Newer milestone thread

[proxy2222]

Originally Posted by rudy235

Seems clear to me that if by 0 days to expire it means before 00 hours 2016 12 27 that 691110441 will expire. The other 691110411 might finish in time but does not seem probable. It is indeed a pity that being so close to 100% they fail to produce, but hopefully they might qualify for the 2nd LL verification.

FYI: I'm poaching 69110411, ETA: 35 hr. 69110441 just expired so if it gets assigned to a fast machine we should reach 70M milestone before 2017 :-)

[retina]

Originally Posted by proxy2222

FYI: I'm poaching 69110411 ,,,

So impatient.

[rudy235]

Originally Posted by retina

So impatient.

...let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Barry Goldwater.

ATH is taking care of 69110411

[proxy2222]

Originally Posted by proxy2222

FYI: I'm poaching 69110411, ETA: 35 hr. 69110441 just expired so if it gets assigned to a fast machine we should reach 70M milestone before 2017 :-)

70M is done!

[NBtarheel_33]

Originally Posted by proxy2222

70M is done!

A mere 369 days after reaching the milestone of first-time testing all exponents below 60M, by far the fastest time between "decennial" milestones.

The new assignment rules are working extremely well, I'd say.

[NBtarheel_33]

Suggest that we add to the milestones report a countdown to completing the first objective of "classical" GIMPS (per the "colorful stats report"): first-time testing all exponents below 79,300,000.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by proxy2222

70M is done!

Milestone page updated.

[petrw1]

Originally Posted by NBtarheel_33

Suggest that we add to the milestones report a countdown to completing the first objective of "classical" GIMPS (per the "colorful stats report"): first-time testing all exponents below 79,300,000.

Oct 25, 1999

Year	Pr.#	Factored	Two LL	One LL	Unknown	     Expect	P-90 Yrs
1999	38	1,622,684	102,184	95,493	2,810,514	6.08	43,144,037

Today

2016	49	3,004,289	910,033	641,519	   75,033	0.16	2,599,832

[rudy235]

Hello: I see that number 70284937 has expired https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...0284937&full=1 when it already had over 90% advance. This number took 90 days to get to 90%

If that number is not kept as a backup (I am assuming that work on that number completely ends when it expires) then that 90% work already done –and that could probably be finished in between 5 and 10 days more– is lost.

So a new user is assigned and also assuming it gets it done in about 6 days why is not the expired work continued and then we have an instant double check?
If I am stating things correctly it would seem that the 90% advance will go to waste.

Would somebody elaborate?

[ric]

Originally Posted by rudy235

So a new user is assigned and also assuming it gets it done in about 6 days why is not the expired work continued and then we have an instant double check?

That's the norm. You might have noticed that - despite being expired on Feb the 3rd, the original assignee updated his progress on Feb 4th. Whoever comes in first, scores the LL result, the second puts in a DC - so no effort goes wasted, unless either one quits testing.

This has happened to me a few times, doing cat0/cat1 exponents: sometimes I went first, sometimes not.

And the juicier point "what if a number turns out to be prime" has already been addressed in some former discussion around here (IIRC, whoever comes first).

[rudy235]

Originally Posted by ric

You might have noticed that - despite being expired on Feb the 3rd, the original assignee updated his progress on Feb 4th.

Actually, (thanks for bringing that to my attention!) I had not noticed that. So we now have 96.6% completion and ideally then it will get done soon enough.