![]() |
![]() |
#936 |
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
146B16 Posts |
![]()
Sorry for the confusion. I think you made your way through unraveling it. That was the list of sequences that had been run once on my machines.
347^63 was run once, twice, because after my first run, you released it again in post 927. 23^123 was from the index 1 thread. The list I posted isn't separated by projects at all. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#937 |
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
522710 Posts |
![]()
I'm going to queue up 337^63 for an overnight single run when 367^65 moves into LA.
I'm going to look at 331^63 and 337^65 tomorrow and see if I want to run those. I need to set up a few that will go through Thursday without intervention, since I'll be busy then. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#938 |
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
2E1F16 Posts |
![]()
Are you communicating correctly here? You're running a C161 on 367^65 before doing anything else? You said in the other thread that C149s were taking you ~5.5 hours. Wouldn't a C161 take you ~a day?
Regardless, if that is what you are doing, why are you running a sequence where the base has 2 remaining and the other sequence on the base has a C136? I'm just curious about your thinking here. I feel like I'm missing something here. Could you perhaps be talking about the C136 on 367^63? Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2022-10-12 at 03:25 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#939 |
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
2E1F16 Posts |
![]()
1184^54 terminates
Base 1184 is complete! I'm happy to be done with that one! I think it's safe to say that this sequence likely has the project record for opposite-parity sequences that haven't merged. The factor 3 remained for 124 consecutive indexes! I had hoped it would be the longest opposite-parity without merge sequence by total number of indexes. But it fell short. I've had at least one in the 190s. This one only made it to index 177. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2022-10-12 at 04:28 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#940 |
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
2E1F16 Posts |
![]()
379^51, 53, 55, & 59 terminate
383^51, 53, 57, & 59 terminate I'm still working on: 379^57 & 61 383^55, 61, & 65 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#941 |
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
146B16 Posts |
![]()
Correct - there's no method to my madness. Yes, the c161 took 21.25 hours with 7.5 of that LA. During the LA, my second factoring host ran the c137 for 2 hours and all was quiet when I arose. I didn't put any time into developing the next set of candidates, expecting to do that today, and I had already gathered some work for the c161, so I let it run. I was also curious how the diminished sieving work force would affect the overall run, which turned out to indicate not much. I suppose that's because such a large portion is LA which didn't change.
ETA: As for the smaller 337^63 (c137), as mentioned, I quickly grabbed something to test my second host script. I'll be trying to figure out some things differently today, so something(s) can run through Thursday. Last fiddled with by EdH on 2022-10-12 at 13:13 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#942 |
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5,227 Posts |
![]()
I've formed my plan for the next couple of days. I'm going to queue three sequences from this sub-project:
Code:
367^63: 159/136 331^63: 155/148 200560490130^14: 159/148 Code:
60^87: 156/149 84^83: 161/149 88^93: 181/149 90^93: 183/149 92^86: 169/149 120^73: 153/149 276^64: 157/149 780^60: 175/149 966^52: 156/149 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#943 |
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
11,807 Posts |
![]()
Great! Thanks for the explanations. It's interesting to hear about your process. 21.25 hours seem unusually fast even for you. I know you posted your various timings a few months ago but I'd have to dig awhile for the specific post. Have things been improved since then?
Before bed this morning, I saw that you had split 337^63 so I followed up on it. I ran it to t40 and nothing happened. So it's at 155/154/3/t40 and released. It doesn't look particularly good to me but I'll keep following up on whatever you split. I'll see what's up on 367^65 that I was harassing you about in a little while. These exponent 63s in the 300s prime bases continue to be irritating. They aren't any good for the newest bases 379 and 383 either. Edit: I found your timings from late July: https://mersenneforum.org/showpost.p...&postcount=599 You were previously ~32 hours for a C160. That's a nice improvement! Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2022-10-12 at 18:23 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#944 |
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5,227 Posts |
![]()
I suppose there are lots of factors: quality of poly, time of day (how many machines for the sieving), etc., but here are the two c161s I have timing for:
Code:
Msieve Filtering: 00:51:22 Msieve Linear Algebra: 05:20:05 Msieve Square Root: 00:16:54 Total time: 22:39:46 (c161) Msieve Filtering: 00:50:46 Msieve Linear Algebra: 07:22:30 Msieve Square Root: 00:21:03 Total time: 21:12:52 (c161) Actually, (now that you point it out) the change was probably getting adequate cooling for the GPU that runs LA, and that might explain why LA was longer for the last one. To cut down noise, I swapped back to inadequate cooling during the recent cooler weather. The hotter summertime may also influence the sieving machines. We'll see how they all perform in the coming cooler days. ETA: I think the previous c161 timings was actually prior to me getting the GPU for LA working. That would explain a lot of the timing change. Last fiddled with by EdH on 2022-10-12 at 18:41 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#945 |
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
11,807 Posts |
![]()
Very nice timings! Thanks for the detail. Meanwhile...
373^65 terminates One remaining on base 373. Guess which exponent that is. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#946 |
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5,227 Posts |
![]()
How many guesses am I allowed? I suppose I'll have to work that c152 in at some point. . .
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Unexpected termination of PM-1 | Miszka | Software | 22 | 2021-11-19 21:36 |
Easier pi(x) approximation | mathPuzzles | Math | 8 | 2017-05-04 10:58 |
Would finding a definate Pi value easier if... | xtreme2k | Math | 34 | 2013-09-09 23:54 |
Aliquot Termination Question - Largest Prime? | EdH | Aliquot Sequences | 6 | 2010-04-06 00:12 |
A new termination below 100k | 10metreh | Aliquot Sequences | 0 | 2010-03-11 18:24 |