20180719, 00:11  #463  
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands
2^{3}·3·7^{2} Posts 
Quote:
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...8&postcount=25 

20180719, 12:08  #464 
Jun 2012
2^{4}·181 Posts 
Thank you!

20180721, 02:11  #465 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
2^{4}×281 Posts 
Running Ubuntu 18.04, killawatt reads 90W idle, 350W with 20 threads of CADO, and 390W with 40 threads of CADO. I haven't gotten CUDA installed yet, so I don't have wattage for the old quadro.
If msievematrixsolving or any other nonGPU task uses appreciably more power (say, 420W or more), I'll let you know. 
20180728, 00:49  #466  
Jun 2012
2^{4}·181 Posts 
Quote:


20190110, 22:49  #467 
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands
2^{3}·3·7^{2} Posts 
yafu376+msieve1028 Polysearch deadine per coefficient too large on a C120?
Code:
01/10/19 23:28:35 v1.35beta @ SupermicroX9DRLiF, System/Build Info: Using GMPECM 7.0.5dev, Powered by GMP 6.1.2 detected Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E52650 0 @ 2.00GHz detected L1 = 32768 bytes, L2 = 20971520 bytes, CL = 64 bytes measured cpu frequency ~= 1999.915240 using 1 random witnesses for RabinMiller PRP checks =============================================================== ======= Welcome to YAFU (Yet Another Factoring Utility) ======= ======= bbuhrow@gmail.com ======= ======= Type help at any time, or quit to quit ======= =============================================================== cached 78498 primes. pmax = 999983 >> nfs(227010481295437363334259960947493668895875336466084780038173258247009162675779735389791151574049166747880487470296548479) nfs: commencing nfs on c120: 227010481295437363334259960947493668895875336466084780038173258247009162675779735389791151574049166747880487470296548479 nfs: searching for brent special forms... nfs: searching for homogeneous cunningham special forms... nfs: searching for XYYXF special forms... nfs: couldn't find special form nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 8192  8442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 8692  8942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 8942  9192 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 9192  9442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 9442  9692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 10442  10692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 10192  10442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 11442  11692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 11942  12192 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 11692  11942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 11192  11442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 9942  10192 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 12442  12692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 12942  13192 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 13192  13442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 13692  13942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 13442  13692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 9692  9942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 12192  12442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 12692  12942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 10692  10942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 14442  14692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 8442  8692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 10942  11192 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 14192  14442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 13942  14192 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 14692  14942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 14942  15192 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 15692  15942 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 15192  15442 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 15442  15692 nfs: commencing polynomial search over range: 15942  16192 deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient deadline: 8640000 CPUseconds per coefficient coeff 12180 specialq 1  72504683 other 1014  2433 With the default parameters: nfs(a120digitnumber) only a few coeffs are done in 15mins. Somehow the deadline per coefficient seems way too high? In the end it finds a few polys. Code:
save 1.964811e11 6.9653 224848.77 2.848045e10 rroots 5 save 1.927938e11 6.4808 123886.85 2.845866e10 rroots 3 save 1.903205e11 6.1052 113493.47 2.830937e10 rroots 3 save 2.143278e11 6.6286 119879.16 3.009189e10 rroots 5 save 2.017982e11 5.5322 44129.01 2.945106e10 rroots 5 
20190112, 03:20  #468  
"Ben"
Feb 2007
3,347 Posts 
Quote:
Did you look in the resulting nfs.dat.p file? That has all of the polynomials that it found. (It's deleted when the job finishes though.) In the test I just did (on linux), with 12 threads over 21 minutes it found 1200 polynomials. I'm running again on windows after a fresh compile with an updated msieve (svn 1028). Not done yet, but it's looking similar so far to the linux run. Is 1520 minutes too much for a c120? I've not kept up with this as much lately so I'd be happy to adjust the deadlines if they are not right. 

20190112, 03:39  #469  
"Ben"
Feb 2007
3,347 Posts 
Quote:
Here is the deadline table: Code:
static const poly_deadline_t time_limits[] = { // bits, seconds {248, 1 * 60}, // 74 digits {264, 2 * 60}, // 80 digits {304, 6 * 60}, // 92 digits {320, 15 * 60}, // 97 digits {348, 30 * 60}, // 105 digits {365, 1 * 3600}, // 110 digits {383, 2 * 3600}, // 116 digits {399, 4 * 3600}, // 120 digits {416, 8 * 3600}, // 126 digits {433, 16 * 3600}, // 131 digits {449, 32 * 3600}, // 135 digits {466, 64 * 3600}, // 140 digits {482, 100 * 3600}, // 146 digits {498, 200 * 3600}, // 150 digits {514, 300 * 3600}, // 155 digits }; 

20190112, 03:52  #470 
"Ben"
Feb 2007
3,347 Posts 
I should maybe also (re)mention that if you don't want to search for a fixed time, you can use the psearch option with either min,avg, or good as a qualifier. yafu will stop when it finds a {min,avg,good} poly for the input number.
min,avg,good are chosen based on Batalov's heuristic. psearch min > uses a multiplier of 1 to that fit psearch avg > uses a multipler of 1.036 psearch good > uses a multiplier of 1.072 Just now, with that c120, I found a "min" poly of score = 2.937000e010 in 3 minutes (8 threads), after searching a range of only a thousand coefficients or so. That actually just barely missed being qualified "avg". On the start of the job the heuristic said the following, so the poly fits in the range expected: nfs: expecting degree 5 poly E from 2.87e010 to > 3.30e010 best poly: # norm 2.039066e011 alpha 6.282017 e 2.937e010 rroots 5 n: 227010481295437363334259960947493668895875336466084780038173258247009162675779735389791151574049166747880487470296548479 skew: 95431.04 c0: 46602088970638410228907101375 c1: 643792960629014034531255 c2: 64059317395932803683 c3: 49937622929009 c4: 7589830536 c5: 9108 Y0: 120039626008868252603764 Y1: 93171618323 Last fiddled with by bsquared on 20190112 at 04:20 
20190203, 16:52  #471  
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands
2^{3}×3×7^{2} Posts 
Sorry, for being vague and not replying sooner.
Yes, I did indeed mean that YAFU was spending too much time in polysearch in relation to the whole factorization. This is especially prevalent for smaller composites. But this could also be caused by me using a 16core/32 threads machine (Ubuntu). For instance with RSA120 Code:
02/03/19 14:41:16 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing nfs on c120: 227010481295437363334259960947493668895875336466084780038173258247009162675779735389791151574049166747880487470296548479 02/03/19 14:41:16 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing poly selection with 32 threads 02/03/19 14:41:16 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: setting deadline of 13500 seconds 02/03/19 14:41:16 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: expecting degree 5 poly E from 2.87e10 to > 3.30e10 02/03/19 14:41:16 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: searching for min quality poly E > 2.87e10 02/03/19 15:27:25 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: completed 80 ranges of size 50 in 2768.6909 seconds 02/03/19 15:27:25 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: best poly = # norm 2.225654e11 alpha 6.557326 e 3.097e10 rroots 5 02/03/19 15:27:25 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:29:12 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:30:59 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:32:46 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:34:27 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:36:21 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:38:04 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:39:51 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:41:37 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:43:26 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:45:18 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:47:07 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:48:56 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:50:45 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:52:30 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:54:25 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:56:17 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:58:09 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 15:59:55 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:01:41 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:03:30 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:05:24 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:07:17 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:09:10 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:11:04 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:12:58 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:14:45 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:16:35 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:18:19 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:20:12 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:22:05 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:23:55 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:25:48 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:27:39 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:29:28 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:31:23 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:33:22 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:35:10 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:37:11 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing msieve filtering 02/03/19 16:40:33 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: raising min_rels by 5.00 percent to 10631389 02/03/19 16:40:33 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:42:24 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing lattice sieving with 32 threads 02/03/19 16:44:20 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing msieve filtering 02/03/19 16:48:21 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing msieve linear algebra 02/03/19 16:57:21 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, nfs: commencing msieve sqrt 02/03/19 16:59:22 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, prp60 = 693342667110830181197325401899700641361965863127336680673013 02/03/19 16:59:22 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, prp60 = 327414555693498015751146303749141488063642403240171463406883 02/03/19 16:59:22 v1.35beta @ SupermicroXeonE52650, NFS elapsed time = 8286.1046 seconds. 2769/8286 = 33.4% of the time. It should've been about 1015% of the time. Quote:


20190208, 16:01  #472  
May 2009
Russia, Moscow
13·193 Posts 
YAFU doesn't want to work in noninteractive mode anymore
For example, I try to run Code:
nohup ./yafu "siqs(293419538711649676999906520094386008543357306311770882385495238269039165018900436212239)" > /dev/null & nohup.out Quote:
Last fiddled with by unconnected on 20190208 at 16:08 

20191113, 11:53  #473 
May 2009
Russia, Moscow
13·193 Posts 
While use YAFU v.1.35beta for batch factoring it always crashes after factoring ~400 numbers.
Used options: ./yafu "factor(@)" batchfile list pretest 25 of out.txt ou uf.txt op pr.txt threads 4 Output: Code:
=== Starting work on batchfile expression === factor(5021087590407124764178007739509945482906763851099037519643121525646762264313367379245411902455705415) ============================================= fac: factoring 5021087590407124764178007739509945482906763851099037519643121525646762264313367379245411902455705415 fac: using pretesting plan: normal fac: custom pretesting limit is: 25 fac: using tune info for qs/gnfs crossover div: primes less than 10000 fmt: 1000000 iterations rho: x^2 + 3, starting 1000 iterations on C99 rho: x^2 + 2, starting 1000 iterations on C99 rho: x^2 + 1, starting 1000 iterations on C99 pm1: starting B1 = 150K, B2 = gmpecm default on C99 ecm: 30/30 curves on C99, B1=2K, B2=gmpecm default ecm: 74/74 curves on C99, B1=11K, B2=gmpecm default fopen error: Too many open files could not open factor.log for appending 11/13/19 14:37:36 v1.35beta @ supercomp, current ECM pretesting depth: 15.18 11/13/19 14:37:36 v1.35beta @ supercomp, scheduled 74 curves at B1=11000 toward target pretesting depth of 25.00 Segmentation fault (core dumped) Code:
[65250.281298] yafu[17356]: segfault at 0 ip 00000000005eb0e4 sp 00007ffdbdb86320 error 4 in yafu[400000+38d000] [65250.281309] Code: 33 0c 25 28 00 00 00 89 f0 75 0a 48 81 c4 d8 00 00 00 5b 5d c3 e8 fc 11 05 00 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 66 90 41 54 55 53 <8b> 07 48 89 fb f6 c4 20 0f 85 a6 00 00 00 89 c2 81 e2 00 80 00 00 Code:
$ ./yafu 11/13/19 14:39:39 v1.35beta @ supercomp, System/Build Info: Using GMPECM 7.0.4, Powered by GMP 6.1.2 detected Intel(R) Core(TM) i78650U CPU @ 1.90GHz detected L1 = 32768 bytes, L2 = 8388608 bytes, CL = 64 bytes measured cpu frequency ~= 2111.997520 Last fiddled with by unconnected on 20191113 at 11:54 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Running YAFU via Aliqueit doesn't find yafu.ini  EdH  YAFU  8  20180314 17:22 
Where to report bugs  Matt  Software  1  20070220 19:13 
Possible Prime95 bugs  JuanTutors  Software  9  20060924 21:22 
RMA 1.7 beta bugs  TTn  15k Search  2  20041124 22:11 
RMA 1.6 fixes LLR bugs!  TTn  15k Search  16  20040616 01:22 