![]() |
|
|
#573 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
141518 Posts |
Well, we'll probably want to put at least some of them on G4000 when it comes back up--but, yes, you're right, most of these will be eventually loaded into IB400. By my estimate IB400 will dry its range at least by Saturday. When G4000 come back online I'll add 3K to it and 7K to IB400; that will clean up the rest of the ranges and should balance the two pretty well considering that Gary said he's going to switch his machines to G4000 when it comes back online.
|
|
|
|
|
#574 | |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
1011001001002 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#575 | |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3×2,083 Posts |
Quote:
![]() As for which server your machines would be most useful on: Gary, how do you think we should do this? I'm fine with whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#576 |
|
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
133768 Posts |
why not just keep everyone on IB400 it can cope with the load and it makes it easier to administrate
|
|
|
|
|
#577 |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
1041310 Posts |
Oh, who knows. We'll figure it out a little later.
My plan was to switch to port 4000 but if Ian wants to, then perhaps I'll stay on port 400. That probably makes more sense. That way, I won't inadvertantly have pairs sent to me that Ian is ready to send results back on. Henry, we can't all be on port 400 the rest of the way. Port 4000 still has quite a few pairs left to be processed. OK, let's do this: Ian, switch all of your machines back to port 4000 after you get the word that we have everything working. (I'm hoping late Tues. night or early Weds. morning.) Stay on it until you dry it out. If we add all the remaining ranges to ports 400 and 443 and dry them before you dry port 4000, then we'll switch over to port 4000. If port 4000 dries first (more likely I think with the large amount of range left still not loaded in port 400/443), then you can switch back over to port 400/443. To clarify, we won't add any more work to port 4000 for the 1st drive. It will all go into ports 400 and 443. One further thing that Max, David, and I are in discussion about in PM's. I'm recommending that we add k=400-600 for n>600K to port 400 even before we have finished this drive. That way, we can just keep right on processing with no interruption and people can leave their cores there. The good thing about k=400-600 for n>600K is that it is sieved far deeper and it's a much smaller k-range, so we'll process the n-ranges much more quickly for quite a while until we have another fftlen change. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2008-12-09 at 09:29 |
|
|
|
|
#578 | |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22×23×31 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#579 | |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
11000011010012 Posts |
Quote:
![]() BTW, IB400 finished the last of 560K-567K last night; I'll get that processed later today. Edit: Oh, I almost forgot: Reserving 588K-596K for LLRnet IB400. That may have been somewhat obvious from my above message, but I figured I'd better make it official.
Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2008-12-09 at 15:10 |
|
|
|
|
|
#580 |
|
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
2·33·109 Posts |
sorry i forgot about drying the other servers
in future i think 3 servers for one drive is a bit unnecessary though unless we have some proxies |
|
|
|
|
#581 |
|
Mar 2007
Austria
4568 Posts |
A little boost:
reserving 596.0-596.2! takin' one of the last available chunks! Last fiddled with by nuggetprime on 2008-12-09 at 17:57 |
|
|
|
|
#582 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3·2,083 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
#583 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
186916 Posts |
LLRnet IB400 has completed 555.6K-567.0K, lresults emailed to Gary.
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Team drive #14: k=600-1001 n=1M-2M | mdettweiler | No Prime Left Behind | 10 | 2021-03-13 22:32 |
| Team drive #7 k=800-1001 n=600K-1M | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 127 | 2011-07-15 14:25 |
| Team drive #6 k=600-800 n=600K-1M | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 89 | 2011-03-10 12:34 |
| Team drive #5: k=400-600 n=600K-1M | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 135 | 2010-11-23 14:27 |
| Team drive #4, 15 k's < 300 for n=600K-1M | gd_barnes | No Prime Left Behind | 38 | 2008-10-22 16:20 |