24 hour rally - Page 21

tnerual · 2008-02-22, 20:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by em99010pepe

Tnerual?

Carlos

i'm late but ...

the answer is : the returned name is the proxi username

it give you the possibility to give a different name to each of your machine and report all results under one name. very usefull to see if a machine is down or having strange timings.

by the way, i have switched my proxy to port 100 ...
if i'm not too lazy, i will try to fire up some p3 (800-1000mhz)

for the rally, i will have at a minimum:
2 cores of a dual amdx2-4200
1 amd xp 2500+
2 core of a centrino duo 1600
1 core of a p4-1600
1 core of a p3-1000

mdettweiler · 2008-02-22, 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnerual

i'm late but ...

the answer is : the returned name is the proxi username

it give you the possibility to give a different name to each of your machine and report all results under one name. very usefull to see if a machine is down or having strange timings.

by the way, i have switched my proxy to port 100 ...
if i'm not too lazy, i will try to fire up some p3 (800-1000mhz)

for the rally, i will have at a minimum:
2 cores of a dual amdx2-4200
1 amd xp 2500+
2 core of a centrino duo 1600
1 core of a p4-1600
1 core of a p3-1000

Did you remember to clean out all the CRUS work from your proxy's queue before switching it to port 100? (Otherwise it will send whatever CRUS work is left in your queue to the port 100 NPLB server, where they'll be dumped in a rejected.txt file, and meanwhile the CRUS serve where they're supposed to go will keep on waiting for them until they expire a week after they were assigned.)

tnerual · 2008-02-22, 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Did you remember to clean out all the CRUS work from your proxy's queue before switching it to port 100? (Otherwise it will send whatever CRUS work is left in your queue to the port 100 NPLB server, where they'll be dumped in a rejected.txt file, and meanwhile the CRUS serve where they're supposed to go will keep on waiting for them until they expire a week after they were assigned.)

i've done it the "brutal way": deleting all my workfile.txt files ...

one week late for results is not a big issue ...

in fact the method used to shut down in a clean way don't work with a proxy server ...

mdettweiler · 2008-02-22, 20:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnerual

i've done the "brutal way": deleting all my worktodo.txt files ...

one week late for results is not a big issue ...

in fact the method used to shut down in a clean way don't work with a proxy server ...

Oh yeah, I didn't think of how the proxy server would complicate cleaning out the queues...

Yeah, I guess the "brutal way" would be the best way to clean 'em out. As you said, one week isn't that big a deal, especially considering that they'll be reassigned without any hassle anyway.

tnerual · 2008-02-22, 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Oh yeah, I didn't think of how the proxy server would complicate cleaning out the queues...

Yeah, I guess the "brutal way" would be the best way to clean 'em out. As you said, one week isn't that big a deal, especially considering that they'll be reassigned without any hassle anyway.

and that i will probably do them cause nobody use the sierpinsky CRUS server ...

mdettweiler · 2008-02-22, 20:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnerual

and that i will probably do them cause nobody use the sierpinsky CRUS server ...

Oh yeah, ha ha.

However, I think Gary's got at least one core on the Sierp. server (though of course it's on NPLB for the rally right now), so you're not quite all alone.

In unrelated news, I just added a P3 1Ghz to NPLB LLRnet port 100 for the rally.

Mini-Geek · 2008-02-22, 20:56

I'll be adding my two 2.5 GHz Athlon X2 cores shortly before the rally begins. Sorry I can't put it in early, but I'm trying to finish up a GIMPS number (currently 93.14%, just a few days) so I can participate in NPLB.

gd_barnes · 2008-02-22, 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Oh yeah, ha ha.

However, I think Gary's got at least one core on the Sierp. server (though of course it's on NPLB for the rally right now), so you're not quite all alone.

In unrelated news, I just added a P3 1Ghz to NPLB LLRnet port 100 for the rally.

Actually, no, I've had 2 cores on the Riesel server all week but only because Tnerual had several cores on the Sierp server. I was trying to keep things betweem them a little 'more even'. If Tnerual hadn't been on Sierp, I would have had one on each.

I'm leaving one on the Riesel server through the rally so I'll be bringing:

7 cores 2.66-Ghz P4
4 cores 1.6-Ghz Athlon (hopefully my son won't shut his 2 down this time)
1 core 3.2-Ghz P4

I may fire up two instances of LLRnet on the 3.2-Ghz. The machine is from 2004 (3.2-Ghz was screaming then!) and I call it a 'semi-false dual core'. If I remember right, the LLR time only goes up 60-70% when running 2 instances so I'll get more testing from 2 instances even though test time per k/n pair goes up. I'll test it again to make sure tonight.

I want to bring one of my laptop Dell CD's, but the only one without critical sieving going on right now has the bad memory that caused a false prime and I won't use it for LLRing anymore until I can get that taken care of.

4 2.66-Ghz P4 cores are currently running port 100. The other 3 will be within the hour. 2 Athlon cores will start on port 100 tonight and the other 2 in the morning along with the 3.2-Ghz.

This is 2 more cores than I originally thought I'd bring so it'll be interesting to see how much they can all test in a day's time of a lower n-range.

Gary

Mini-Geek · 2008-02-22, 23:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

1 core 3.2-Ghz P4

I may fire up two instances of LLRnet on the 3.2-Ghz. The machine is from 2004 (3.2-Ghz was screaming then!) and I call it a 'semi-false dual core'. If I remember right, the LLR time only goes up 60-70% when running 2 instances so I'll get more testing from 2 instances even though test time per k/n pair goes up. I'll test it again to make sure tonight.

I'm assuming you're referring to hyperthreading. As I recall from Prime95, and LLR is essentially the same AFAIK, it's better to run only one instance (but I could be wrong).
Please post the results of the test you run.

mdettweiler · 2008-02-22, 23:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mini-Geek

I'm assuming you're referring to hyperthreading. As I recall from Prime95, and LLR is essentially the same AFAIK, it's better to run only one instance (but I could be wrong).
Please post the results of the test you run.

Actually, with hyperthreading, you should definitely not see any performance loss with running two instances; instead, you will quite likely see a small performance increase. (Probably, how large or small that increase is will depend on the application you're using.)

AES · 2008-02-22, 23:54

I'm seeing a lot of messages like this in the proxy console. What do you make of this?

Result 649/282615 succesfully sent to the server.
Successfully connected to server!
connection request from 7801a8c0:1736 (socket 388)
Proposing pair 465/282619 to PC_3
net_Recv : bad header 'LOGG'
Could not log on to the server
LOGGING OUT
recv error res=-1, errno=0
Could not send result.
The server refused your new result :
either someone else computed it already,
either the server is now configured to
work on other numbers.recv error res=-1, errno=0
connection closed (socket 400)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
24 hour news	davieddy	Soap Box	4	2011-12-19 19:35
mfaktc slows on WinXP after about an hour	Christenson	GPU Computing	5	2011-05-27 21:47
Prime 95 shuts down itself after exactly 9:22 hour	Unregistered	Information & Answers	13	2009-09-02 05:11
! hour limit on editing	davieddy	Lounge	7	2009-09-01 15:57
1 buck an hour	crash893	Hardware	6	2009-06-18 01:45

2008-02-22, 20:56	#227
Mini-Geek Account Deleted "Tim Sorbera" Aug 2006 San Antonio, TX USA 17·251 Posts	I'll be adding my two 2.5 GHz Athlon X2 cores shortly before the rally begins. Sorry I can't put it in early, but I'm trying to finish up a GIMPS number (currently 93.14%, just a few days) so I can participate in NPLB.

2008-02-22, 23:54	#231
AES Jul 2007 Tennessee 2⁵·19 Posts	I'm seeing a lot of messages like this in the proxy console. What do you make of this? Result 649/282615 succesfully sent to the server. Successfully connected to server! connection request from 7801a8c0:1736 (socket 388) Proposing pair 465/282619 to PC_3 net_Recv : bad header 'LOGG' Could not log on to the server LOGGING OUT recv error res=-1, errno=0 Could not send result. The server refused your new result : either someone else computed it already, either the server is now configured to work on other numbers.recv error res=-1, errno=0 connection closed (socket 400)