![]() |
|
|
#56 | |
|
Aug 2002
10110 Posts |
Quote:
Some example criteria for calculation could be - at least 10 P90 years reported in the past 90 days, the more the better. (all cpu slower than 40x P90 are dropped. hosts younger than 90 days are dropped. fast cpu that dont report as expected are dropped). - one priority assignment each node - vacation hosts are dropped - current task finish date The beauty is that once the rules are set, all is automatic. |
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Oct 2002
Lost in the hills of Iowa
7008 Posts |
Are these "priority exponents" ones that need factoring, or need LLing?
Or both? |
|
|
|
|
#58 | |
|
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
7,537 Posts |
Quote:
At present, the server just blindly hands out small exponents to the next user to ask for an exponent of that work type. |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
"GIMFS"
Sep 2002
Oeiras, Portugal
3·491 Posts |
By "priority exponents" it is meant exponents below a given milestone. For example, the approx 130 exponents still to be double-checked in order to prove that M38 *is really* M38. If they are in the hands of slow or careless testers, the time needed to achieve this milestone may get unnecessarily long.
|
|
|
|
|
#60 | |
|
Banned
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia
12D216 Posts |
Quote:
Luigi |
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Oct 2002
Lost in the hills of Iowa
26·7 Posts |
Slower and less reliable machines are probably not going for the 10 million exponent prize.
I don't think it would be practical for me to swap my K5 and K6 machines over to doublechecking - they're REAL slow on floating point - but I figure that having them dedicated to factoring should still help the situation. |
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Sep 2002
32×13 Posts |
woah that was random... I don't think there's any worries that these slow machines will tie up the winning 10M exponent here.
Still, it'd be a good idea to give out the smallest exponent to more reliable, or at least faster machines. It would be extremely simple (as I see it) to limit the "priority exponents" to machines over 500 MHz or something. T'hen at least you'd have a better chance of getting them done (and you wouldn't have to go to all the trouble of determining reliability) |
|
|
|
|
#63 | |
|
Banned
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia
481810 Posts |
Quote:
Luigi |
|
|
|
|
|
#64 | |
|
Aug 2002
3·52·7 Posts |
Quote:
Joe O. aka JMO |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 | ||
|
Oct 2002
43 Posts |
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Aug 2002
20D16 Posts |
So the fact that a person could be working on an exponent and someone else poaches it is not frowned upon?
I am setting up a Dual Celeron/450 to run PRIME95. It has no internet connection. I put exponents from my internet box into the nonet worktodo.ini and start on them. Lo and behold 2 of them are taken from me. One by the server, the other possibly by the server, possibly by a poacher. The CPU time I have had wasted for me bothers me. Especially if it were a poacher! This is theft! And it is not frowned upon? |
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Report of monitoring primenet server unavailability | Peter Nelson | PrimeNet | 13 | 2005-10-18 11:17 |
| Is Entropia in trouble? | ekugimps | PrimeNet | 1 | 2005-09-09 16:18 |
| mprime stalls if primenet server is unavailable :( | TheJudger | Software | 1 | 2005-04-02 17:08 |
| Primenet Server Oddity | xavion | PrimeNet | 28 | 2004-09-26 07:56 |
| PrimeNet server replacement | PrimeCruncher | PrimeNet | 10 | 2003-11-19 06:38 |