mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Cunningham Tables

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-02-17, 21:24   #56
frmky
 
frmky's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
So Cal

25·32·7 Posts
Default

For 2,1165+, the 16e tasks will use significantly more memory. We can't afford to keep it artificially low for this one. It will likely be a bit over 2GB per core.
frmky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-02-17, 21:35   #57
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

112·37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frmky View Post
For 2,1165+, the 16e tasks will use significantly more memory. We can't afford to keep it artificially low for this one. It will likely be a bit over 2GB per core.

Make an announcement, double the points for this case only, etc ...I'm happy up to 4 GB/thread.

Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 2020-02-17 at 21:47
pinhodecarlos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-02-18, 02:23   #58
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

391610 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frmky View Post
For 2,1165+, the 16e tasks will use significantly more memory. We can't afford to keep it artificially low for this one. It will likely be a bit over 2GB per core.
Greg-
Please post parameters here once you decide them- lim's and mfb's/lp's. I don't think your client is 34-bit capable, so I imagine we're on 33/33 for LP.
I'd like to start sieving very small Q locally on CADO. I'll use A=32, which is equivalent of 16.5e (40% larger sieve area). I have just one 20-core machine available at present, so I won't get far, but I can start at Q=10M and contribute some relations.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-02-18, 21:39   #59
frmky
 
frmky's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
So Cal

111111000002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
Greg-
Please post parameters here once you decide them- lim's and mfb's/lp's. I don't think your client is 34-bit capable, so I imagine we're on 33/33 for LP.
I'd like to start sieving very small Q locally on CADO. I'll use A=32, which is equivalent of 16.5e (40% larger sieve area). I have just one 20-core machine available at present, so I won't get far, but I can start at Q=10M and contribute some relations.
After testing I'll stick with the suggested parameters:
rlim: 536000000
alim: 536000000
lpbr: 33
lpba: 33
mfbr: 96
mfba: 66
rlambda: 3.7
alambda: 2.8

I usually start at 20M, but I can up that a bit if you wish.
frmky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-02-18, 22:28   #60
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

75148 Posts
Default

Thanks!
How about you start at 40M, and I'll run Q=5-40M on CADO? I think I'll get yield 3-6x higher than ggnfs at those smaller Q (plus the extra 40% from using a larger siever), since CADO is fine with sieving Q values below lim.

I'll get CADO fired up later this week, and will post yield and sec/rel data once I have a reasonable sample.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Poly select and test-sieving for RSA232 VBCurtis Operation Kibibit 25 2020-01-07 01:57
Poly select and planning for 2,2210M swellman Cunningham Tables 50 2019-10-26 20:51
Poly select and planning for 2,2330M VBCurtis Cunningham Tables 68 2019-09-15 07:10
YAFU Poly Select Deadline amphoria YAFU 22 2016-09-17 09:47
Starting NFS skipping poly select jux YAFU 5 2016-01-02 01:01

All times are UTC. The time now is 22:00.

Wed Feb 19 22:00:54 UTC 2020 up 19 days, 16:32, 1 user, load averages: 2.73, 2.46, 2.41

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.