20130319, 16:51  #1 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)
3×5×83 Posts 
NewPgen question
NewPGen 2.82 is great program and under Services Primality test on several machines you hove option that program evenly distribute one large NPG file in several smaller ( according to CPU speed). I try this option: take NPG, enter number of processors (8 CPU) with same speed ( 4000 MHz)
And got 8 new , smaller NPG files, but without any sense... Picture is talking everything :) I got NPG files from 380  565 bytes? What is wrong.... Last fiddled with by pepi37 on 20130319 at 16:52 
20130319, 16:58  #2  
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT)
1011000011100_{2} Posts 
Quote:


20130319, 17:51  #3 
Jun 2003
11F1_{16} Posts 
You have provided absolutely no information to diagnose the situation. Can you prove that what NewPGen did is not correct  i.e, the files don't have (approximately) equal amounts of Primality testing work?
EDIT: Your "large" file contains 3493 bytes! Last fiddled with by axn on 20130319 at 17:57 
20130319, 21:16  #4 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)
10011011101_{2} Posts 
Axn, in NewPgen says that program will give to faster cpu more results, and to slower cpu less results so time will be approx same.
I use for all 8 cores IDENTICAL speed ( 4000 MHZ) 1 file 36 candidates 2 file 36 candidates 3 file 25 candidates 4 file 31 candidates 5 file 39 candidates 6 file 28 candidates 7 file 34 candidates 8 file 22 candidates  251 candidates /8 = 31,375 So for same speed, same number of results, +/1 not +/ 18 ( max difference) Last fiddled with by pepi37 on 20130319 at 21:40 
20130319, 21:38  #5 
ἀβουλία
"Mr. Meeseeks"
Jan 2012
California, USA
2×13×83 Posts 
4000 GHZ holy s**t!!

20130319, 21:40  #6 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)
4DD_{16} Posts 
MHz not GHz
Maybe NewPGen when splting file also consider i exponent number ( candidates with bigger exponenet calculates more on same speed), so it gives less candidates...? Last fiddled with by pepi37 on 20130319 at 22:16 
20130320, 03:13  #7 
Jun 2003
3·1,531 Posts 
Yes. Which is why I said that you didn't give us any information. Are we supposed to guess that your sieve contained differentsized exponents? Even then there may or may not be a bug in NewPGen. Depends on the actual contents of these files.

20130320, 08:13  #8  
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)
3·5·83 Posts 
Quote:
I made another attempt to "break" sieve from K 11 N from 4M to 5M into 8 pieces, and got similar result.No I will try to count exponents, their sizes, and will return with more data :) 

20130322, 19:54  #9 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)
3×5×83 Posts 
It look like I was right. I made real work using my both CPUs , and split sieve in 8 pieces. 4 is made with CPU at 4GHZ, and 4 is made with CPU on 4.2 Ghz.
Right now: one of cores on slower CPU have only 7 hours of work, until one core on faster CPU have 21 hours. So I dont know how NePGen is do calculation, but it is not even equal ... 
20130322, 20:07  #10 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
13115_{8} Posts 
This is 11*2^n+1 or 11*2^n1 right? If so, then I suggest using a combination of srsieve and sr1sieve. That would be much faster than NewPGen. In either case some presieved data should be available.

20130322, 20:41  #11 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)
3·5·83 Posts 
Rogue it is not "problem" in sieving, I use sr1sieve, and that is ok. NewPgen have implemented option that split sieve file in number of CPU according to CPU speed , so faster CPU will get more work, and slower CPU will have less work.
But I noticed that function doesnot work as should, and that is all "problem" 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
NewPgen  Cybertronic  Factoring  0  20140322 10:07 
Does NewPGen have a bug?  MooooMoo  Riesel Prime Search  16  20081211 11:46 
Question: Multiple sequences in NewPGen format  Xentar  Conjectures 'R Us  3  20080120 15:56 
NewPGen k value problem  roger  Information & Answers  0  20070404 22:38 
NewPGen reliability  Cruelty  Riesel Prime Search  3  20060215 05:15 