Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2021-09-21, 18:05 #2344 Jan S   Oct 2018 Slovakia 22·23 Posts Sorry i didn't notice this discussion. If I remember correctly, after uploading P-1 results, server wrote: "Original assigment not deleted". I tried to register these exponents again(https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...&postcount=598, but i was unsuccessful(Error text: No assignment available meeting CPU, program code and work preference requirements...). I'm still working on them(102436709 - 56.03; 104000179 - 28.84).
2021-09-21, 18:33   #2345
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

2·3·5·337 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Jan S I'm still working on them(102436709 - 56.03; 104000179 - 28.84).
I noticed the ones that you turned in P-1 from the Strategic thread. I have kept them off the list (figuring that you are working on them.)

 2021-10-04, 12:09 #2346 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 265016 Posts Sometime ago I got assigned M3427211 for a PRPCF and i found out that is closed to expire and it didn't do off from the assignment list, while it was not in the worktodo. Checking the log files to see if it was really assigned, if the work was done and why it was not reported, I found out that the assignment was indeed taken, but the work was never done, ending up with a "does not divide" error every time I add the assignment to worktodo. I first suspected that some factor is wrong, but then looking more careful to the line, the last factor is doubled. It seems that we found a "non square free mersenne", solving a 300 years old dilemma... Code: PRP=3F18_KEY_KEY_KEY_KEY_AE98,1,2,3427211,-1,99,2,3,1,"6854423,5867740296406049161,168285690558111904601,168285690558111904601" I fixed the assignment line, by deleting the last factor, and now the test is ongoing. The question still remains why this happened (it is clear that the last factor was reported two times, but this should not influence the assignment) and how many exponents are still in this situation (work not done, skipped because assignment line is not generated correctly). Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2021-10-04 at 12:11
2021-10-04, 12:52   #2347
ric

Jul 2004
Milan, Ita

22·47 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by LaurV The question still remains why this happened
It happened before, very occasionally, and had already been reported (ATH, myself, maybe someone else). IIRC, a transient glitch, maybe not worth further investigation (not my words, GW's).

 2021-10-04, 15:12 #2348 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 24·613 Posts Well, the real issue is that the exponent continues to be assigned again and again (ending in error), after the job is done, because the PRPCF for the Mx/3_factors is not the same as the PRPCF of the Mx/4_factors (including the duplicate), so in its mind (server's, that is), the work is not done. So, this MUST be investigated, as it bothers the clients and slows them down. For now, the job is done, so I removed it manually from the worktodo file, but I will keep it (re-re-)assigned on the server, so it won't be assigned to somebody else. Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2021-10-04 at 15:15
 2021-10-09, 13:46 #2349 Viliam Furik     "Viliam Furík" Jul 2018 Martin, Slovakia 2·353 Posts I was looking at the P+1 successful efforts list on mersenne.ca, when I noticed exponent 40927 seems to have a factor found by P+1, but in November 2018... AFAIK, P+1 was not possible back then. I suspect some mishandling of server records. link to the exponent page Last fiddled with by Viliam Furik on 2021-10-09 at 13:46
2021-10-09, 14:25   #2350
James Heinrich

"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

2×5×353 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Viliam Furik I was looking at the P+1 successful efforts list on mersenne.ca, when I noticed exponent 40927 seems to have a factor found by P+1, but in November 2018... AFAIK, P+1 was not possible back then. I suspect some mishandling of server records.
As you can see on the P+1 factors page the general finding of P+1 factors starts shortly after the release of Prime95 with P+1 capabilities in April 2021. However, once P+1 became a result type on PrimeNet user YarBer emailed George and myself indicating that his factors for M40927 and M193873 were found with GMP-ECM using P+1. Those factors had been recorded by PrimeNet but were assumed at the time to be ECM. George and I manually updated the mersenne.org and mersenne.ca databases respectively to reflect the P+1 discovery method.

Last fiddled with by James Heinrich on 2021-10-09 at 14:26

 2021-10-10, 21:36 #2351 kriesel     "TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17" Mar 2017 US midwest 134368 Posts Cert estimated completion mismatch The prime95 client shows me Oct 14 (~3.5 days) one way, and ~30. days another, for completing the Cert on 843112609. And after using Advanced, Manual communication, checking the box for send new expected completion dates to server, then OK, then in the web browser refresh https://www.mersenne.org/workload/ the server still shows 1 day estimated completion. It's always 0 or 1. Seven percent completed in ~2 days is consistent with the worker windows ~30. days to complete, but the server is still indicating 1. Attached Thumbnails
 2021-10-26, 03:05 #2352 slandrum   Jan 2021 California 24610 Posts Server accounting is off The following line from the exponent status distribution: Code: 105000000 54071 | 35011 14284 4769 7 | 8 3 | 221 4542 | Shows 7 exponents left to clear (for FTC) in this range, but 8 being worked on, and if you examine all 8, they do all need to be cleared. Last fiddled with by slandrum on 2021-10-26 at 03:06
 2021-11-04, 00:55 #2353 techn1ciaN     Oct 2021 U.S. / Maine 5D16 Posts If you check out exponents for PRP-CF on the manual assignment page (or re-load any of your automatically fetched PRP-CF work from the replacement lines in https://www.mersenne.org/workload/), the work lines given look like: Code: PRP=[AID],1,2,[exponent],-1,99,2,3,1,"[known factor(s)]" If loaded without editing, this sets PRP residue type 1, which disables Gerbicz error checking and proof generation in the case of a PRP-CF test. These tools can be used for PRP-CF if residue type 5 is selected instead, so lines for those assignments should look like: Code: PRP=[AID],1,2,[exponent],-1,99,2,3,5,"[known factor(s)]" (Incidentally, these lines also set 2 primality tests saved in the case of a found P-1 factor. This doesn't make any sense for CF work since we want to see if the current cofactor is prime before we put more work into factoring, by definition. This shouldn't mean anything practical with what the completed TF bit level is set to; just something else I noticed.)
2021-11-04, 01:08   #2354
James Heinrich

"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

2×5×353 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by techn1ciaN If loaded without editing, this sets PRP residue type 1, which disables Gerbicz error checking and proof generation in the case of a PRP-CF test. These tools can be used for PRP-CF if residue type 5 is selected instead
I think this is something George will need to look into, as best I can tell it's set to 1 in the table of available assignments.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post ewmayer Lounge 39 2015-05-19 01:08 ewmayer Science & Technology 41 2014-04-16 11:54 cheesehead Soap Box 56 2013-06-29 01:42 cheesehead Soap Box 61 2013-06-11 04:30 Dubslow Programming 19 2012-05-31 17:49

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:16.

Wed Dec 1 03:16:57 UTC 2021 up 130 days, 21:45, 1 user, load averages: 1.94, 2.00, 1.94