mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2007-02-14, 18:19   #34
masser
 
masser's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
wear a mask

1,553 Posts
Default

I recently submitted about 3000 factors, but the stats page shows 9000. Any ideas?
masser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-02-14, 22:24   #35
ltd
 
ltd's Avatar
 
Apr 2003

22×193 Posts
Default

I have corrected the entry but i do not know why it happened.
The main DB shows that you have returned 3009 results which have a value of 6341 points. But for unknown reasons the statistics tables show 3 times the amount.
These tables are only used to speed up statistics generation but are calculated using the
main test table information. So if i find more errors in the stats the data can be regenerated from the main data.

The scripts have security measures implemented so that they can only be run once so there should be no way to have the results counted more then once and after counting the status of each entry is changed in a way that the next stats run can not find the data anymore.

So from the design point of view there should be no way that this could happen. But there must be a programming error that made it possible to
run more then once. I checked the other entries from february and found no errors so far.

Lars

Last fiddled with by ltd on 2007-02-14 at 22:27
ltd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-31, 20:13   #36
tnerual
 
tnerual's Avatar
 
Oct 2006

7×37 Posts
Default

it seems that there is a problem with 35248

it is reserved by LLRNET, at n=240 000 in first post but at n=100 000 on stat page, no tests issued from the llrnet server.

another thing, now that konrad as supplied his residues (thanks ), according to the new "Masser's Rule" can we put all the k into the LLRNET queue even if they belongs to individuals? it will give people a motivation for turning residues in on a regular basis (extra work for LTD, sorry ) and it will help with some missed test (ex: tests just below 125 000 for some k).

L.
tnerual is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-04-01, 06:11   #37
ltd
 
ltd's Avatar
 
Apr 2003

30416 Posts
Default

For k=35248 the thing is very simple. I forgot to reactivate that k. In the DB it is still marked as reserved by user.

Next time the server requests more work it will get numbers for that K.

Lars
ltd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-04-27, 20:05   #38
masser
 
masser's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
wear a mask

1,553 Posts
Default

ltd,

Sorry to bother you again about this. Could you check my Sierpinski sieve stats. I was testing the sieveimport page a few days ago with some old factor files and it seems I got credited with 54 factors that I was previously credited with.

I will stop trying to break your record-keeping pages now...
masser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-04-27, 21:54   #39
ltd
 
ltd's Avatar
 
Apr 2003

22·193 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by masser View Post
ltd,

Sorry to bother you again about this. Could you check my Sierpinski sieve stats. I was testing the sieveimport page a few days ago with some old factor files and it seems I got credited with 54 factors that I was previously credited with.

I will stop trying to break your record-keeping pages now...
Hi,

please continue to try to break the functionality of the pages as this is the only way to find errors.

For your problem: That you got points for those 54 values from the 23 looks OK to me. The problem was not this import but i think i made an error when you reported them before. To lower the chances of an error was one of the main reasons why i implemented the automated submission page.

Can you remember when you reported them the first time so i can check if i can find out what went wrong then and to see if that was an unique error.

One more information about the sieve submission. When the page says it received a new factor that does not mean a 100% sure that you will get points for it. The reason for that is that the submission only checks if the identical factor is already returned by automated submission. But you get only points if you report the first factor that removes a test. So if you post factors from files that have been imported into the DB before the automated submission the submission will tell you that you have entered a lot of new factors but when they try to enter the main database the system finds that they are already their and will not grant any points for them.

Hope i wrote my description clear enough,

Lars
ltd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-05-11, 22:18   #40
masser
 
masser's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
wear a mask

1,553 Posts
Default

I don't remember when I submitted them the first time. However, I have been able to recover 45 of the factors that I believe caused my confusion, though. They are attached, if that helps...

regards,
masser
Attached Files
File Type: txt old_factor.txt (1.8 KB, 83 views)
masser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-08-07, 17:05   #41
robin_benson
 
robin_benson's Avatar
 
Jul 2007

19 Posts
Default

I submit

3634992055859597471126652802009733778269027330417 | 76724*5^137+1

but it looks like

363499205585959747112665280200973377826902733 | 76724*5^137+1

on sr5stats page. can this be fixed?

robin
robin_benson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-08-08, 18:46   #42
ltd
 
ltd's Avatar
 
Apr 2003

22×193 Posts
Default

Error solved.
At least partial.
In the transfer table there is a column with a fixed maximal length which was set to 45. For the moment i have increased that limit to 80 which should be large enough for the moment. For a correct implementation i will have to change the type of that column from "varchar" to "text" as it is already in the master table. But this is a modification i only want to make after a new backup and when i checked if there are other implications (like speed problems) that speak against it.

Cheers,

Lars
ltd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-08-08, 20:05   #43
Xentar
 
Xentar's Avatar
 
Sep 2006

11×17 Posts
Default

there are some other numbers with a length of 45 - is it possible, that these numbers are incorrect, too?
Xentar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-08-08, 21:26   #44
ltd
 
ltd's Avatar
 
Apr 2003

22×193 Posts
Default

That is quite possible. But i have no way to check this as the rest of the number was lost when the data was inserted into the table.

Everybody with a factor 45 digits or greater should send it to me as forum mail and i will correct the entries by hand. This is necessary for factors of this size reported before today 19:00 CET.

The good news is that the original number was a real factor in all cases because my script checks if the factor is valid before it enters it into the DB.

Cheers,

Lars

Last fiddled with by ltd on 2007-08-08 at 21:27
ltd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Overall Stats Fred PrimeNet 7 2016-02-10 14:48
CSVs for stats available + New combined stats opyrt Prime Sierpinski Project 3 2010-05-31 08:13
Stats question em99010pepe NFSNET Discussion 8 2005-07-05 03:22
stats on 15k jocelynl 15k Search 5 2004-01-13 15:45
P4 On Stats HiddenWarrior Hardware 2 2003-08-13 14:39

All times are UTC. The time now is 22:36.

Fri Mar 5 22:36:22 UTC 2021 up 92 days, 18:47, 0 users, load averages: 1.62, 1.50, 1.51

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.