PrimeNet 5.0 Upgrade - Page 4

S45653 · 2008-10-30, 17:24

This did the trick.

Thanks for you prompt reaction.

uigrad · 2008-10-30, 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by ET_

Code:

CPU Name      Exponent      Result Type     Received     age  days      Result                                         GHz-Days
Manual testing      65536       NF-ECM       2008-10-30 11:09      0.0          10 curves, B1=44000000, B2=4400000000        9.9159
v4_computers    20252509    C    2008-10-27 14:42      0.0           SIGNED]__                               16.4270
v4_computers    20252503    C    2008-10-27 14:42      0.0           SIGNED]__                               16.4270
v4_computers    35325137    C    2008-10-27 14:18      0.0            __                                       46.5114

It seems that part of the resultmessage was eaten by the server (see under the result column)

Luigi

This happened with both of the results I've turned in since the migration. The correct residue did make it, but the server gives credit to two accounts sometime (ANONYMOUS, and the real account), and the second credited account will be listed as returning __ for the residue.

You can see both entries in the v5 server are from the same date:
http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_exp...&B1=Get+status

Here's my two similar cases:
http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_exp...&B1=Get+status
http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_exp...&B1=Get+status

There were two that I submitted with the manual testing form, and they show two lines of results also, but in those cases, the full residue is there. ie:
http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_exp...&B1=Get+status

jinydu · 2008-10-30, 22:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmorrow

No, I started off small in the beginning. However, for the past 2 years the number has been static, roughly the same number (+/-2) of machines, only the power of one of them increasing substantially. I can see no way that in 6 months my current suite could outdo what I've done in 5 years, not by miles. Furthermore I just checked, in an 8 hour period my score just went up from 173.796 to 222.849, an increase of 49.053 GHz-Days, the new V5 server is way more generous, at least for TF'ing which is what I mainly do.

Well the v4 server severely under-credited TF assignments, especially when no factor was found. Maybe that has been fixed now.

rudi_m · 2008-10-30, 22:58

Quote:

The old v4 Workunits are (up to now) only shown under the
http://v5www.mersenne.org/v4_migration/

Ah ok, thx - I got that alerady.

I thought its possible to see my old style stats.
I just wanted to verify it because I am missing the credits which were checked in by v4 clients between 2008-10-27 and 2008-10-29.
(7 x 10M-digit LL-test)

My 2 last recent LL tests from 2008-10-30 (also checked in by v4 clients) are credited aleready on v5 account.

garo · 2008-10-30, 23:06

tmorrow, the old server used to under-credit TF as compared to LL. If the new server has corrected this, it should account for about 30-50% of the increase.

Uncwilly · 2008-10-31, 01:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by garo

tmorrow, the old server used to under-credit TF as compared to LL. If the new server has corrected this, it should account for about 30-50% of the increase.

P-1 credit got short changed big time, too.

Old man PrimeNet · 2008-10-31, 09:13

Please email me the particulars of any issue.

The v4_computers 'virtual' CPU is a logical container - upgrading to Prime95 25.7 or later effects the defection of that computer from that group. Once the v4 group is empty you can drop your v4_computers CPU to ANONYMOUS on your CPUs page for eventual admin cleanup.

v4 stats are now appearing on the account summary page.

RMAC9.5 · 2008-10-31, 13:48

I have a few previously "borged" v4_computers under my v4 user id (RMAC9.5) that I no longer have access to that are still reporting to Primenet (i.e upgrading them to Prime95 25.7 or higher is not an option). How will the v5 server deal with these results? Will they simply stay in the v4_computers 'virtual' CPU container forever? If so, that is not a problem for me as long as their results are credited to my v5 account.

I have also been unsuccessful in setting up RMAC9.5 as a v5 user id. Will it be possible to use RMAC9.5 as my v5 user id in the future? I would very much like to continue using my v4 user id and I don't mind waiting if it takes a while for this to happen.

Roger

P.S. I just found a trial factoring result (M50607409) that was reported this morning by a PC that I still have access to via the v4 bridge. It was credited to ANONYMOUS v4_computers. Will this result be credited to me when I get a v5 user id set up and link it to my v4 user id or does the credit for each PC wait until it is upgraded to Prime95 25.7?

petrw1 · 2008-11-03, 15:33

For the past few years I have always had between 6 and 9 active PCs; a few were mine but the rest belonged to friends and family.

So, in v4 I had a "team" of 6 or 9 PCs.

BUT in v5 I am simply called a "user" with 7 computers.

So, in v5 what constitues a team vs a user with several computers?

TimSorbet · 2008-11-03, 15:37

In v5, Teams are groups of user accounts separate from the account itself. If you want your account to be part of a team, you join your account to that team, but unlike v4, your account exists as well as the team.
http://www.mersenne.org/team/
You can see team summaries or create or join a team there.

Bundu · 2008-11-05, 15:18

I was wondering if the summary page could be altered a little bit to group some of the sections a little better.

Under the summary you have the following components:

Stats for the last 365 days
CPU time by stats type (pie)
Rank (percentile) by stats type (graph)
Computers
Workload
Lifetime Completed by Result-Type
Lifetime CPU time by stats type (pie)

Would it be possible to have the:

Stats for the last 365 days and Lifetime Completed by Result-Type next to one another in the first section (and could they both have the stats split into 9 categories. Currently the stats for the last 365 days counts all TF together as TF the lifetime counts them as F and NF)

Underneath could we then have the CPU time by stats type (pie), Rank (percentile) by stats type (graph) and Lifetime CPU time by stats type (pie) side by side in the second section

Followed in the final section by workload and computers side by side.

I hope I have put this clearly (let me know if I haven't). I would have thought most people use their summary for stats and these should come first. Also by grouping these components together it should be easier to read and there should be less need to scroll up and down?

Just a thought, I wondered if anyone else agreed?

2008-10-31, 13:48	#41
RMAC9.5 Jun 2003 3²×17 Posts	I have a few previously "borged" v4_computers under my v4 user id (RMAC9.5) that I no longer have access to that are still reporting to Primenet (i.e upgrading them to Prime95 25.7 or higher is not an option). How will the v5 server deal with these results? Will they simply stay in the v4_computers 'virtual' CPU container forever? If so, that is not a problem for me as long as their results are credited to my v5 account. I have also been unsuccessful in setting up RMAC9.5 as a v5 user id. Will it be possible to use RMAC9.5 as my v5 user id in the future? I would very much like to continue using my v4 user id and I don't mind waiting if it takes a while for this to happen. Roger P.S. I just found a trial factoring result (M50607409) that was reported this morning by a PC that I still have access to via the v4 bridge. It was credited to ANONYMOUS v4_computers. Will this result be credited to me when I get a v5 user id set up and link it to my v4 user id or does the credit for each PC wait until it is upgraded to Prime95 25.7? Last fiddled with by RMAC9.5 on 2008-10-31 at 14:28 Reason: Added P.S. question

2008-11-03, 15:33	#42
petrw1 1976 Toyota Corona years forever! "Wayne" Nov 2006 Saskatchewan, Canada 5²×211 Posts	In v4 I was a team ... in v5 I am not??? For the past few years I have always had between 6 and 9 active PCs; a few were mine but the rest belonged to friends and family. So, in v4 I had a "team" of 6 or 9 PCs. BUT in v5 I am simply called a "user" with 7 computers. So, in v5 what constitues a team vs a user with several computers?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
GPU upgrade	chris2be8	GPU Computing	8	2015-11-14 17:05
Wiki upgrade...	Xyzzy	mersennewiki	3	2011-02-18 03:31
How would you upgrade this?	jasong	Factoring	5	2005-09-09 19:26
Please upgrade to version 1.1	xilman	NFSNET Discussion	6	2004-06-17 01:24
ga-7dx upgrade	crash893	Hardware	4	2002-09-26 06:27

2008-10-30, 17:24	#34
S45653 Oct 2008 8₁₆ Posts	This did the trick. Thanks for you prompt reaction.

2008-10-30, 23:06	#38
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 101011010000₂ Posts	tmorrow, the old server used to under-credit TF as compared to LL. If the new server has corrected this, it should account for about 30-50% of the increase.

2008-10-31, 09:13	#40
Old man PrimeNet Jan 2003 Altitude>12,500 MSL 101 Posts	Please email me the particulars of any issue. The v4_computers 'virtual' CPU is a logical container - upgrading to Prime95 25.7 or later effects the defection of that computer from that group. Once the v4 group is empty you can drop your v4_computers CPU to ANONYMOUS on your CPUs page for eventual admin cleanup. v4 stats are now appearing on the account summary page.

2008-11-03, 15:37	#43
TimSorbet Account Deleted "Tim Sorbera" Aug 2006 San Antonio, TX USA 4279₁₀ Posts	In v5, Teams are groups of user accounts separate from the account itself. If you want your account to be part of a team, you join your account to that team, but unlike v4, your account exists as well as the team. http://www.mersenne.org/team/ You can see team summaries or create or join a team there.

2008-11-05, 15:18	#44
Bundu Jul 2004 Mid Calder, Scotland 5×37 Posts	I was wondering if the summary page could be altered a little bit to group some of the sections a little better. Under the summary you have the following components: Stats for the last 365 days CPU time by stats type (pie) Rank (percentile) by stats type (graph) Computers Workload Lifetime Completed by Result-Type Lifetime CPU time by stats type (pie) Would it be possible to have the: Stats for the last 365 days and Lifetime Completed by Result-Type next to one another in the first section (and could they both have the stats split into 9 categories. Currently the stats for the last 365 days counts all TF together as TF the lifetime counts them as F and NF) Underneath could we then have the CPU time by stats type (pie), Rank (percentile) by stats type (graph) and Lifetime CPU time by stats type (pie) side by side in the second section Followed in the final section by workload and computers side by side. I hope I have put this clearly (let me know if I haven't). I would have thought most people use their summary for stats and these should come first. Also by grouping these components together it should be easier to read and there should be less need to scroll up and down? Just a thought, I wondered if anyone else agreed?