Other Factordb Problems

wblipp · 2012-05-27, 15:11

From time to time things happen in the factordb that require manual intervention by the administrator, Syd. Syd's busy. This thread is a parking space to note such problems until Syd gets around to fixing them - the individual posts may then be deleted.

There is already a thread for broken aliquot sequences. This thread is for everything else.

wblipp · 2012-05-27, 15:13

4*938!+1 should have a simple N-1 primality proof. It starts up OK but doesn't finish - looks like it might be overflow.

wblipp · 2012-06-01, 15:13

This is a factorization that won't stick. If I enter the factor, it shows as fully factored. But if I click the the "factorize" button again, the status returns to C

This C149 is divisible by this P100

Ahh - I see that sometimes the status shows as "err" instead of C or FF.

Stargate38 · 2012-06-02, 21:34

That happens to me to, but it also happens to 9539^41-1 itself without the "err" status.

Dubslow · 2012-06-02, 21:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by wblipp

This is a factorization that won't stick. If I enter the factor, it shows as fully factored. But if I click the the "factorize" button again, the status returns to C

This C149 is divisible by this P100

Ahh - I see that sometimes the status shows as "err" instead of C or FF.

Just appeared as U to me, though a few seconds later it reverted to C.

Stargate38 · 2012-06-12, 13:26

Why is it still doing that? I can't get the P100 to stay. Is there a read-only file in there somewhere that keeps the P100 from staying, thus creating the "err" status, or what else would cause that?

wblipp · 2012-06-13, 20:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by wblipp

This is a factorization that won't stick. If I enter the factor, it shows as fully factored. But if I click the the "factorize" button again, the status returns to C

This C149 is divisible by this P100

Ahh - I see that sometimes the status shows as "err" instead of C or FF.

New Symptom! I got this error message once:

insert into U values(1100000000185668546,"(9539^41-1)/431293525901506",149,3149750496) - Duplicate entry '1100000000185668546' for key 'PRIMARY'

Batalov · 2012-06-13, 21:43

There are probably a couple of daemons (e.g. a PRP-tester thread and a add-a-factor thread) negating each other's work - in the guts of the database. I've recently observed the "factored"-"oh no, not factored, and of U status"-"oh yes it is composite"-"factored with U-type factors"-and back to the beginning vicious circles; a.f.a.i.r. that was for the 10^99999+y^3+-1 PRPs that I've looked at (the PRPs are D.Broadhurst's dated back to ~2003). Maybe it will help debugging.

chalsall · 2012-06-13, 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by wblipp

New Symptom! I got this error message once:

insert into U values(1100000000185668546,"(9539^41-1)/431293525901506",149,3149750496) - Duplicate entry '1100000000185668546' for key 'PRIMARY'

Is the first field meant to be constrained to being unique? This is what this message is telling you -- you have an unique index on this field.

If this isn't what you want, you can drop the index on the field. Then, if you want that field indexed, add it back without the "unique" option. And/or add a compound unique index including some other fields in addition to this one.

Dubslow · 2012-06-13, 23:41

Yes, it's supposed to be unique. One ID for each number, and an ID should only point to one number.

How much do you know about FDB? (Not to be rude or anything, it's an honest question.)

chalsall · 2012-06-13, 23:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubslow

How much do you know about FDB? (Not to be rude or anything, it's an honest question.)

Not a thing.

2012-05-27, 15:11	#1
wblipp "William" May 2003 New Haven 2,371 Posts	Other Factordb Problems From time to time things happen in the factordb that require manual intervention by the administrator, Syd. Syd's busy. This thread is a parking space to note such problems until Syd gets around to fixing them - the individual posts may then be deleted. There is already a thread for broken aliquot sequences. This thread is for everything else.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A suggestion for factordb.	enzocreti	FactorDB	21	2022-06-08 18:35
Extending Factordb	carpetpool	FactorDB	6	2017-01-23 11:04
FactorDB PRP's	smh	FactorDB	231	2015-07-28 02:30
bugged sequence in factordb	firejuggler	Aliquot Sequences	2	2010-06-15 14:03
FactorDB question	Raman	Factoring	15	2010-01-28 10:24

2012-05-27, 15:13	#2
wblipp "William" May 2003 New Haven 2,371 Posts	4*938!+1 should have a simple N-1 primality proof. It starts up OK but doesn't finish - looks like it might be overflow.

2012-06-01, 15:13	#3
wblipp "William" May 2003 New Haven 4503₈ Posts	This is a factorization that won't stick. If I enter the factor, it shows as fully factored. But if I click the the "factorize" button again, the status returns to C This C149 is divisible by this P100 Ahh - I see that sometimes the status shows as "err" instead of C or FF.

2012-06-02, 21:34	#4
Stargate38 "Daniel Jackson" May 2011 14285714285714285714 1011000100₂ Posts	That happens to me to, but it also happens to 9539^41-1 itself without the "err" status.

2012-06-12, 13:26	#6
Stargate38 "Daniel Jackson" May 2011 14285714285714285714 2²·3·59 Posts	Why is it still doing that? I can't get the P100 to stay. Is there a read-only file in there somewhere that keeps the P100 from staying, thus creating the "err" status, or what else would cause that?

2012-06-13, 21:43	#8
Batalov "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 3×19×173 Posts	There are probably a couple of daemons (e.g. a PRP-tester thread and a add-a-factor thread) negating each other's work - in the guts of the database. I've recently observed the "factored"-"oh no, not factored, and of U status"-"oh yes it is composite"-"factored with U-type factors"-and back to the beginning vicious circles; a.f.a.i.r. that was for the 10^99999+y^3+-1 PRPs that I've looked at (the PRPs are D.Broadhurst's dated back to ~2003). Maybe it will help debugging.

2012-06-13, 23:41	#10
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 1C35₁₆ Posts	Yes, it's supposed to be unique. One ID for each number, and an ID should only point to one number. How much do you know about FDB? (Not to be rude or anything, it's an honest question.)