mersenneforum.org Team drive #9 k=1005-2000 n=50K-350K
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2009-01-09, 10:21   #122
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

10,099 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by kar_bon try Code: type *.txt >all.txt this will 'copy' (actually list) all *.txt-files in one file called 'all.txt' without the \$1A-value at the end!
Thanks Karsten. I'll try that.

Gary

2009-01-09, 13:47   #123
Flatlander
I quite division it

"Chris"
Feb 2005
England

31·67 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes Added a quad to the fun. I will likely add 3 more cores later today. ... Gary
In that case, you will reach a score 0f 1000,000 real quick.
http://stats4.free-dc.org/stats.php?...name=gd_barnes

 2009-01-09, 13:58 #124 IronBits I ♥ BOINC!     Oct 2002 Glendale, AZ. (USA) 21318 Posts copy /b part1 + part2 + part3 file.ext Brrrrrrrrrrr Carlos! Last fiddled with by IronBits on 2009-01-09 at 13:58
 2009-01-09, 14:00 #125 henryzz Just call me Henry     "David" Sep 2007 Cambridge (GMT) 24×353 Posts this drive is convicing me that we need a kind of score system for llrnet results with this drive i have jumped from 2 primes to over 10 with very little effort also my number of pairs tested has rocketed
2009-01-09, 21:10   #126
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo

Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

186916 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes Max, it might be best to go ahead and process the results in ranges of 100k (actually ~50 k's), i.e. k=1005-1100, 1100-1200, etc. As soon as you see that the first k/n pair is k>=1101, then you can go ahead with it. As soon as I can after getting the file from you, I'll start compiling a list of primes and finders. THAT should be interesting! lol
Okay. I see that the first k/n pair remaining in the server is for k=1107, so it's all set for me to process the results any time now.

One quick question: would you prefer the results for each 100-k range sorted by k or by n within that k-range? My scripts are designed to sort by n, but I should be able to modify them to sort by k if need be. Of course, even if I do end up sorting them by n, I'd still have to re-sort the sieve file...so, I'm going to end up having to change *something* either way. Though, of course, either modification should be pretty easy, so I'm fine with either way.

2009-01-09, 23:19   #127
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

10,099 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mdettweiler Okay. I see that the first k/n pair remaining in the server is for k=1107, so it's all set for me to process the results any time now. One quick question: would you prefer the results for each 100-k range sorted by k or by n within that k-range? My scripts are designed to sort by n, but I should be able to modify them to sort by k if need be. Of course, even if I do end up sorting them by n, I'd still have to re-sort the sieve file...so, I'm going to end up having to change *something* either way. Though, of course, either modification should be pretty easy, so I'm fine with either way.
Sort by k primary and n secondary. I'll be matching them with the original results, which are sorted by k then n. Also, the primes listing will need to be by k then n.

Gary

 2009-01-09, 23:27 #128 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 10,099 Posts Guys, don't get too excited about this score thing for all the results and primes for this effort. The scoring should be far lower for each pair and prime. Actually, it needs to be the same as calculated on the top-5000 site. That is: A result at n=600K should score 36 times as much as a result at n=100K. A prime at n=600K should score 216 times as much as a prime at n=100K. That is correct, it takes 216 times as much CPU time to find a prime at n=600K vs. 100K and 36 times as much CPU time to process a result at n=600K vs. 100K. That said, don't pull any machines off. I just wanted to point out that while this is a fun effort, it shouldn't score any higher than other efforts for the amount of CPU time expended. Gary
 2009-01-10, 02:31 #129 glennpat     May 2007 Minnesota USA 72 Posts I added one core for a couple of days for a little of this fast fun.
2009-01-10, 05:36   #130
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo

Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3·2,083 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes Sort by k primary and n secondary. I'll be matching them with the original results, which are sorted by k then n. Also, the primes listing will need to be by k then n. Gary
Okay, thanks--I'll get the results processed tomorrow (probably late afternoon or evening). Feel free to bug me if they're still not done by Sunday morning.

2009-01-10, 06:23   #131
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

10,099 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mdettweiler Okay, thanks--I'll get the results processed tomorrow (probably late afternoon or evening). Feel free to bug me if they're still not done by Sunday morning.

By mid-day Sunday, we'll be done up to k=1200. If you wait until then, you may as well do k=1000-1200. lol

 2009-01-10, 06:32 #132 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 10,099 Posts Moved discussion about the weather to a separate thread.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 61 2013-01-30 16:08 gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 96 2012-02-19 03:53 gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 42 2010-11-19 10:42 gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 101 2009-04-08 02:11 gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 118 2009-01-17 16:05

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:12.

Wed Apr 8 03:12:03 UTC 2020 up 14 days, 45 mins, 2 users, load averages: 2.61, 2.70, 2.46

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.