mersenneforum.org Other Factordb Problems
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2021-10-25, 04:39 #474 firejuggler     "Vincent" Apr 2010 Over the rainbow 2·3·11·43 Posts It seems that the db is filled with approximatelly 5000+ low integer that are less than 5 digits and are all in the form of Code: 64^63%(2^63-1)*x Those need to be purged. Last fiddled with by firejuggler on 2021-10-25 at 04:45
2021-10-28, 07:28   #475
Happy5214

"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City

2×401 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by firejuggler It seems that the db is filled with approximatelly 5000+ low integer that are less than 5 digits and are all in the form of Code: 64^63%(2^63-1)*x Those need to be purged.
The modulo operator (%) needs to be removed entirely if we keep getting issues like this. The software is able to resolve the operation, but it can't seem to figure out that it doesn't need a new ID just because that operator is in the form. Normally, distinct forms don't result in duplicate IDs for numbers already in the database, but they do for anything with %.

2021-10-28, 12:47   #476
axn

Jun 2003

23×233 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Happy5214 The modulo operator (%) needs to be removed entirely if we keep getting issues like this. The software is able to resolve the operation, but it can't seem to figure out that it doesn't need a new ID just because that operator is in the form. Normally, distinct forms don't result in duplicate IDs for numbers already in the database, but they do for anything with %.
Probably there are two (or more) different code paths which parses/checks/creates, and they're using different precedence for the % operator. Could be becuase it is using a different program for some of the computation (similar to ## issue where PFGW interprets it differently from factordb internal operations)

Anyway, maybe someone can email Syd to get these fixed.

 2021-11-02, 10:32 #477 firejuggler     "Vincent" Apr 2010 Over the rainbow 2×3×11×43 Posts another false-positive or a positive-false i'm afraid http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000938546746 Code: (10^43*10-10^43-1)^2-2 P88 = 8099999999999999999999999999999999999999999819999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 is seen as composite when yafu tell me is is a p88
2021-11-02, 12:33   #478
sweety439

"99(4^34019)99 palind"
Nov 2016
(P^81993)SZ base 36

3×72×23 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by firejuggler another false-positive or a positive-false i'm afraid http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000938546746 Code: (10^43*10-10^43-1)^2-2 P88 = 8099999999999999999999999999999999999999999819999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 is seen as composite when yafu tell me is is a p88
Well.... the same number http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000938611710

2021-11-07, 10:10   #479
Happy5214

"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City

11001000102 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by sweety439 Well.... the same number http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000938611710
So (10^43*10-10^43-1)^2-2 ≠ (10^43*9-1)^2-2?

Wow, this backend needs a better algebra system.

 2021-12-29, 14:22 #480 richs     "Rich" Aug 2002 Benicia, California 147910 Posts Overnight some nitwit added 8 C89's and 1 C90 of the form 2^572%2^286*286 that the database does not parse correctly as noted earlier in this thread.
 2022-01-21, 19:21 #481 bur     Aug 2020 79*6581e-4;3*2539e-3 7678 Posts Does anyone know if Syd is still reading this thread? In the factor tables there's the wrong entry for Proth numbers (called Cullen there) and the Sylvester/Euclid sequence could be fixed so it won't terminate at primes. On the other hand, is there a specific reason that that sequence is in the db and won't add new terms until the last one is factored? It doesn't require factorization to calculate the next term.
 2022-01-21, 19:40 #482 EdH     "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 450610 Posts I don't think he is routinely keeping up with the forum threads. In the past, when I've contacted him, I used the email at the bottom of the "imprint" page. He's always been quite responsive to db issues, when contacted.
 2022-01-25, 15:51 #483 Stargate38     "Daniel Jackson" May 2011 14285714285714285714 701 Posts I've noticed that the DB has been running slow. Is someone flooding it, or is there a hardware issue?
2022-02-04, 00:16   #484
charybdis

Apr 2020

2×33×13 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Stargate38 I've noticed that the DB has been running slow. Is someone flooding it, or is there a hardware issue?
I don't know if this is the same issue that you were having, but the DB is being flooded. Someone is adding millions of 4x-digit numbers, many of the form 10^46+n, along with their factorizations, and there is now a backlog of millions of unproved small PRPs which is preventing other PRPs from being proved. I've dropped Markus an email. If the user responsible happens to be reading this forum, please could you stop?

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post enzocreti FactorDB 19 2021-08-11 16:49 carpetpool FactorDB 6 2017-01-23 11:04 smh FactorDB 231 2015-07-28 02:30 firejuggler Aliquot Sequences 2 2010-06-15 14:03 Raman Factoring 15 2010-01-28 10:24

All times are UTC. The time now is 02:28.

Sat May 21 02:28:10 UTC 2022 up 37 days, 29 mins, 0 users, load averages: 1.52, 1.36, 1.35

Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔