20061022, 20:18  #34  
Jun 2003
13·19^{2} Posts 
I am assuming you got this from this page: http://primes.utm.edu/top20/page.php?id=1
If so, the key sentence would be: Quote:


20061024, 23:20  #35  
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005
5·701 Posts 
Quote:
Anyway, I just thought I'd throw it out there, just in case it was overlooked. Never mind. 

20061114, 19:48  #36 
Oct 2005
Fribourg, Switzerlan
2^{2}×3^{2}×7 Posts 
FYI, I started sieving 25G50G. I'm planning to stop when p reaches 3T.

20061114, 20:22  #37 
Mar 2005
Internet; Ukraine, Kiev
11·37 Posts 
I don't think it is worthful. I can do that in 710 hours (or so I think) and the datafile will be quite large (> 300Mb)  and thus not really transferrable.
Last fiddled with by gribozavr on 20061114 at 20:24 
20061115, 14:52  #38 
Oct 2005
Fribourg, Switzerlan
2^{2}·3^{2}·7 Posts 

20061126, 13:32  #39 
Mar 2004
17D_{16} Posts 
Splitting up horizontal sieving does not make sense, at all. (Of course, for the first G (before merging) this rule does not apply; here a bitmap instead of a hashtable is used due to the large number of candidates)
The sieving speed does not depend on the size of the range, therefore it is recommended, that the range is initially sized larger then necessary. We just need to take care that the computer has enough memory. (I do also some sieving on a 100G range and I have no impact on the sieving speed. The safe file is 750MBytes (but it can compressed down to 20% if the sieving is distributed) and NewPGen takes 320 Mbytes for the hashtable) n=195000 does also follow this strategy; they chance of failing is only 1/6. In case we do not find a twin after the first 20G we can discuss our future plans. Either continuing from 25G or choosing a new N is an option. (I suggest to choose a N which is some 100 below a FFT change point (SSE2 and nonSSE2) in order to improve efficiency) 
20061126, 14:53  #40 
Oct 2005
Italy
153_{16} Posts 
I think that we'll find a twin prime before 20G.

20061129, 20:46  #41  
"Sander"
Oct 2002
52.345322,5.52471
29×41 Posts 
Quote:


20061130, 13:40  #42 
Mar 2005
Internet; Ukraine, Kiev
11·37 Posts 
Range [1200e6; 25e9] is at p=930.0T, 8,397,809 k's left.

20061130, 17:19  #43  
Mar 2004
3·127 Posts 
Quote:
My favourite is N=333333. It has a little bit more than 100000 Digits and is just below a FFT change for SSE2. So, I already started sieving on that number. I have chosen a range of 100G (Has the same probability of finding a twin like a 34G Range at 195000). At the moment I am somewhere beyond 150T and have less than 39 million candidtes left. I will continue sieving that range and we can start with that N after finishing. N=195000. Maybe even distributes sieving is possible; the ideal sieving depth is between 50P and 100P depending architecture used. How do you think about it? Edit: Imagaine, we are working on than N, it is very likely that we find thousands of primes that are not a twin. These Primes will flood the top5000 page and have quite an inpact on the diversity of primes. biwema Last fiddled with by biwema on 20061130 at 17:22 

20061202, 13:12  #44 
Mar 2005
Internet; Ukraine, Kiev
627_{8} Posts 
Looking at http://primes.utm.edu/primes/lists/all.txt I see that 17 primes have already been reported for n=333333.
Last fiddled with by gribozavr on 20061202 at 13:12 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
S9 and general sieving discussion  Lennart  Conjectures 'R Us  31  20140914 15:14 
Sieving discussion thread  philmoore  Five or Bust  The Dual Sierpinski Problem  66  20100210 14:34 
Combined sieving discussion  ltd  Prime Sierpinski Project  76  20080725 11:44 
Sieving Discussion  ltd  Prime Sierpinski Project  26  20051101 07:45 
Sieving Discussion  R.D. Silverman  Factoring  7  20050930 12:57 