![]() |
|
|
#331 |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Yes, that was it... zindex option is adjusted and it should be good now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#332 |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
I'm working on a way to export an XML version of the exponent report, such as this one:
http://www.mersenne.org/report_expon...exp_hi=&full=1 Here's the format I've come up with (for this example I truncated some of the history items just for clarity). Comments or suggestions? Code:
<exponents expStart="70000141" expEnd="70000141">
<data exponent="70000141">
<factoredToBits>72</factoredToBits>
<PM1_Bound1>820000</PM1_Bound1>
<PM1_Bound2>23780000</PM1_Bound2>
<llResults>
<llResult result="Unverified" residue="28A1D8DFCE5B35__" dateReceived="2011-10-27 19:35" userName="Lorenzo"/>
</llResults>
<history>
<result dateReceived="2008-12-31 01:02" userName="starrynte" resultType="NF" resultText="no factors by trial factoring">
<resultMessage>no factor from 2^64 to 2^65</resultMessage>
</result>
<result dateReceived="2010-09-07 08:50" userName="timbit" resultType="NF-PM1" resultText="no factors by P-1">
<resultMessage>B1=820000, B2=23780000</resultMessage>
</result>
<result dateReceived="2011-10-27 19:35" userName="Lorenzo" resultType="C" resultText="LL test composite">
<resultMessage>28a1d8dfce5b35__</resultMessage>
</result>
</history>
</data>
</exponents>
|
|
|
|
|
|
#333 |
|
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE
53148 Posts |
Hi Madpoo, thanks for all your excellent work. This has probably been mentioned before but is it possible to show the Recent Results report without TF-LMH results. They really clog it up.It would make sense to shunt the TF-LMH results off to a separate report. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#334 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
I guess it depends on what people use that report for... right now it's just the last 3000 things checked in, plain and simple. If you want to see something more interesting, the "recent cleared" might be more up your alley, showing the 3000 most recently checked in things without the "no factor found" stuff clogging it up. I don't know if that's quite what you meant? When you mention excluding the LMH results, did you just mean the "no factors found" check ins from them (there are a lot), or even when a factor *was* found, which I think most people would find more useful? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#335 |
|
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!
2·3·1,693 Posts |
I think the issue may be that a high-results-volume range can effectively push a lot of lower-volume work off the display very quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#336 |
|
"Graham uses ISO 8601"
Mar 2014
AU, Sydney
35 Posts |
I remember once looking but failing to find a definition of that term.
I have several vague notions as to what it might have been intended to mean, but I suspect there are different classes of LMH workers. Some explore shallow depth across a broad range, or intensive and becoming deeper in a narrow range, and variously within sight of benefit for near term LL testing or way out in the future. It might be handy if there really were a definition in a glossary somewhere! p.s. I recognise the literal acronym of Lone Mersenne Hunter, but that does not really correspond well to the circumstances that the LMH term has been used. Last fiddled with by snme2pm1 on 2014-11-01 at 22:22 Reason: ps. |
|
|
|
|
|
#337 |
|
May 2013
East. Always East.
11×157 Posts |
LMH is Lone Mersenne Hunters. It boils down to people looking for Mersennes outside the "conventional" zone, most of which are 100M digits (although I think there's some minor interest in 1B digits). There are a few LL tests done / being done but the vast majority is trial factoring.
If finding factors is your thing, then doing a bit-level first TF run through 100M - 1000M will get you a lot, fast. Current work is trial factoring tens of millions of exponents to 66 from 65. I did a few runs myself in the 400M range and I ended up going from 65 to 68 because 65 to 66 was too fast. The amount of work in the LMH area might be small in terms of GHz but in terms of # of results it is massive, so the last-1000 reported results are often mostly from the upper ranges that most of us don't actually care about. One possible solution is putting on filters for the results, one of which could be the exponent range. Last fiddled with by TheMawn on 2014-11-01 at 22:25 |
|
|
|
|
|
#338 |
|
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario
23·149 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#339 | |
|
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE
22×691 Posts |
Quote:
Hence I propose creating two "canned" reports. One that shows "Recent Results" for exponents < 100M and another for exponents > 100M. This should resolve most of the issues and give us more visibility on ranges where "actual" work is being done. Any factors found or LL/DC results in > 100M range should continue to appear in the Recent Cleared report as currently. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#340 | |
|
"Graham uses ISO 8601"
Mar 2014
AU, Sydney
35 Posts |
Quote:
So when are you planning to open 10G for general craziness? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#341 | |
|
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
19·397 Posts |
Quote:
Also, I don't see why a dynamic (instead of hourly) recent results report should create a terrible server load. There is an index on date-received, so SQLServer should be able to execute any recent results query efficiently (even a non-LMH report that tosses 90% of result rows because they are LMH results) -- we should run some sample queries to test that out. I can't do the tests as I'm on a cruise ship and cannot access the server. Yes, you folks have failed to find a new Mersenne Prime while I'm on vacation -- most disappointing. You have a week left to rectify the situation
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Database design | xilman | Astronomy | 1 | 2017-04-30 22:25 |
| Theoretical Experiment Design | c10ck3r | Homework Help | 7 | 2015-02-03 08:54 |
| Digital Logic Design | henryzz | Puzzles | 9 | 2014-12-04 20:56 |
| new intel design | tha | Hardware | 5 | 2007-04-19 11:38 |
| design factoring algorithms | koders333 | Factoring | 14 | 2006-01-25 14:08 |