mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-01-11, 18:02   #34
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

23·11·73 Posts
Default

Ah, yes ... I have measured the distribution of the primes in the two relation files, and indeed Batalov's run on R30-31M has many more relations with algebraic primes in the 30-125M range than xyzzy's, and if I account for that then it does seem that xyzzy is using -15e. The problem is that a relation with one prime in the 30-125M range and two large primes would be found with Batalov's parameters and not with xyzzy's.

If you are running a chunk on the R side from 27.93 to 27.94 million, rlim should be 27930000 and alim should be 125000000; so you need to have a different .poly file for each chunk you run.

Last fiddled with by fivemack on 2009-01-11 at 18:04
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-11, 18:16   #35
Xyzzy
 
Xyzzy's Avatar
 
"Mike"
Aug 2002

5×17×97 Posts
Default

Quote:
If you are running a chunk on the R side from 27.93 to 27.94 million, rlim should be 27930000 and alim should be 125000000; so you need to have a different .poly file for each chunk you run.
Okay. (See our edited post above.)

We have run the "R" side semi-properly, we think. On the "A" side we took the poly file from the "R" side and edited it to fix the "A" side without fixing the "R" side back to the right value. Doh!

If the chunk is 31M to 32M, and you are working the "R" side, would you raise the rlim to 31M or would a generic 30M be okay?

We used 30M for the rlim for the whole 30-35M "R" chunk.

What parts do we need to redo?

Xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-11, 19:28   #36
Xyzzy
 
Xyzzy's Avatar
 
"Mike"
Aug 2002

824510 Posts
Default

The test results are in.

Code:
-rw-r--r-- 1 m m 1031656 2009-01-11 14:09 a
-rw-r--r-- 1 m m  573416 2009-01-11 13:56 ax
-rw-r--r-- 1 m m  972593 2009-01-11 14:07 r
-rw-r--r-- 1 m m  599596 2009-01-11 13:50 rx
  • "A" side sieving 25,000,000 to 25,000,4999
    • a = alim = 25M & rlim = 100M
    • ax = alim = 25M & rlim = 25M
  • "R" side sieving 25,000,000 to 25,000,4999
    • r = alim = 125M & rlim = 25M
    • rx = alim = 25M & rlim = 25M
Xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-11, 21:07   #37
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

9,497 Posts
Default ay, there's the rub; do not lower both limits

My posted Opteron binary is 15e (even though it is a bit old and doesn't have the -R option). I've just checked - I sieve with exactly the same binary. One of its benefits is that you don't have to manipulate the *.poly file ever (it lowers the necessary limit itself, internally).

Do not lower both limits - when using any binary.
Using this particular binary (and GGNFS-built after 332) - do not lower any limits.

However, the bottom line is that no intervals are not worth redoing (they have enough valuable data as they are, the relations are compatible if fewer, and you will produce more relations by doing another interval (this goes for me, too).

I'll take 65-70M, both sides.

Last fiddled with by Batalov on 2009-01-11 at 21:39 Reason: checked the binary
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-11, 22:35   #38
Xyzzy
 
Xyzzy's Avatar
 
"Mike"
Aug 2002

5·17·97 Posts
Default

Quote:
Do not lower both limits - when using any binary.
Using this particular binary (and GGNFS-built after 332) - do not lower any limits.
Thanks!
Xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-12, 21:46   #39
Xyzzy
 
Xyzzy's Avatar
 
"Mike"
Aug 2002

100000001101012 Posts
Default

We just uploaded the "R" side for 30-34M. You can tell our files because we use lower case letters. The file sizes look close in size to the others so we expect we haven't mangled them up too bad.

We are currently (and properly) working the "A" and "R" side of 34-35M and the "A" and "R" side of 25-30M.

The "A" side of 30-34M that we uploaded earlier is obviously suboptimal, but we gather that it is a workable situation.

Thanks for letting us participate!
Xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-13, 00:02   #40
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

251916 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
However, the bottom line is that no intervals are not worth redoing ...(if they are >50% done)
My semantic had already been noted to be abstruse (see above). Well I am glad that you saw through it.

Yes, those r30-34 look quite good, so don't berate yourself too hard.
It's all good.

_____
"...sometimes you're ahead, sometimes you're behind.
The race is long and, in the end, it's only with yourself.
Remember compliments you receive.
Forget the insults; if you succeed in doing this, tell me how." (c) Mary Schmich
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-17, 00:19   #41
J.F.
 
J.F.'s Avatar
 
Jun 2008

23×32 Posts
Default

Res. 75-85.
J.F. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-20, 19:46   #42
J.F.
 
J.F.'s Avatar
 
Jun 2008

23×32 Posts
Default

Reserving 90-100.
J.F. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-20, 20:30   #43
Xyzzy
 
Xyzzy's Avatar
 
"Mike"
Aug 2002

5·17·97 Posts
Default

We can understand (and dream of) having a lot of horsepower to throw at a job, but how do you manage to keep track of everything?
Xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-01-20, 20:48   #44
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

7·503 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xyzzy View Post
We can understand (and dream of) having a lot of horsepower to throw at a job, but how do you manage to keep track of everything?
I know you're not referring to me here, but from my POV the answer is "scripts".

I'm not sure what arrangement of computers J.F. has access to, but for me the cluster uses a queuing system and thus all jobs are faciliated by qsub. Once a set of scripts is in place to divide up a range and kick off jobs to qsub, which then distributes them to worker nodes, the management of files goes pretty easy.
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NFS sieving? Dubslow Factoring 8 2012-09-28 06:47
Line sieving vs. lattice sieving JHansen NFSNET Discussion 9 2010-06-09 19:25
10^420 + 1 sieving juno1369 Factoring 20 2010-04-28 01:11
Sieving OmbooHankvald Prime Sierpinski Project 4 2005-06-30 07:51
Sieving robert44444uk Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5 8 2005-04-02 22:30

All times are UTC. The time now is 15:39.


Fri Aug 6 15:39:15 UTC 2021 up 14 days, 10:08, 1 user, load averages: 2.71, 2.62, 2.73

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.