results not needed

[Mini-Geek]

Some of the results from my latest TF submission came back as "results not needed".

PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M70070123 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.20 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M70070123 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M70070237 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.20 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M70070237 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M70191343 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.20 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M70191343 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M70070207 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.20 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M70070207 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M70070249 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.20 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M70070249 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M70213879 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.20 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M70213879 WAS NOT NEEDED
PROCESSING RESULT: NO FACTOR FOR M70214041 FROM 2^73 TO 2^74 [MFAKTC 0.20 BARRETT76_MUL32_GS]
ERROR CODE: 40, ERROR TEXT: TF RESULT FOR M70214041 WAS NOT NEEDED

I checked on one in particular (assuming they all have a similar story): M70213879 TF from 73 to 74 was assigned to me by GPUto72 on 2015-01-04, then A_Savchenko submitted that result on 2015-01-07. Now, on 2015-01-08, I tried to submit the same result.
Did GPUto72 double-assign the work? Did A_Savchenko run work that wasn't assigned to him? I'm not worried about the credit, but I don't want us to be duplicating work.

[kladner]

I just came home and submitted some TF results on assignments from 72-75. I got several "Not Needed" results, but screwed up the listing before I made note of them. I then checked my remaining assignments and found two in progress which I had from 72-75, but had been done to 74 by Mark Rose. I have cut my losses and modified the remaining assignments. The two which I know to have been mine are

73247971
73247597

but there may have been 3 or 4 Not Neededs.

[kladner]

These four assignments seem to be the ones involved. I lost 72-74 on the latter two. I may have lost 72-73 on one of the others, and backed out in time on the last.

73247971
73247597
73247021
73247429

EDIT: I hope Mark does not have 73347523 queued up. I do.

[Mark Rose]

I have only DCTF work queued at the moment.

With the machine issues I had a week ago, it's possible things got screwed up.

Chris, can you please check the GPU72 logs for those exponents? If I did step on any toes by doing unassigned work, please move the credit over.

Alternatively, I'll gladly do the same amount of work or more and PM the results including any factors found to you so you can submit them and get the credit. Post the assignments here and I'll get started right away.

[kladner]

Thanks for the offer, Mike. I do not think you were at fault. Of course, I don't think I am, either. I don't need the (maybe) 80-100 GHz-d/d to feel fulfilled. It was just a surprise to which I probably over reacted. The question is only how this came to pass.

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by kladner

Thanks for the offer, Mark.

Fixed it for you...

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

Chris, can you please check the GPU72 logs for those exponents? If I did step on any toes by doing unassigned work, please move the credit over.

Yup, I"m afraid you did step on toes:

+----------+----------------------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+---------------------+---------------------+
| Exponent | User                             | WorkType | Status | FactFrom | FactTo | Assigned            | Completed           |
+----------+----------------------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+---------------------+---------------------+
| 73247971 | 2423ae6e8f696d5e7d1447de91ca35a6 |        1 |      1 |       71 |     72 | 2015-03-31 09:49:34 | 2015-04-02 04:13:41 | 
| 73247971 | ea39a75de82cd896610be22735054fc5 |        1 |     90 |       72 |     74 | 2015-09-04 17:52:48 | 2015-09-12 06:33:49 | 
| 73247971 | 8ad778c87c3d88f688fef4ebad36994c |        1 |      1 |       72 |     75 | 2015-09-12 07:07:40 | 2015-09-16 12:42:36 | 
+----------+----------------------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+---------------------+---------------------+

The Status of 90 means the candidate was assigned to you, but then you unreserved it 2015-09-12 06:33:49 UTC.

kladner did receive the full credit on GPU72, but not Primenet.

[Mark Rose]

Darn it :(

Edit: It looks like I removed all my work of a type at one point, including assignments that were already submitted to PrimeNet. I guess GPU72 hadn't picked up all my completed work yet, so I had unreserved work I had already submitted.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

I guess GPU72 hadn't picked up all my completed work yet, so I had unreserved work I had already submitted.

Likely scenario. In such cases, it's best to wait at least an hour before unreserving work.

Unfortunately there's no way for GPU72 to know about such situations without hammering Primenet with spidering.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Fixed it for you...

Thanks!

EDIT: I have made plenty of confused moves when juggling assignments, some of which undoubtedly messed with someone else's work.

[airsquirrels]

I just finished http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/73447019 which I was assigned by GPU72, of course the result wasn't needed...