![]() |
![]() |
#78 |
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31·67 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#79 |
Dec 2005
4718 Posts |
![]()
Gary I just answered your email. I split that range over two Q9400's, 8 cores. Around 9:30am PST on the 10th is when my part of the 20T will be finished except for the range you loaded on to your systems. I hope that works for you. See the email please... the one labeled the crises. :)
Last fiddled with by Brucifer on 2009-04-09 at 00:27 |
![]() |
![]() |
#80 | |
May 2007
Kansas; USA
240538 Posts |
![]() Quote:
David, it's not so bad now. The sieving should be done to P=20T by 6-8 PM EDT on Apr. 10th. Port 8000 wouldn't dry, at its current rate, until close to noon on Apr. 11th so we're in decent shape. I'll keep an eye on its testing rate. If someone adds a bunch of cores, I'll pull some of mine over to port 5000 for a while. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-04-09 at 00:35 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#81 |
Dec 2005
313 Posts |
![]()
Dumb question time...... Looking down the road on the rally, is any of this stuff going to be used? If so, how much more needs to be completed. Just asking before I reload stuff after this 20T stuff is finished.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#82 | |
May 2007
Kansas; USA
7×13×113 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Once we hit P=20T (20000e9), we'll use those factors for the n=520K-600K range files of the 10th drive and so it will be quite a while before we need any more factors. The rally will not come even close to getting up to n=600K even if we have the same # of resources as the last huge rally. (Not likely because it appears that Beyond is no longer available.) I'm hoping we'll near n=550K by the end of the rally, which would be a substantial accomplishment over the next 10 days or so, but n=540K would be very good also. Therefore, you can take your time with 20T-30T because we won't use those factors until the 10th drive is nearing n=600K. I would suggest loading something like P=250G ranges into each core so you aren't messing with them stopping and having to restart new ranges frequently. Also, it's easier for me to handle fewer large factor files than many smaller files. We're leaving the entire n-range in the file and continuing to sieve it to P=30T because it takes little additional time to sieve n=500K-1M vs. 600K-1M. We will use the deeper sieved file for double-checking in the future, which will save time there. To go math-geek on you: Sieving n=500K-1M vs. 600K-1M takes sqrt(500K/400K) longer = 1.118 = 11.8% more time and will save us more than that on double-checking in the future. Future double-checking is also why we have the k=1003-1400 range in there even though we're not currently testing it. But there's another reason: It's possible that Benson may not want to take k=1003-1400 all the way up to n=1M (he's stated in an Email that he is taking it to n>600K but hasn't specified how high yet) so we will be here to pick up where he left off if he stops. In other words, we're trying to cover all of the possibilities in the future by continuing to sieve the entire k and n-range. Does that answer what you are after or way more than you're after? ![]() Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-04-09 at 01:23 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#83 |
May 2007
Kansas; USA
7·13·113 Posts |
![]()
Ah, we're in even better shape than I thought. My prior estimate was extrapolated from when I was sieving far lower P-ranges. With far less pairs in the file now, the sieving is faster. Right from the source itself, sr2sieve, my sieving range should complete about 7 AM Friday morning CDT.
David, we'll have more than a day leeway on the next file for port 8000 now. |
![]() |
![]() |
#84 |
Dec 2005
4718 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#85 | |
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31×67 Posts |
![]()
17-17.25T complete.
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#86 |
Dec 2005
313 Posts |
![]()
Yo Gary... the faster one is now averaging 224000 p/sec per core. The slowest is doing 203/204 so big change. I wasn't using v1.7.15, so updated them. Changes the projections by days like from a completion on 1 May down to 22 April for a 250G chunk per core. So they are running like yours now. :)
|
![]() |
![]() |
#87 | |
May 2007
Kansas; USA
7·13·113 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Excellent! I'm glad we checked your P-rate. Once I get all the factors up to P=20T on Friday, I'll compute the optimum sieve depth and send you a new file. For everyone's reference: It's looking like we'll probably need to sieve this range to P=40T-50T somewhere. A bad error on the original estimate on my part. With both the k-range and n-range being larger than any previous sieving effort, there is quite a bit to be gained in total testing time to sieve deeper than other efforts. Based on that, I'll probably open back up the sieving drive here. As for me, after the end of the rally, I'll probably keep one full quad on it full time until it's done. One final note: Bruce reported completion of P=18750G-19750G in an Email. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-04-10 at 04:59 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#88 |
I ♥ BOINC!
Oct 2002
Glendale, AZ. (USA)
3·7·53 Posts |
![]()
If I were to take P=40-50T range...
If you break it up to go across 4 x 8 cores = 32 * 3.5 GHz cores How long would that take? |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Team drive #10 k=1400-2000 n=500K-1M | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 61 | 2013-01-30 16:08 |
Misc. reserves/statuses/primes for k>2000 & k=1003 | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 113 | 2009-07-30 22:32 |
Sieving drive for k=2000-3400 n=50K-1M | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 145 | 2009-06-23 18:28 |
Team drive #8 k=1400-2000 n=350K-500K | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 101 | 2009-04-08 02:11 |
Sieving drive for k=1005-2000 n=200K-500K | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 118 | 2009-01-17 16:05 |