20090105, 02:18  #1 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2^{6}×3×53 Posts 
Team drive #9 k=10052000 n=50K350K
This is team drive #9 for NPLB. We will be searching all k=10052000 for n=50K200K and k=14002000 for n=200K350K. Karsten has created a web page that shows details for the drive here.
An LLRnet server will be processing most of the range. For general info. on setting up and running the server see this thread. Server info. is: server = "nplb.ironbits.net" port = 9000 For this drive, there will be no top5000 primes. For ranges run on the server, the admins will take care of showing all primes in this post. Please post requests for manual files and we will send them to you. For manual ranges, please wait until you have completed your range and then post primes in THIS THREAD along with your completion status. The drive will be searched by kvalue to make it easier for posting the many small primes that will be found. All primes found from drive #9 for k=10052000 and n=50K200K by k and nvalue: primes k=10052000 n=50K200K All primes found from drive #9 for k=14002000 and n=200K350K by k and nvalue: Code:
Prime found by new (n) or confirmed (c)? primes k=14001500 n=200K350K primes k=15001600 n=200K350K primes k=16001700 n=200K350K primes k=17001800 n=200K350K 1805*2^3066581 Bruce n 1809*2^2386231 Bruce n 1809*2^3367851 Bruce n 1813*2^3196471 Flatlander n 1815*2^2282941 Flatlander n 1815*2^3110161 Flatlander n 1817*2^2359521 Bruce n 1821*2^2464191 Bruce n 1821*2^2905181 Bruce n 1821*2^2975741 Bruce n 1821*2^3033651 Bruce n 1823*2^2460041 Bruce n 1823*2^2817141 Bruce n 1823*2^3224901 Bruce n 1825*2^2521671 Angus n 1825*2^2952791 Bruce n 1827*2^2482021 Bruce c 1831*2^2225851 Flatlander n 1831*2^2474371 Bruce n 1833*2^2523321 Bruce n 1837*2^2298491 Bruce n 1837*2^2995291 Bruce n 1839*2^2154651 Flatlander n 1839*2^2502921 Bruce n 1839*2^2783081 Bruce n 1839*2^3029011 Bruce n 1841*2^2254021 Bruce n 1843*2^2883151 Bruce n 1843*2^2941151 Bruce n 1845*2^2947441 Bruce n 1847*2^2744721 Bruce n 1849*2^2390951 Bruce n 1849*2^3328071 Bruce n 1851*2^2487431 Bruce n 1853*2^2725441 Bruce n 1855*2^2314771 Bruce n 1855*2^2434511 Bruce n 1857*2^3121291 Flatlander n 1857*2^3127381 Flatlander n 1857*2*3283891 Bruce n 1861*2^2041711 Bruce n 1863*2^2936601 Bruce n 1865*2^2980481 Bruce n 1865*2^3382061 Bruce n 1867*2^3324851 Bruce n 1869*2^2149511 Flatlander n 1869*2^3258431 cipher n 1873*2^3401031 Bruce n 1875*2^2288701 Flatlander n 1875*2^2385421 Bruce n 1875*2^2445931 Bruce n 1875*2^2705371 vaughan n 1875*2^2804851 Bruce n 1875*2^3367741 Bruce c 1875*2^3491891 gd_barnes c 1877*2^2237841 Bruce n 1877*2^2758701 Bruce n 1879*2^2305751 Bruce n 1881*2^2134341 Flatlander n 1881*2^2370461 Bruce n 1883*2^2225361 DeeDee n 1883*2^2278721 Bruce n 1883*2^2398041 Bruce n 1883*2^2567341 Bruce n 1887*2^2173651 Bruce n 1887*2^2584881 Bruce n 1887*2^2660941 Bruce n 1887*2^3414241 Bruce n 1891*2^2760771 Bruce n 1893*2^2602711 Bruce n 1893*2^2638761 Bruce n 1895*2^2694001 Bruce n 1895*2^3430201 Bruce n 1897*2^3098251 Bruce n 1897*2^3182811 Bruce n 1899*2^2019391 Bruce n 1899*2^2482091 Bruce n 1901*2^2390301 Bruce n 1901*2^3350181 Bruce n 1905*2^2337711 Bruce n 1905*2^2983671 Bruce c 1905*2^3274521 Bruce c 1907*2^3217921 Bruce n 1909*2^2342991 Bruce n 1909*2^2632991 Bruce n 1911*2^2209951 Bruce n 1911*2^2229531 Bruce n 1911*2^2348011 Bruce n 1911*2^2494831 Bruce n 1911*2^3149791 Bruce n 1915*2^2343471 Bruce n 1915*2^2811351 Bruce n 1915*2^2970091 Bruce c 1915*2^3024631 Bruce n 1919*2^2676041 Bruce n 1921*2^2297351 Bruce n 1923*2^2718761 Bruce c 1925*2^2018361 Bruce n 1929*2^2301201 Bruce n 1931*2^2794221 Bruce n 1933*2^2339991 Bruce n 1935*2^2183871 Bruce c 1935*2^2232631 Bruce c 1937*2^2373681 Bruce n 1939*2^2284011 Bruce n 1939*2^2463031 Bruce n 1939*2^2755051 Bruce n 1939*2^3171071 Bruce n 1939*2^3187231 Bruce n 1941*2^2670251 Bruce c 1943*2^2199321 Chuck n 1945*2^2697471 Bruce n 1947*2^2505561 Bruce n 1947*2^2710841 Bruce n 1947*2^3373061 Bruce n 1949*2^2334001 Bruce n 1951*2^2198011 Bruce n 1951*2^2293791 Bruce n 1951*2^2664111 Bruce n 1951*2^3411911 Bruce n 1953*2^2106821 Bruce n 1953*2^2126141 Bruce n 1953*2^2453101 Bruce n 1953*2^3320101 Bruce n 1957*2^3402691 Bruce n 1959*2^2498451 Bruce n 1961*2^2202701 Bruce n 1963*2^2263151 Bruce n 1963*2^3206191 Bruce n 1965*2^2263081 Bruce c 1965*2^3042371 Bruce c 1965*2^3273841 Bruce c 1971*2^2124901 Bruce n 1971*2^2312061 vaughan n 1971*2^2435341 Bruce n 1971*2^3365661 Bruce c 1973*2^3163741 AMDave n 1975*2^2598491 vaughan n 1977*2^2757321 Bruce c 1977*2^3037121 Bruce c 1977*2^3074901 Bruce c 1983*2^2021201 Bruce n 1987*2^2316211 Bruce n 1991*2^3074021 Bruce c 1993*2^2264511 Bruce n 1993*2^2670031 Bruce n 1993*2^2862231 Bruce n 1995*2^2250741 Bruce c 1995*2^2394121 Bruce c 1995*2^2402791 Bruce c 1999*2^2366991 Bruce n 1999*2^2383611 Bruce n Code:
krange nrange tested by Status # primes 18002000 200K350K LLRnet (IB9000) in progress 131 (plus 21 confirmed) 16091800 200K350K LLRnet (IB9000) complete 152 (plus 15 confirmed) 16011607 200K350K MiniGeek complete 3 14001600 200K350K LLRnet (IB9000) complete 144 (plus 15 confirmed) 18002000 50K200K LLRnet (IB9000) complete 396 (plus 32 confirmed) 16001800 50K200K LLRnet (IB9000) complete 418 (plus 3 confirmed) 14001600 50K200K LLRnet (IB9000) complete 358 (plus 33 confirmed) 12001400 50K200K LLRnet (IB9000) complete 343 (plus 18 confirmed) 10051200 50K200K LLRnet (IB9000) complete 314 (plus 65 confirmed) Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20090914 at 23:15 Reason: update status 
20090105, 22:18  #2 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
23700_{8} Posts 
Excellent. OK, everyone. I just need to apply the P=1.4T1.8T factors to the file, which I will do shortly. How would we like to proceed with the n=50K200K effort? I had previously recommended that we search by kvalue. If we do that, we'd post files, 13 k's at a time in sequencial order similar to our doublecheck drive, and people can take as many as they see fit. Alternatively, we can try loading a very small nrange for the entire set of k's in nvalue sequence, say, n=50K52K, and see how it handles such fast tests. A second alternative might be to load 23 k's into the server and observe how the server performs in kvalue sequence over the entire n=50K200K range. In a synopsis: 1. Test manually by kvalue. 2. Use server on a small file sorted by nvalue. This would be the most stringent test on a server because all tests would be very fast. 3. Use server on a small file sorted by kvalue then nvalue. This is not as stringent of a test since all nvalues within the range will be tested. Gary Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 20090323 at 06:03 
20090105, 22:30  #3  
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
3·2,083 Posts 
Quote:
Of course, if we're giving the server ranges in terms of n, we'll probably want to do the same for manual ranges to avoid confusion. That shouldn't be too bad, thoughsorting by n worked pretty well for the 8th Drive on this same krange, so this should essentially be the same thing except that we'll be giving out larger files to compensate for the smaller tests. BTW, Gary: if you're having a hard time dealing with the huge sieve files for this effort in a text editor, try popping it onto one of your Linux machines, and then use the terminal to run the command "split l 500000 [name of sieve file]". It will then split the file into nice easy chunks of 500,000 lines eachquite manageable. (It will originally call the files generic names such as "xaa", "xab", "xac", etc., but you can of course rename them however you like.) 

20090105, 22:52  #4 
I ♥ BOINC!
Oct 2002
Glendale, AZ. (USA)
3×7×53 Posts 
vi has no such limitation
http://www.vim.org/download.php I like #2, however, send IB8000 that entire range and let's just eat it up. Last fiddled with by IronBits on 20090105 at 23:03 
20090105, 23:36  #5 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2^{6}·3·53 Posts 
I know this is long but I'd appreciate it if people could read it all the way through because it goes "one way" and then the "other".
We need to think this through. You remember the discussion we had before? Karsten is not going to like us because he'll constantly have to be entering primes all over the place on his pages. That is why I had suggested sorting by kvalue to begin with on the low nrange, i.e. n=50K200K. People had initially agreed searching manually by kvalue was the way to go so we now have 2 schools of thought. Let's look at what we have here: 1. There will be 10's of primes coming in very rapidly and David, it will stretch your primes listing to a very long length on your web page as they come in. 2. If people post them all in our primes thread as they come in, it will quickly innundate our primes thread. 3. It will be extremely easy to miss a prime or two because we won't be associating primes with specific kvalues, only nranges, and there will be so many of them. I know it sounds like I'm trying to talk everyone out of it but not really. I just want to make sure everyone knows the facts of doing it that way. If people think it would be more fun to search by nvalue, here is what I would suggest: 1. Load n=5K or (10K or whatever we think is best) ranges into the server sorted by nvalue. The range can be decreased as we move higher. 2. No one report any primes anywhere until the entire n=5K range is done. 3. When we have determined that the nrange is complete, Max or I check the results files, sort the primes in them by kvalue, and post them in our primes thread, showing who found them, all in one post for each nrange. In addition, as usual, they will be put in the 1st post of the drive thread in decesending nvalue order, also showing who found them. This creates a little more admin work for us but I personally don't mind if Max doesn't. IMHO, it's the only way we'll avoid missing primes. It's just too easy for otherwise "passive" searchers to accidently miss reporting nontop5000 primes. It will also make it relatively easy for Karsten to post the primes on his k=3002000 page. Karsten, if you're around, you can give your opinion here too. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20090105 at 23:40 
20090105, 23:47  #6 
I ♥ BOINC!
Oct 2002
Glendale, AZ. (USA)
459_{16} Posts 
Whatever, however, you want to do it is fine by me.
I was just trying to help everyone out by avoiding the tedious manual reservations thang. Just load up the server with what ever you like, if folks want to come in and cache 100s at a time, that's fine by me, the server seems to handle that with out a hiccup. We'll never know what the limits of the server are, if we don't push it a little harder... I have no preference to loading it up by K or N, what ever suits you suits me 
20090105, 23:50  #7  
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
2^{5}·89 Posts 
Quote:
Everything eventually gets tested either way so why create loads of unnecessary work. Oops I almost forget, NO MANUAL RESERVATIONS. To hard to handle. Oops #2. I would love to reserve a k from n=50K to n=1M. Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 20090105 at 23:56 

20090106, 00:10  #8  
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
3×2,083 Posts 
Quote:
Oh, and by the way: sorting by k should still be just as much of a stress test for the server. Maybe not quite as prolonged of a stress test, but that shouldn't make a differenceit will still tell us unequivocally whether the server can handle n=50K tests. 

20090106, 00:15  #9  
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
81D_{16} Posts 
Quote:


20090106, 00:19  #10 
I ♥ BOINC!
Oct 2002
Glendale, AZ. (USA)
10001011001_{2} Posts 
Heck, I'll offer to save you all the trouble and reserve that whole k/n range and let you know when I finish it.
Did you want me to turn off autonotify, and not display found primes on the web page, for this range on port 8000? Last fiddled with by IronBits on 20090106 at 00:21 
20090106, 00:23  #11 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2^{6}×3×53 Posts 
I will also vote for #3 mainly because it would save us a little admin time and Karsten a lot of admin time. It would also spread out the average prime rate found instead of having tons of them at first followed by less of them later.
David, if we went that route, you would still get the entire range loaded into your server; just processed in a different order. If we did #3, I would still suggest doing what I suggested above with Max or me posting the primes found sorted by kvalue in the primes thread. Instead of every n=5K or 10K range, we just do it after about every 25 k's searched. The admin time it would save for Max and me is us having to sort it by kvalue before posting so not a lot. But...the admin time saved by Karsten would be large. He would only have to update the nrange searched on each k one time each. We have 2 votes each on #2 and #3. More opinions still welcome. Gary 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Team drive #10 k=14002000 n=500K1M  gd_barnes  No Prime Left Behind  61  20130130 16:08 
Team drive #12 k=20003000 n=50K425K  gd_barnes  No Prime Left Behind  96  20120219 03:53 
Team drive #11 k=20003000 n=425K600K  gd_barnes  No Prime Left Behind  42  20101119 10:42 
Team drive #8 k=14002000 n=350K500K  gd_barnes  No Prime Left Behind  101  20090408 02:11 
Sieving drive for k=10052000 n=200K500K  gd_barnes  No Prime Left Behind  118  20090117 16:05 