Newer milestone thread

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

Productivity is not the only consideration here.

I hear, understand and appreciate what you're saying. But, at the same time, this project requires rather serious amounts of compute (obviously).

This is why the new assignment rules were put in place -- to hopefully be able to let everyone meaningfully participate with the compute they're willing and able to contribute without holding up "milestones" nor being "stepped on".

We only have a few more months before even the "grandfathered" assignments are dealt with -- either because the assignee completes, or the system automatically recycles.

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I hear, understand and appreciate what you're saying. But, at the same time, this project requires rather serious amounts of compute (obviously).

This is why the new assignment rules were put in place -- to hopefully be able to let everyone meaningfully participate with the compute they're willing and able to contribute without holding up "milestones" nor being "stepped on".

We only have a few more months before even the "grandfathered" assignments are dealt with -- either because the assignee completes, or the system automatically recycles.

Thanks, and I agree with everything you write. Let's hope that the new assignment rules eliminate any excuse for pinching other people's work once and for all.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

Thanks, and I agree with everything you write. Let's hope that the new assignment rules eliminate any excuse for pinching other people's work once and for all.

Yeah, the new assignment rules seem to be having a positive impact on the newer ranges of exponents (for both first and second checks). It's only these grandfathered assignments I'm looking at.

If it weren't for the grandfather setup, I'm pretty sure that almost all of the assignments still out there from before Feb 28, 2014 would have been expired by the new rules. The grandfather rules seem to be especially generous.

Let me put it in a slightly different light... let's say we've double-checked all of the exponents up to M45 except for 1 solitary assignment that was handed out in 2013. For the purposes of this example, let's also say the machine with that assignment is working at the same pace as one of those real life ones... about 0.1% every 3 days, and we're estimating there about 4-5 months still to go.

In this case we're not merely talking about a basically meaningless milestone like the n-millionth exponent, but one involving an important milestone like actually saying M45 is really M45.

Would there be an objection in that case to just running it on a machine that can finish it in 13 hours compared to the 2+ years the assigned machine was taking? Or do we just wait? It's not an entirely theoretical question because it's bound to happen with some of the work out there. There are a 23 grandfathered assignments out there for exponents below 37156667. They range from 1.5% to 97.1% complete. All were assigned in Feb 2014, the last month where the grandfather rules are applicable.

We know the ETA's from the machines themselves are wildly wrong when progress is so slow, but the last of that batch is supposedly going to finish in July 2015... I doubt it personally.

In reality, double-checking up to M45 is still a ways off and it probably won't happen, but on the other hand, these very 3 exponents we're talking about will be blocking the milestone of at least single-checking everything up to M48, if we want to consider that a major milestone or not. There are 17 first-time checks below M48 that were assigned before the recycling rules.

Again, at some point all of these grandfathered machines will expire anyway... or will they? The grandfather rules make it seem like some machines "close to finishing" but progressing at a snails pace may still be around for years.

What I'm getting at is, would there ever be an acceptable reason to look at one of these grandfathered assignments and just apply the same rules that every other assignment since March 2014 is subject to, so as not to hold whatever milestone up, or just in the interest of moving things along in general?

After all, a decision was already made to expire work assigned to slow machines...that's not in question. I'm just flipping it a bit and asking whether the grandfathered assignment rules are a little bit too lenient?

I think it's a valid question in terms of old assignments blocking *major* milestones... I'll grant that completing a minor milestone isn't really a big deal. It's nice to tidy up a range but if you're not suffering from mild OCD it's really not that important.

On a more fun note...

The current record for "oldest active LL assignment" goes out to 332,210,191 assigned way back in Nov 2008:
M332,210,191

No surprise since it's a 100M digit monster, but kudos to that user for chunking away at it with an ETA in 2016. 8 years of CPU thrown at one exponent, assuming that estimate is even close.

The oldest assignment for something in the <100M digit range is 58,998,341 assigned in Nov 2012:
M58,998,341

[chalsall]

To put on the table, I find this query interesting.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

Let me put it in a slightly different light... let's say we've double-checked all of the exponents up to M45 except for 1 solitary assignment that was handed out in 2013. For the purposes of this example, let's also say the machine with that assignment is working at the same pace as one of those real life ones... about 0.1% every 3 days, and we're estimating there about 4-5 months still to go.

In this case we're not merely talking about a basically meaningless milestone like the n-millionth exponent, but one involving an important milestone like actually saying M45 is really M45.

I'd say wait, there is no hurry. Look at it this way, 5 years from now will you care if the M45 milestone was completed in March 2015 or September 2015?

The oldest assignment for something in the <100M digit range is 58,998,341 assigned in Nov 2012:
M58,998,341

By my understanding of the expiration rules, that exponent should already have been recycled. Do you want to investigate why, or would you like me to investigate?

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Prime95

By my understanding of the expiration rules, that exponent should already have been recycled. Do you want to investigate why, or would you like me to investigate?

What would be very much appreciated, by many, is to understand the actual recycling rules enacted by Primenet.

Why, for example, is 33944569 still out after 107 days with no work done?

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

[snip] It's just weird to me to take nearly 2 years for one LL test. [snip]

2 years? Nothing, I remember when I were a lad exponent 79299719

[Mon Jan 03 05:18:24 2000]
Exponent started - factoring will go to 72 bits.

[Wed Sep 06 02:25:51 2000]
UID: nitro/liberator, M79299719 stage 1 is 100.000000% complete.

[Fri Oct 06 02:58:47 2000]
UID: nitro/liberator, M79299719 completed P-1, B1=780000, B2=12480000, WW1: 03B3AE1F

On a 533Mhz Celeron system, factoring and P-1 has taken 277 days. Exponent now switched to a 733Mhz P3

Fast forward a few years

[Wed Aug 23 06:53:27 2006]
UID: nitro/m79299719, M79299719 is not prime. Res64: B2C51947EEBD3B05. Wc1: 30EAA708,54176722,01000100

6 years 8 months 20 days, you had to be dedicated in those days

I still have the interim residue files generated every 1m iterations...

[ATH]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

Again, at some point all of these grandfathered machines will expire anyway... or will they? The grandfather rules make it seem like some machines "close to finishing" but progressing at a snails pace may still be around for years.

Not years but about 8-9 months at most. An exponent assigned Feb 28th 2014 which is 95% done will not expire until Dec 8th 2015 (not counting unspecified grace period). So by december we should see the last grandfathered exponents but probably a bit before.

Originally Posted by Gordon

6 years 8 months 20 days, you had to be dedicated in those days

That's dedication but that was also a 24M digit exponent and in 2000 it was almost before the "opened" up for 10M exponents? I did a 10M digit exponent around 2003 on a 950Mhz Athlon, which took 9-10 months.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Gordon

6 years 8 months 20 days, you had to be dedicated in those days

Or stupid... Never give the full result!

I'll run the DC on this; will take about three days.

[TheMawn]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

these very 3 exponents we're talking about will be blocking the milestone of at least single-checking everything up to M48, if we want to consider that a major milestone or not.

I do not consider that to be a major milestone. It means nothing.

Doublechecks are huge because we get to say that the X million mersenne numbers between M43 and M44 are all composite with 99.9999...₍₂₀₎...999% certainty.

First time checks mean nothing. The LAST first time check for the M47 to M48 (for example) block is of no consequence because we can be pretty sure there are two thousand bad results mixed in.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by Prime95

By my understanding of the expiration rules, that exponent should already have been recycled. Do you want to investigate why, or would you like me to investigate?

Oops, I forgot this clause "Assignments are recycled when the exponent moves into the first category...". Although not explicitly states, this clause also applies to grandfathered assignments.