Sierp base 6 - team drive #3

[mdettweiler]

user=Free-DC_Beyond
[04/02/08 20:11:04]
66520*6^96685+1 is prime!

I'll be verifying this with PFGW shortly...

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

user=Free-DC_Beyond
[04/02/08 20:11:04]
66520*6^96685+1 is prime!

I'll be verifying this with PFGW shortly...

Verified with PFGW. Stay tuned for an updated team-sieve file with k=66520 removed.

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

user=Free-DC_Beyond
[04/02/08 20:11:04]
66520*6^96685+1 is prime!

I'll be verifying this with PFGW shortly...

Dang, you beat me to the punch! I was just thinking that it had been a long time since we had a prime so went through the last 10 days worth and found this. So I'm glad to see you're on it since this was just found yesterday.

Beyond has pulled his machines off of this effort to check them. As far as I can tell, no one is running the server right now. I pulled my 2 off to put on sieving because otherwise we were going to run the server dry before breaking off a sieving range. So I'll go ahead and throw a machine on it for a while. The last k/n pair in yesterday's results was at n=97.6K so we're moving right along.


Gary

[gd_barnes]

The server is now complete to n=100K for all k's that were originally included in the drive, although we will shortly be in the process of verifying that every k/n pair has been processed.

The server is now processing k=10107, 13215, and 14505 from n=60K-100K that were previously left for manual reservations. It is currently at n=~70K on those.

Thanks for pitching in one of your speedy cores Anon. In looking at the server results, my 2 cores about equal your 1 core, maybe even a little less. lol


Gary

[tnerual]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

The server is now complete to n=100K for all k's that were originally included in the drive, although we will shortly be in the process of verifying that every k/n pair has been processed.

The server is now processing k=10107, 13215, and 14505 from n=60K-100K that were previously left for manual reservations. It is currently at n=~70K on those.

Thanks for pitching in one of your speedy cores Anon. In looking at the server results, my 2 cores about equal your 1 core, maybe even a little less. lol


Gary

don't forget to compare residues from 14505 with those i send you in PM ...
just to be sure phrot is ok !

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by tnerual

don't forget to compare residues from 14505 with those i send you in PM ...
just to be sure phrot is ok !

Yep, I have that on my 'agenda'. lol

Early this morning, the server started on the 3 previously manual k-values including k=14505. It is currently at n=~70K on those 3.

Thanks for the reminder.


Gary

[mdettweiler]

I just noticed something really odd when I was processing the results for the port 6 LLRnet server.

I found a bunch of k/n pairs for k=157473 in both the results file and the original sieved file, yet k=157473 doesn't show up either in the list of primes found >30K at the beginning of this thread, nor on the Sierp. base 6 reservations page. Was this k erroneously entered as part of the sieve that Gary did for n=30K-100K? It would appear so. Fortunately, n>100K shouldn't be affected, since I put together my equations file from scratch when starting that sieve.

The question now is: was this k accidentally put in the 30K-100K sieve, or was it just not put on the Sierp. base 6 page? Gary, do you by any chance have Geoff's file with all the primes for Sierp. base 6 n<30K? If so, is k=157473 listed in there as having a prime?

Anon

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I just noticed something really odd when I was processing the results for the port 6 LLRnet server.

I found a bunch of k/n pairs for k=157473 in both the results file and the original sieved file, yet k=157473 doesn't show up either in the list of primes found >30K at the beginning of this thread, nor on the Sierp. base 6 reservations page. Was this k erroneously entered as part of the sieve that Gary did for n=30K-100K? It would appear so. Fortunately, n>100K shouldn't be affected, since I put together my equations file from scratch when starting that sieve.

The question now is: was this k accidentally put in the 30K-100K sieve, or was it just not put on the Sierp. base 6 page? Gary, do you by any chance have Geoff's file with all the primes for Sierp. base 6 n<30K? If so, is k=157473 listed in there as having a prime?

Anon

n>100K shouldn't be affected?? That's what is incorrect! The sieving and testing for n<=100K is correct. Even more interesting is that the number of k's remaining is correct! :surprised

I keep just about everything. There was no prime from Geoff on this k.

Now, how can all of this be? Of course it's my fault here. I blundered when we found a prime for k=154797. When I went to remove it from the reservation page, I accidentally removed the similar looking k=157473 instead. In a page full of 40+ 5 and 6-digit numbers, they all run together sometimes. Sorry!

The sieving and testing for n<=100K is correct because I removed the correct k from files with a larger n-value. I just removed the incorrect k on the reservations page. That will be corrected shortly.

We now have a bit of a mess on our hands on the n>100K sieving. Here is what is needed:

1. Remove k=154797 from the current n=100K-150K and n=150K-400K sieves.

2. Sieve k=157473 for n=100K-400K to P=6T, break off n=100K-150K, and combine it with the n=100K-150K file from #1. Fortunately with a single k, speedy sr1sieve can be used.

3. Continue sieving k=157473 for n=150K-400K to whatever our current sieving limit is and combine it with the n=150K-400K file from #1.


Obviously the first priority is to start quickly sieving k=157473. I had dropped back to 2 cores on the sieve for my P=400G range. I'll immediately suspend that and start sieving k=157473. I will also suspend some Riesel base 19 n<2K testing on 2 cores (for Simelink) that I'm running on my work laptop and bring the sieving here back up to 4 cores.

Can you let KrZip know what is up and post a sieved file for him with k=154797 removed? He can just continue along without k=157473 on the other 34 k's and when we get it up to P=8T or whatever, we can then merge it in. There's no reason to hold him up or involve him in correcting the situation.

Edit: NICE CATCH!! This is only a 'small' mess now. Had it gotten into the server like this and had a lot of testing done, THEN we would have had a much bigger mess!


Gary

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

n>100K shouldn't be affected?? That's what is incorrect! The sieving and testing for n<=100K is correct. Even more interesting is that the number of k's remaining is correct! :surprised

I keep just about everything. There was no prime from Geoff on this k.

Now, how can all of this be? Of course it's my fault here. I blundered when we found a prime for k=154797. When I went to remove it from the reservation page, I accidentally removed the similar looking k=157473 instead. In a page full of 40+ 5 and 6-digit numbers, they all run together sometimes. Sorry!

The sieving and testing for n<=100K is correct because I removed the correct k from files with a larger n-value. I just removed the incorrect k on the reservations page. That will be corrected shortly.

We now have a bit of a mess on our hands on the n>100K sieving. Here is what is needed:

1. Remove k=154797 from the current n=100K-150K and n=150K-400K sieves.

Okay, I'll do that ASAP.

2. Sieve k=157473 for n=100K-400K to P=6T, break off n=100K-150K, and combine it with the n=100K-150K file from #1. Fortunately with a single k, speedy sr1sieve can be used.

3. Continue sieving k=157473 for n=150K-400K to whatever our current sieving limit is and combine it with the n=150K-400K file from #1.


Obviously the first priority is to start quickly sieving k=157473. I had dropped back to 2 cores on the sieve for my P=400G range. I'll immediately suspend that and start sieving k=157473. I will also suspend some Riesel base 19 n<2K testing on 2 cores (for Simelink) that I'm running on my work laptop and bring the sieving here back up to 4 cores.

Okay, sounds good. We do have one other option that we could do, though: simply leave k=157473 as a manual-reservation k for n>100K. That way, we don't have to worry about messing with merging it with the big sieve file and all that--we can go ahead release 100K-150K for PRPing, and simply leave k=157473 out of the team drive.

What do you think?

Can you let KrZip know what is up and post a sieved file for him with k=154797 removed? He can just continue along without k=157473 on the other 34 k's and when we get it up to P=8T or whatever, we can then merge it in. There's no reason to hold him up or involve him in correcting the situation.

Yep, I'll post an updated n=150K-400K sieve file soon.

Anon

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Okay, I'll do that ASAP.


Okay, sounds good. We do have one other option that we could do, though: simply leave k=157473 as a manual-reservation k for n>100K. That way, we don't have to worry about messing with merging it with the big sieve file and all that--we can go ahead release 100K-150K for PRPing, and simply leave k=157473 out of the team drive.

What do you think?


Yep, I'll post an updated n=150K-400K sieve file soon.

Anon

I starting cranking k=157473 on speedy sr1sieve on 4 cores late last night, 2 on my fastest siever. It will be at P=6T by Saturday and at P=8T by Monday.

When I get to P=6T, I'll send you 2 separate files:
1. One with k/n pairs for n=100K-150K that you can merge in with the range that has been broken off.
2. One with k/n pairs for n=150K-400K that you can merge in with the big drive for future reservations.

When I get to P=8T, I'll send you factors from P=6T-8T to apply against the big n=150K-400K file.

I just need to make sure I'm up to P=6T before KrZip has finished P=7T-8T for the rest of the k's. That way, for future reservations, he'll be using a file that contains the missed k-value.

You might mention in the sieving drive to hold off on any reservations above P=8T until late Saturday.

I like this better than having a 'random' k-value like this be a manual reservation.


Gary

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

I starting cranking k=157473 on speedy sr1sieve on 4 cores late last night, 2 on my fastest siever. It will be at P=6T by Saturday and at P=8T by Monday.

When I get to P=6T, I'll send you 2 separate files:
1. One with k/n pairs for n=100K-150K that you can merge in with the range that has been broken off.
2. One with k/n pairs for n=150K-400K that you can merge in with the big drive for future reservations.

When I get to P=8T, I'll send you factors from P=6T-8T to apply against the big n=150K-400K file.

I just need to make sure I'm up to P=6T before KrZip has finished P=7T-8T for the rest of the k's. That way, for future reservations, he'll be using a file that contains the missed k-value.

You might mention in the sieving drive to hold off on any reservations above P=8T until late Saturday.

I like this better than having a 'random' k-value like this be a manual reservation.


Gary

Okay, sounds good.