20110907, 01:31  #23  
Dec 2010
Monticello
3403_{8} Posts 
Quote:


20110907, 07:44  #24  
Mar 2011
Germany
1100001_{2} Posts 
Quote:
icc O3 lgmp wilsontest.c o wilsontest.exe (needs of course GMP installed properly) If you mean the parameters for running it: There are no real command line parameters as you have to interactivly type it in. But you can mimic the input with echo (assuming that you start from scratch) echo e "<start>\n<end>\n<interval>\n0\n"  ./wilsontest.exe Last fiddled with by MrRepunit on 20110907 at 07:52 Reason: added runtime parameters 

20110907, 07:53  #25  
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada
3×17×23 Posts 
Quote:
I understand the start and end value part, but when it says how many primes to test what are people using? It is best to keep increasing that until you use as much RAM as possible to speed things up? And someone was saying it is better to use 1 core with lots of RAM instead of multiple cores with your RAM split between them? I will try the range 7e10 to 8e10 then. Jeff. 

20110907, 08:04  #26  
Mar 2011
Germany
97 Posts 
Quote:
Concerning the runtime with splitting and without: I don't have exact timings, but my feeling is that using more cores should be faster. By looking at the timings of fivemack I see that a factor of ten in the used interval (4E6 to 4E7) just gives a speedup of a factor 2.5. So ten cores instead of one on that range would be faster. 

20110907, 08:11  #27 
Mar 2011
Germany
141_{8} Posts 

20110907, 10:29  #28 
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
2·7·461 Posts 
I've split this into algorithmdiscussion and practicalities threads; am happy to rearrange if it becomes unwieldy again

20110907, 10:33  #29  
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
2×7×461 Posts 
Quote:
At the moment, if you have about (maybe a little over) one gigabyte per core, I would run a 1e9 range on each core and use 2e7 as the interval parameter. But I haven't yet completed a calibration run with that parameter choice, I expect it to take a bit over 24 hours but I'm not at all sure how much over. 

20110907, 12:11  #30  
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada
2225_{8} Posts 
Quote:


20110907, 12:17  #31 
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada
3×17×23 Posts 
It is but not publicly listed. You can download the core2 optimized version for Windows 64bit here:
http://gilchrist.ca/jeff/factoring/wilsontest_win64.zip 
20110907, 12:22  #32  
Mar 2011
Germany
97 Posts 
Quote:
(If someone is interested in the profiling script I can upload it.) 

20110907, 12:51  #33 
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
2·7·461 Posts 
The memory usage is very peaky: the below graph is for running 50G .. 60G with interval= 4e7. X axis is in tensecond units since the program starts, Y axis is memory use in kilobytes.
The drops to ~400M use occur at the start of intervals; you can see three phases for each interval  the largememory phase, an intermediate phase where there's a sort of squareroot curve visible in the growth of memory use, and the output phase where the memory use is flat. The moduli in this graph are [11, 1, 5, 1, 1, 5] (the last 5 is not finished yet); you can clearly see the 123 timing ratio. Last fiddled with by fivemack on 20110907 at 13:04 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Twin prime search?  MooooMoo  Twin Prime Search  115  20100829 17:38 
k=51 or about coordinated prime search  Kosmaj  Riesel Prime Search  7  20070713 22:15 
Prime Search on PS3?  Kosmaj  Riesel Prime Search  6  20061121 15:19 
Genetics and Wilson's theorem  David John Hill Jr  Science & Technology  2  20060510 14:10 
Generalized wilson's theorem  bouayoun  Math  3  20040312 18:24 