GPU to 72 status...

[Bdot]

Originally Posted by chalsall

So everyone knows, "What Makes Sense" is now "Lowest Exponent" to 74, starting from 62M. The LL P-1 form (and proxy) will now only assign work which is already TFed to at least 74 bits.

Well, could you maybe think about this again? One of my machines has picked up 2 new P-1 assignments that were even TF'd to 77! Unfortunately in the 332M range .

I don't think this machine will handle stage 2 on those very well. And I'd triple GPU72's expectation of completion in ~180 days ...

But if we finished all P-1 in the LL range, then maybe this is what now MS^TM.

[Aramis Wyler]

lol, those dirty insubordinate computers never do what Chalsall means! They don't think! Sheesh!

[kracker]

Originally Posted by Aramis Wyler

lol, those dirty insubordinate computers never do what Chalsall means! They don't think! Sheesh!

Let's hope they are not planning mutiny against us.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Bdot

Well, could you maybe think about this again? One of my machines has picked up 2 new P-1 assignments that were even TF'd to 77! Unfortunately in the 332M range .

Oh crap!!! Sorry. Seriously stupid programmer error!

I changed the sort order for LL P-1 to be FactTo desc, forgetting about the recently added 332M range...

No good deed goes unpunished.

Fixed. Please feel free to throw those back.

Edit: Actually, there's a way I can automatically call these (seven) assignments back. I set the AIDs to be "". When the clients report the estimated completion, they'll get an "Invalid Assignment Key" from Primenet, and will not start (or will stop) work on them. Sorry again for this fsck-up.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by kracker

Let's hope they are not planning mutiny against us.

LOL...

"The Skynet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.

[Bdot]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Edit: Actually, there's a way I can automatically call these (seven) assignments back. I set the AIDs to be "". When the clients report the estimated completion, they'll get an "Invalid Assignment Key" from Primenet, and will not start (or will stop) work on them. Sorry again for this fsck-up.

This has worked, thanks for cleaning this up.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Bdot

This has worked, thanks for cleaning this up.

Thanks for bringing the problem to my attention so quickly. And for confirming that the "fix" (never before tested) worked.

[davieddy]

Originally Posted by davieddy

I've got a really crackpot idea:
Take expos (>62M and not yet assigned for LL) in ascending order, and TF them to 74.

D

Originally Posted by chalsall

That doesn't Make Sense^(TM) for the project overall, since Primenet still occasionally hands out assignments in the 62M range for LLing. But anyone interested is free to take candidates reserved for P-1'ing to TF to 74 in that range (and some do).

What might Make Sense^(TM) in a couple of months is to revisit 65M, and start taking it up to 75.

The empirical data will tell us -- we haven't yet fully absorbed into the automated analysis the loss of BCP19.

Discussion welcome. Hopefully from serious players.

Originally Posted by chalsall

As a demonstration that I don't dogmatically reject your suggestions, I had a deep think about this, ran some numbers, and concluded that we can and should do this. (Although, I do find it a bit ironic that this suggestion came from you, after the all the "debating" about how we couldn't sustain taking 63M and above to 74 bits...)

So everyone knows, "What Makes Sense" is now "Lowest Exponent" to 74, starting from 62M. The LL P-1 form (and proxy) will now only assign work which is already TFed to at least 74 bits.

I love the way you operate Chris:

Take the absurd from my "reductio ad absurdum" argument and run with it!

At least it makes for a good experiment.
Let's see how it settles down in a month or so.

Meantime, would you please remove this restraint whereby my posts are delayed to the extent that editing and real time discussion are imossible?

D

[chalsall]

I don't know about other "webmasters", but GPU72 (and all of my other publicly facing sites) has been inundated lately by Microsoft's "bingbot" spiders.

This might have something to do with M$'s recent advertising campaign about how "Bing is better".

On a cost/benefit basis, this doesn't make sense to me, since I get only trivial amounts of incoming traffic from Bing, while I get lots from Google.

For the record, I have blocked bingbot from accessing my various sites because of documented unfriendly requests (four a second!?!?!?).

[20/May/2013:19:01:04 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/d472d38f268449b8d9d38488bdf89820/ HTTP/1.1" 403 327 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:04 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/d9dc41bc1e310a202e4ff89dd6f74d4f/ HTTP/1.1" 403 327 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:04 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/dd68e6103188b11290a8a04d288b56ce/ HTTP/1.1" 403 327 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:04 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/f4723379fe039673c88e4e8e47e48fed/ HTTP/1.1" 403 327 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:06 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/047701d1e335849897e8b564967893b3/ HTTP/1.1" 403 335 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:06 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/067ccb9c43297464d2310d6c19589acb/bycredit/ HTTP/1.1" 403 344 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:06 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/08332c96355eaf6f2b369c8dc9b29568/ HTTP/1.1" 403 335 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:06 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/143471536f544b17590aad4023de7132/byexponent/ HTTP/1.1" 403 346 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:07 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/15aa325b9d9ee716c825070059f2337a/bycredit/ HTTP/1.1" 403 344 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:07 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/15aa325b9d9ee716c825070059f2337a/byexponent/ HTTP/1.1" 403 346 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:07 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/19437658c4ba52abaa8aacbb8da29007/byexponent/ HTTP/1.1" 403 346 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:07 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/1a660fdf1f559b6df4f6f46ddbbbc5cf/ HTTP/1.1" 403 335 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:08 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/20b4360ad24d3ec3169651b1355e366b/byexponent/ HTTP/1.1" 403 346 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:08 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/243c958917060d5be14181a224a49383/byexponent/ HTTP/1.1" 403 346 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:08 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/24d5f681f3717894683da9313d933c13/ HTTP/1.1" 403 335 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:08 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/2877aa0e1c37b72ea13b99ae1f87e5f9/ HTTP/1.1" 403 335 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:09 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/29cc984f9602dca466dead7f279c17e1/ HTTP/1.1" 403 335 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:09 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/29cc984f9602dca466dead7f279c17e1/bydate/ HTTP/1.1" 403 342 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:09 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/29cc984f9602dca466dead7f279c17e1/byexponent/ HTTP/1.1" 403 346 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"
[20/May/2013:19:01:09 -0400] fr.gpu72.com 157.56.229.185 - - "GET /reports/worker/factors/352a6b2d64850085d5122c8b4fcce4c6/bycredit/ HTTP/1.1" 403 344 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; bingbot/2.0; +http://www.bing.com/bingbot.htm)"

[chalsall@burrow ~]$ dig -x 157.56.229.185

; <<>> DiG 9.8.2rc1-RedHat-9.8.2-0.10.rc1.el6_3.6 <<>> -x 157.56.229.185
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 32339
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;185.229.56.157.in-addr.arpa.	IN	PTR

;; ANSWER SECTION:
185.229.56.157.in-addr.arpa. 2768 IN	PTR	msnbot-157-56-229-185.search.msn.com.

[James Heinrich]

I just checked today's logs for www.mersenne.ca and I don't see any undue bingbot activity, and nothing of the unfriendly hammering you quote above.

But totally agree on the referral bias. For May 2013 (so far), the referral count:
Google: 1722
Bing: 10

[ET_]

Originally Posted by James Heinrich

I just checked today's logs for www.mersenne.ca and I don't see any undue bingbot activity, and nothing of the unfriendly hammering you quote above.

But totally agree on the referral bias. For May 2013 (so far), the referral count:
Google: 1722
Bing: 10

I excluded BING (and Yahoo and Altavista) spiders from DoubleMersennes since the start. I guess that Google does a good job, and whoever comes from the other search engines doesn't really need my site

Luigi