by chalsall That's because the PrimeNet database is reporting what it knows -- that they've been completed, *and* that they are still assigned to you.
I just unassigned all of them as they all seem to have been completed and I was given a bunch of 690M exp's, so no more redoing completed work.

2012-02-06, 17:43   #7
chalsall
If I May

"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002

61·167 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by bcp19 I just unassigned all of them as they all seem to have been completed and I was given a bunch of 690M exp's, so no more redoing completed work.
It might be a nice addition to PrimeNet for situations like this that the current assignment's page includes a warning where one or more current assignments "aren't needed".

This wouldn't help for those who "install, configure and forget", but for those who review their assignments regularily it would semi-automate this avoidance of duplication of work.

Edit: Actually, thinking about this a bit more... I wonder why PrimeNet / Prime95 (or mprime) didn't automatically unassign the work (and remove it from the worktodo.txt) file. How often do you have your client(s) check in with PrimeNet (or was this mfakt*)?

Last fiddled with by chalsall on 2012-02-06 at 18:01 Reason: Obsessive compulsive need to problem solve.

2012-02-08, 01:25   #8
bcp19

Oct 2011

7×97 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by chalsall It might be a nice addition to PrimeNet for situations like this that the current assignment's page includes a warning where one or more current assignments "aren't needed". This wouldn't help for those who "install, configure and forget", but for those who review their assignments regularily it would semi-automate this avoidance of duplication of work. Edit: Actually, thinking about this a bit more... I wonder why PrimeNet / Prime95 (or mprime) didn't automatically unassign the work (and remove it from the worktodo.txt) file. How often do you have your client(s) check in with PrimeNet (or was this mfakt*)?
Due to the quantity of assignments it had (I had been running low level P-1's from James' site and maxexponents was set to 1500), it was set to report every 7 days and had last reported on the 31st.

 2012-02-25, 07:50 #9 scubabob   Jun 2010 110012 Posts I am running into the same issue, but am using manual assignments. I obtained 12 TF assignments from 119000000 -> 119999999 via the web page while signed on to my ID. Primenet put up 12 lines to copy into my worktodo file. I did so and cycled the program (the only way I could get the program to recognize the new worktodo file). It sent out estimated completion dates on all 12. When it finished the first one, with no factor, I got the "Result was not needed" message. I checked the "Primenet summary," and was puzzled to find that while the number of assigned exponents went from 12 to 11, the number of P-1 available went from 1 to 2. So if I was doing duplicate work, I would not have expected the P-1 to go from 1 to 2. Now, it just finished the next one with no factor. Again, the same behavior on the summary screen. Number of assignments for the range went from 11 to 10, and the number of P-1 available exponents went from 2 to 3. If something is wrong, I want to abort this before any more time is wasted. Any ideas?
 2012-02-25, 08:14 #10 Dubslow Basketry That Evening!     "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 4070 assignments, which are certainly not LMH. I tried setting the preference via the Prime95 menus, setting them manually in prime.txt, and even via PrimeNet but nothing is changing the behavior. (When I unreserve them I merely get similar assignments.)
 2012-02-25, 09:58 #11 scubabob   Jun 2010 52 Posts I'm referring to www.mersenne.org -> left column -> "Primenet Summary," status of every exponent, assigned, type, etc. For the heck of it, I decided to try some TFs in the 119000000 range. The 10 that are 'assigned' (on the summary page as of 2/25/2012) are the ones left on one of my machines. The number of P-1 available is currently 3 on the 119000000 line on the same summary report. The contents of my worktodo file: [Worker #1] Factor=E317EBDAC4778F29378E75D3EE65D8BF,119585911,71,72 Factor=8B21EBA7256DE326F3F00D8FEF250F42,119646911,70,71 Factor=2F16360D7617635D3C1233BAA9677279,119717911,70,71 Factor=E62E701D4B805402A3F62093F48965D7,119787911,70,71 Factor=31F08B235844DE59946AE26EF4B9772D,119888911,70,71 Factor=0F50E0FB61971D4C64E81C8EF877C5AF,119999927,67,68 Factor=039295BE26E1D5BF51F1B617FF4AE2C6,119111051,66,67 Factor=09F3AEF46E3F06208CF53EDE48C820B2,119111071,66,67 Factor=9ABF1FCD444D85898E39FDB7A38DD6C4,119111077,66,67 Factor=70D8A875850B980B8952745CDCD204EC,119111099,66,67 The machine is working on 119585911 now. I'm trying to figure out if these exponents are already done/all effort wasted/I don't know how to control this process properly. If they are already done, why did I get them on manual assignment? If they aren't, why is the server telling me "Result was not needed" on the prior two?

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Unregistered Information & Answers 1 2012-03-28 00:02 Primeinator PrimeNet 4 2009-06-04 22:35 JuanTutors Software 2 2008-12-02 01:57 mdettweiler PrimeNet 2 2008-10-05 18:18 junky NFSNET Discussion 6 2004-03-12 18:24

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:12.

Sat Jan 22 21:12:17 UTC 2022 up 183 days, 15:41, 0 users, load averages: 1.33, 1.18, 1.33