GPU to 72 status... - Page 408

James Heinrich · 2019-12-06, 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by storm5510

Has the automated submission to PrimeNet from Colab been implemented? Based on my experience yesterday evening, it would seem so...

Based on my experience of right now, I would say not, at least not for TF. Are you talking about mfaktc or mprime?

chalsall · 2019-12-06, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by storm5510

Has the automated submission to PrimeNet from Colab been implemented? Based on my experience yesterday evening, it would seem so...

Nope. I'm only now back to transition from the "limping" GPU72 server to the new one (with Toshiba HDs!).

I /was/ doing some clean-up last night, clearing out results which had been done by "Anonymous" TF Notebook runs. Is this what you're talking about? Or have I made (yet another) stupid administrator's error?

petrw1 · 2019-12-06, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

Nope. I'm only now back to transition from the "limping" GPU72 server to the new one (with Toshiba HDs!).

I /was/ doing some clean-up last night, clearing out results which had been done by "Anonymous" TF Notebook runs. Is this what you're talking about? Or have I made (yet another) stupid administrator's error?

I believe he is talking about this:

Code:

https://www.gpu72.com/account/colab/results/
.
.
This will be automated shortly...

chalsall · 2019-12-06, 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by petrw1

I believe he is talking about this:

Yeah... And then just about every system imaginable failed all at once...

storm5510 · 2019-12-07, 00:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Heinrich

Based on my experience of right now, I would say not, at least not for TF. Are you talking about mfaktc or mprime?

mfaktc. I tried to submit more today, manually, They were refused. Result not needed, it said.

Uncwilly · 2019-12-07, 01:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by storm5510

mfaktc. I tried to submit more today, manually, They were refused. Result not needed, it said.

Look at your PrimeNet account results page. I submitted some manual results the other day [earlier this week] (a mix of Colab and mfakto on my integrated graphics chip). They were all marked as not needed, but shouldn't have been. Some were in the 200,000,000 range and I manually raised the assignment by an extra bit. I got the assignment via Prime95, moved them over to the mfakto worktodo, and change the 70,71 to 70,72 at the end of each line. Then I waited until it was done with 72 bits and submitted 71 and 72 at the same time.

I think it is a problem with PrimeNet's processing.

Uncwilly · 2019-12-07, 01:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

I /was/ doing some clean-up last night, clearing out results which had been done by "Anonymous" TF Notebook runs.

I noticed a bit of other clean-up happening.

James Heinrich · 2019-12-07, 01:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

I submitted some manual results the other day... They were all marked as not needed, but shouldn't have been.
I think it is a problem with PrimeNet's processing.

Both Uncwilly and storm5510: If you can identify a specific exponent for which this happened I can take a look and perhaps figure out why you got that message.

Uncwilly · 2019-12-07, 02:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Heinrich

Both Uncwilly and storm5510: If you can identify a specific exponent for which this happened I can take a look and perhaps figure out why you got that message.

I am sending you a PM with my best guesses at some of the exponents in question.

storm5510 · 2019-12-07, 03:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Heinrich

Both Uncwilly and storm5510: If you can identify a specific exponent for which this happened I can take a look and perhaps figure out why you got that message.

M94052807, M95431241, M95431309, M95432759, and M95435729. These five were submitted as a group from my notebook results page.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Look at your PrimeNet account results page...

They are all there, twice.

chalsall · 2019-12-07, 04:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by storm5510

They are all there, twice.

I don't see anything unusual in the GPU72 database. Single assignment, single results record in the ColabResults table.

Is there any chance you didn't wait long enough for the results to be "observed" by GPU72 (can take up to 30 minutes, depending on the range) before copy-and-pasting again?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Status	Primeinator	Operation Billion Digits	5	2011-12-06 02:35
62 bit status	1997rj7	Lone Mersenne Hunters	27	2008-09-29 13:52
OBD Status	Uncwilly	Operation Billion Digits	22	2005-10-25 14:05
1-2M LLR status	paulunderwood	3*2^n-1 Search	2	2005-03-13 17:03
Status of 26.0M - 26.5M	1997rj7	Lone Mersenne Hunters	25	2004-06-18 16:46