| Author |
Message |
|---|
John Honorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
                 
|
|
PrimeGrid's Honorary Soothsayer!
We are finally within 50k of n=666666, the point at which PPS (LLR) can be removed from "critical project" status. Afterwards, the project will be safely rooted in the Top 5000 list. :)
Today, we reached n=616666. It's been a long tough journey but finally, there is a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel. We are now taking dates on when the n=666666 milestone might be reached. The one closest to the actual date and time will be deemed the honorary soothsayer of PrimeGrid for the rest of the year. :)
Therefore, please post your date and times in this thread. Good Luck!
30 Jan 2011 18:48 UTC - Tim
04 Feb 2011 19:13 GMT - KWSN - bart
11 Feb 2011 12:00 GMT - Alan (211 is prime)
23 Feb 2011 10:00 CST - mfbabb2
25 Feb 2011 08:00 UTC - some-one
03 Mar 2011 03:03:03.03 UTC - mackerel
03 Mar 2011 12:00 UTC - rroonnaalldd
05 Mar 2011 18:00 UTC - Scott Brown
13 Mar 2011 13:03 UTC - cromido (for all n<666666 being complete, 23 Mar 11:31 UTC)
15 Mar 2011 12:00 UTC - Dirk (Ides of March)
17 Mar 2011 10:28 UTC - Ion Basa
17 Mar 2011 11:16 UTC - John (St. Patrick's Day, the Luck of the Irish!)
20 Mar 2011 23:21 UTC - ConflictingEmotions (March equinox)
23 Mar 2011 22:00 UTC - NullCoding
27 Mar 2011 08:00-12:00 UTC - Pooh Bear 27
29 Mar 2011 13:00 UTC - Jeff17
31 Mar 2011 - Rick Reynolds
01 Apr 2011 04:01 UTC - gomeyer (April Fools Day)
09 Apr 2011 11:59 UTC - Zydor
11 Apr 2011 05:00 UTC - SteveRC (Happy Birthday)
14 Apr 2011 22:00 UTC - Conan
20 Apr 2011 13:00 UTC - Vato
21 Apr 2011 14:38 UTC - Crystal Pellet
06 May 2011 18:00 UTC to 07 May 2011 12:00 UTC - Vid Vidmar*
____________
|
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1948
ID: 352
Credit: 6,000,044,170
RAC: 1,496,195
                                     
|
|
I was also wondering when this will be reached.
Reported primes from PPS will jump 2000 positions by then!
Is there any statistics how many results (a da, percentage) are from Anonymous platform? I'm really currious about this one since those hosts, I'm afraid, are actually slowing overall progress IN PPS. Once there is a Windows wrapper or no need for app_info.xml for GPU projects, this would make more progress.
Would it make sense to have a deadline for posting dates?
Perhaps a price for a winner?
Let's make it fun...
____________
My stats |
|
|
|
|
|
1848 on 30 Jan 2011 which I think marks the third anniversary of my involvement in this project.
So far 81 Proth Primes but more importantly 3 years of fun and mathematical progress. My very sincere thanks to all for putting up with rat tales, poor jokes and rants. My even more sincere thanks to those good friends past and current (you know who you are) who have helped over a remarkable 3 years of change in my life.
But most of all my thanks to those who have made it possible for no material reward.
Cheers!
T |
|
|
|
|
|
My guess would be around May 7th (2011). To be more precise, somewhere from May 6th 18:00 UTC to May 7th 12:00 UTC.
BR,
____________
  |
|
|
|
|
|
Uuuuh guessing ....
I prefer forecasting: 21-Apr-2011 14:38 UTC |
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
                   
|
|
February 23, 2011 at 10:00 CST.
____________
Murphy (AtP)
 |
|
|
|
|
|
I'll go with Feb 11 (211 is prime); let's say noon GTM.
____________
  |
|
|
mackerelVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 08
Posts: 2639
ID: 29980
Credit: 568,393,769
RAC: 4,473
                            
|
|
No guess from me yet, but the thought does spring to mind, doesn't this just reverse the top5000 problem? I'll assume the "n" in PPS will rise much faster than the "k" of SGS, so I'm thinking once PPS passes n>666666 or not much further then ordinary SGS primes will fall off the radar. Or am I missing something? |
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
                                           
|
|
I'll go with March 5th (in honor of my late sister who passed away last summer...it was her birthday).
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
|
|
Today, we reached n=616666.
I feel cheated as I seem to only have WUs with n=616451 or less :-)
Anyhow, Groundhog Day Feb 2 would have been fitting but too close. So I will go with the March equinox on Mar 20 at 23:21.
|
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
No guess from me yet, but the thought does spring to mind, doesn't this just reverse the top5000 problem? I'll assume the "n" in PPS will rise much faster than the "k" of SGS, so I'm thinking once PPS passes n>666666 or not much further then ordinary SGS primes will fall off the radar. Or am I missing something?
I believe that SGS go in pretty high up the list; whereas, PPS were just barely making the cut at 4500+.
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
mackerelVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 08
Posts: 2639
ID: 29980
Credit: 568,393,769
RAC: 4,473
|
|
To throw in my random guess, based without any looking at n historical rates, 3rd March at 03:03:03.03.
I could use all 6's but that'll be far too far off I think... |
|
|
|
|
|
My crystal ball just told me 4th of February, 19.13 GMT
But for years, it gives me the numbers of next week's lottery, and still no luck... |
|
|
|
|
|
Will wait until we hear the official Feb 3 challenge. If it's going to be the PPS LLR that might lower the date...
____________
@AggieThePew
 |
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=2972&nowrap=true#31450 suggests that it is a PPS search. |
|
|
|
|
http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=2972&nowrap=true#31450 suggests that it is a PPS search.
And so it does...
Thanks Tim
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
|
|
Is there any statistics how many results (a da, percentage) are from Anonymous platform? I'm really currious about this one since those hosts, I'm afraid, are actually slowing overall progress IN PPS. Once there is a Windows wrapper or no need for app_info.xml for GPU projects, this would make more progress.
Just curious, how exactly would Anonymous Platform results slow down PPS LLR progress? Are many of them still on the older LLR (3.7.1c) or something? |
|
|
 VatoVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Feb 08
Posts: 840
ID: 18447
Credit: 640,741,675
RAC: 529,287
                 
|
|
I'm going to be pessimistic and plump for April 20th 13:00 UTC
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Given there is a challenge on PPS LLR coming up, I will predict March 23rd 2011 at 2200h UTC.
____________
 |
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
Is there any statistics how many results (a da, percentage) are from Anonymous platform? I'm really currious about this one since those hosts, I'm afraid, are actually slowing overall progress IN PPS. Once there is a Windows wrapper or no need for app_info.xml for GPU projects, this would make more progress.
Just curious, how exactly would Anonymous Platform results slow down PPS LLR progress? Are many of them still on the older LLR (3.7.1c) or something?
Would not matter in any case. An extra computer processing data (no matter how slow it is) will only speed up progress over that computer not processing said data -- the faster machine that could be doing its WU will be working on still another!
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
|
|
Is there any statistics how many results (a da, percentage) are from Anonymous platform? I'm really currious about this one since those hosts, I'm afraid, are actually slowing overall progress IN PPS. Once there is a Windows wrapper or no need for app_info.xml for GPU projects, this would make more progress.
Just curious, how exactly would Anonymous Platform results slow down PPS LLR progress? Are many of them still on the older LLR (3.7.1c) or something?
Would not matter in any case. An extra computer processing data (no matter how slow it is) will only speed up progress over that computer not processing said data -- the faster machine that could be doing its WU will be working on still another!
I'm still confused. What about Anonymous Platform makes it slower (as compared to a non-AP client doing the same subproject)? |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1948
ID: 352
Credit: 6,000,044,170
RAC: 1,496,195
|
I'm still confused. What about Anonymous Platform makes it slower (as compared to a non-AP client doing the same subproject)?
AR not being applied to AP hosts hurts user, project or both.
Eighter you run slower without app_info (about 20% slower with older LLR comparing to newer/Linux), smaller chance of primefinder etc.
Or you run faster using app_info and newer LLR (perhaps small cache, report results immediately to have a change of primefinder) but induce another replication for each WU and it hurts overall progress.
Note that AP apply only to PPS and SGS and that only some users using app_info (due to newer LLR or GPU apps).
Hopefully, Cruch3r will be able to make new Windows.
(it would be great if distributed before first LLR Challenge)
Another challenge will be to go back from using app_info to default settings - it is possible without loosing work in progress?
Sorry for off-topic...
____________
My stats |
|
|
|
|
|
My estimate for first crossing n=666666 is 13 of March, at 13:03 UTC, and for all n less than 666666 being complete is 23 of March, at 11:31 UTC.
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to find out what "n" is being crunched on my host machines?
Thanks,
Jim |
|
|
|
|
AR not being applied to AP hosts hurts user, project or both.
Eighter you run slower without app_info (about 20% slower with older LLR comparing to newer/Linux), smaller chance of primefinder etc.
Or you run faster using app_info and newer LLR (perhaps small cache, report results immediately to have a change of primefinder) but induce another replication for each WU and it hurts overall progress.
Note that AP apply only to PPS and SGS and that only some users using app_info (due to newer LLR or GPU apps).
Hopefully, Cruch3r will be able to make new Windows.
(it would be great if distributed before first LLR Challenge)
Another challenge will be to go back from using app_info to default settings - it is possible without loosing work in progress?
Sorry for off-topic...
Ah, that makes sense now. Thanks! :-) |
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to find out what "n" is being crunched on my host machines?
Thanks,
Jim
One of your tasks:
http://www.primegrid.com/workunit.php?wuid=156024492
Is prime? 8477*2^613247+1 is not prime. |
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to find out what "n" is being crunched on my host machines?
Thanks,
Jim
One of your tasks:
http://www.primegrid.com/workunit.php?wuid=156024492
Is prime? 8477*2^613247+1 is not prime.
I'm sorry, my question wasn't real clear. Is there any way to find the "n" being crunched while the WU is running?
____________
Thanks,
Jim
 |
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to find out what "n" is being crunched on my host machines?
Thanks,
Jim
One of your tasks:
http://www.primegrid.com/workunit.php?wuid=156024492
Is prime? 8477*2^613247+1 is not prime.
I'm sorry, my question wasn't real clear. Is there any way to find the "n" being crunched while the WU is running?
In the folder C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\BOINC\projects\www.primegrid.com\ (on Vista/7 this would be C:\Users\Public\Application Data\etc.) you should see a file with the same name as your workunit. (There will also be a lot of other files in there, but the one you want will look like "llrWOO_75312210" using an example from my computer.)
Once you find the file for the workunit you want to check, double-click on it to open it. Since the file has no extension, Windows will ask you what program to open it with. Choose Notepad and click OK. Notepad will open, showing a file like this (again from the llrWOO example above):
193512827:M:0:2:2
8736428 8736428
Ignore the first line, it's just information that tells the LLR application how to interpret the rest of the file. The second line is the number you're testing, in the form "k n" (where the real number is k*2^n+1). In my example, the number I'm testing is 8736428*2^8735428-1; note that it's -1 instead of +1 since it's Woodall instead of Proth. (Hence the "M" in the first line of the workunit input file representing the -1; for +1 numbers it's "P".) |
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry, my question wasn't real clear. Is there any way to find the "n" being crunched while the WU is running?
First, look at the name of the WU you want information about. For example, I have a Seventeen Or Bust, the name is given in BOINC Manager as "llr_sob_71252227_3"
Now look in the directory where BOINC is installed, more precisely the Prime Grid subdirectory. On Windows, it's probably something like C:\program files\BOINC\Data\projects\www.primegrid.com.
Open the file (in my example) "llr_sob_71252227" (note the missing "_3", this is the number of your copy of the task, so it might be anything from 0 to 35)
This file contains two lines. First line is header and specifying the kind of WU, the second line gives you two numbers, those being k and n.
Hope that helps.
Peter
Edit: Max was faster ;-)
____________
There are only 10 kinds of people - those who understand binary and those who don't
 |
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry, my question wasn't real clear. Is there any way to find the "n" being crunched while the WU is running?
First, look at the name of the WU you want information about. For example, I have a Seventeen Or Bust, the name is given in BOINC Manager as "llr_sob_71252227_3"
Now look in the directory where BOINC is installed, more precisely the Prime Grid subdirectory. On Windows, it's probably something like C:\program files\BOINC\Data\projects\www.primegrid.com.
Open the file (in my example) "llr_sob_71252227" (note the missing "_3", this is the number of your copy of the task, so it might be anything from 0 to 35)
This file contains two lines. First line is header and specifying the kind of WU, the second line gives you two numbers, those being k and n.
Hope that helps.
Peter
Edit: Max was faster ;-)
Sorry guys, I have a Mac and it must do something different.
____________
Thanks,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry guys, I have a Mac and it must do something different.
The basic principle should be the same, you need to locate the project folder and have a look at the WU file.
____________
There are only 10 kinds of people - those who understand binary and those who don't
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry guys, I have a Mac and it must do something different.
The basic principle should be the same, you need to locate the project folder and have a look at the WU file.
I agree but so far it is hiding.
____________
Thanks,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
Was just wondering can you do a search of your hard drive for any files that are named like pps_llr_extended_* and then see if you can open them with a wordpad or notepad type of editor? If you happen to find them and you happen to get them open, I wouldn't stay in them since you never know when the wu will finish and the file will be needed by boinc.
On windows, unfortunately Boinc's default install is to a hidden folder. Users have to change their explorer settings to allow them to see hidden folders and system files. Not sure if the Mac has anything like that or not.
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
|
|
Was just wondering can you do a search of your hard drive for any files that are named like pps_llr_extended_* and then see if you can open them with a wordpad or notepad type of editor? If you happen to find them and you happen to get them open, I wouldn't stay in them since you never know when the wu will finish and the file will be needed by boinc.
On windows, unfortunately Boinc's default install is to a hidden folder. Users have to change their explorer settings to allow them to see hidden folders and system files. Not sure if the Mac has anything like that or not.
It does and that is the problem. I think I will go over either to Wiki or the BOINC forms to get some clues.
____________
Thanks,
Jim
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
               
|
Was just wondering can you do a search of your hard drive for any files that are named like pps_llr_extended_* and then see if you can open them with a wordpad or notepad type of editor? If you happen to find them and you happen to get them open, I wouldn't stay in them since you never know when the wu will finish and the file will be needed by boinc.
On windows, unfortunately Boinc's default install is to a hidden folder. Users have to change their explorer settings to allow them to see hidden folders and system files. Not sure if the Mac has anything like that or not.
It does and that is the problem. I think I will go over either to Wiki or the BOINC forms to get some clues.
If you look at the beginning of the log messages in the manager, there should be a message right after BOINC starts that tells you where the data directory is. It's not necessary to search your hard drive.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
Was just wondering can you do a search of your hard drive for any files that are named like pps_llr_extended_* and then see if you can open them with a wordpad or notepad type of editor? If you happen to find them and you happen to get them open, I wouldn't stay in them since you never know when the wu will finish and the file will be needed by boinc.
On windows, unfortunately Boinc's default install is to a hidden folder. Users have to change their explorer settings to allow them to see hidden folders and system files. Not sure if the Mac has anything like that or not.
It does and that is the problem. I think I will go over either to Wiki or the BOINC forms to get some clues.
If you look at the beginning of the log messages in the manager, there should be a message right after BOINC starts that tells you where the data directory is. It's not necessary to search your hard drive.
Aaaaarrrrgggghhhh!
Thanks. Another solution hidden in plain sight.
____________
Thanks,
Jim
|
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
|
And, like finding something you have misplaced, it will always be in the last place you look for it!
...
(Think about it ...)
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll guess the 666666 will be reached at: 25th of Feb. 8:00 UTC |
|
|
|
|
And, like finding something you have misplaced, it will always be in the last place you look for it!
...
(Think about it ...)
A new law of physics? ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 14th at 2200 hours
Conan
____________
 |
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
And, like finding something you have misplaced, it will always be in the last place you look for it!
...
(Think about it ...)
A new law of physics? ;-)
No, just an extension of Murphy's Laws! ;-)
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 6 days since this thread was started, my most recent WU is at n = 619k, almost 620k. That means, current rate is about 0.6k/day. Let's see how big a leap the upcoming challenge provides.
BR,
____________
|
|
|
mackerelVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 08
Posts: 2639
ID: 29980
Credit: 568,393,769
RAC: 4,473
|
|
I didn't think to include a time zone, but make mine UTC too. |
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
I'll go with March 5th (in honor of my late sister who passed away last summer...it was her birthday).
Forgot a time for mine...I'll go with 18:00 UTC
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I will guess 29 March 2011 1300UTC
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
1159hrs UTC 9 April 2011
Regards
Zy |
|
|
STE\/EVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 05
Posts: 573
ID: 103
Credit: 3,631,506,192
RAC: 5
            
|
We are finally within 50k of n=666666, the point at which PPS (LLR) can be removed from "critical project" status. Afterwards, the project will be safely rooted in the Top 5000 list. :)
Does this mean there will be no more PPS LLR Wu's to run once the n=666666 is reached ??? ... Thanks
____________
 |
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
We are finally within 50k of n=666666, the point at which PPS (LLR) can be removed from "critical project" status. Afterwards, the project will be safely rooted in the Top 5000 list. :)
Does this mean there will be no more PPS LLR Wu's to run once the n=666666 is reached ??? ... Thanks
No...it means that we will transition to a different range which will move the primes found under the PPS LLR project from near the edge of the Top 5000 list to much higher rankings.
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
STE\/EVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 05
Posts: 573
ID: 103
Credit: 3,631,506,192
RAC: 5
|
|
Okay Scott, was just wondering if I needed to pound the PPS LLR's right now to get a Higher Badge if they were going to be Discontinued ... Thanks
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Okay Scott, was just wondering if I needed to pound the PPS LLR's right now to get a Higher Badge if they were going to be Discontinued ... Thanks
Information about sub-project life expectancy.
____________
Polish National Team |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
We are within 30K of n=666666. Currently n~636678.
____________
|
|
|
mackerelVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 08
Posts: 2639
ID: 29980
Credit: 568,393,769
RAC: 4,473
|
|
Had a quick play with a calculator. That's 20k in 15 days, so the remaining 30k would take us to... 4th March - not far off my guess!
BUT that assumes the n will continue to increase at the same rate. Given the challenge must have boosted the throughput quite a lot, it will take longer at a more normal rate. How much longer, I don't know. |
|
|
rroonnaallddVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 3 Jul 09
Posts: 1213
ID: 42893
Credit: 34,634,263
RAC: 0
            
|
|
Noon, March 3.
____________
Best wishes. Knowledge is power. by jjwhalen
 |
|
|
|
|
|
With the Challenge done, it is back to normal. My guess is going to be March 27th, somewhere between the 08:00-12:00 UTC. |
|
|
VatoVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Feb 08
Posts: 840
ID: 18447
Credit: 640,741,675
RAC: 529,287
|
|
Even with the Challenge and the Tour, I'm still happy with my earlier guess - I don't think I'll be too far away from the mark...
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
If it happens on 11 Apr 2011 (05h00 UTC) - then it can be my birthday present!
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
April 17th 2011 @ 6:28 PM PST
Semi- random geuss, I did some math to find an estimate and then molded my answer around that. |
|
|
mackerelVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 08
Posts: 2639
ID: 29980
Credit: 568,393,769
RAC: 4,473
|
|
I'll leave my original guess in place, but doing some quick calculation with some generous rounding error, I'm now getting 15 March based on the rate of the last few days. |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
We are within 25K of n=666666. Currently n~641858.
____________
|
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
|
We appear to be doing about 1K per day; therefore, new target date is ~ 25 days from now, March 12. YMMV
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 17th 2011 @ 6:28 PM PST
for some reason in my earlier post I put April instead of March, so this right now is my official answer. |
|
|
|
|
|
I go for the Ides of March, high noon. |
|
|
|
|
|
I will vote for March 31
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 04/01 @ 04:01 (April 1 at 04:01 UTC)
April Fools Day
[edit] No Fooling! [/edit] |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
We are within 15K of n=666666. Currently n~652006.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's yet a chance I could be right...
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
Progress has taken a nosedive the past several days...only completing 1K to 653K.
This is no April fool's joke...on 1 April, the Marie-Sophie Germain Challenge is taking place. Therefore, we have til 1 April to get PPS above n=666666 as I suspect the Challenge will push everything below 666666 off the Top 5000 list.
However, if we can make it by 17th March, that would be GREAT! ;) see prediction post :)
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Countdown Update
Progress has taken a nosedive the past several days...only completing 1K to 653K.
...
However, if we can make it by 17th March, that would be GREAT! ;) see prediction post :)
I likely contributed a large chunk of the dive; I've added back PPS LLR
to the preferences on our 32-bit xeon blades. Since Scott's not going to
hit March 5th (cf. predictions), he could run the other half, if he were
inclined to. -Bruce* |
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
Countdown Update
Progress has taken a nosedive the past several days...only completing 1K to 653K.
...
However, if we can make it by 17th March, that would be GREAT! ;) see prediction post :)
I likely contributed a large chunk of the dive; I've added back PPS LLR
to the preferences on our 32-bit xeon blades. Since Scott's not going to
hit March 5th (cf. predictions), he could run the other half, if he were
inclined to. -Bruce*
I switched back several cores last night that I had begun moving to other projects and will run near full tilt until we make the goal. Still, Lennart and I were pretty much doing that for the last few days anyway, so more help will be needed I think...Shanky?...Hankey?...
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've added 13 cores... Not much but I guess it would help............
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
Countdown Update
Progress has taken a nosedive the past several days...only completing 1K to 653K.
...
However, if we can make it by 17th March, that would be GREAT! ;) see prediction post :)
I switched back several cores last night that I had begun moving to other projects and will run near full tilt until we make the goal. Still, Lennart and I were pretty much doing that for the last few days anyway, so more help will be needed I think...Shanky?...Hankey?...
If I'm reading correctly, shanky123 and Mr. Hankey made large
contributions to PPS LLR during the Challenge (big time!), but not
so much during the part of the Tour after the Challenge. We'll
need a nontrivial reallocation from them to finish 666K early before
the April Challenge. -Bruce*
|
|
|
|
|
I've added 13 cores... Not much but I guess it would help............
Also added little effort not that March 20th has any special meaning for me. :-)
Perhaps then should have been an official Challenge to get to the first n=666666 WUs. Although I am curious to see exactly how many primes will be found. |
|
|
|
|
Countdown Update
We are within 25K of n=666666. Currently n~641858.
Over the past 12 hours my task count went up somewhat
more than 3.5K. A recent valid task reports
1929*2^654170+1 is not prime.
not a surprize, but noting n = 654170, so within 12K, half
of the previous amount? Here's a task that finished somewhat
more than 12 hours ago
2335*2^653854+1 is not prime.
So over 12 hours n wasn't raised by very much? n:= n+320?
Maybe we _do_ need more help to get back to 1K/day increase in n.
-Bruce* |
|
|
STE\/EVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 05
Posts: 573
ID: 103
Credit: 3,631,506,192
RAC: 5
|
|
Why is is so important to do this by April 1 ... ???
I can't really help as I have 72 SOB's running right now & don't want to stop them from running ...
____________
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
|
Why is is so important to do this by April 1 ... ???
On April 1st, a 2-day challenge will start, running SGS. One would expect a large percentage of the total computing power available to PrimeGrid to be directed towards SGS for those two days.
Currently, SGS is just above PPS in terms of the number of digits in the prime candidates being tested.
SGS checks numbers with an 'n' of 666666.
John fears that if PPS isn't above 666666 by then (which is where SGS is), the two day challenge will push the leading edge of PPS off the bottom of the top 5000 prime list.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
Why is is so important to do this by April 1 ... ???
I can't really help as I have 72 SOB's running right now & don't want to stop them from running ...
Because there's a 48 hours challenge starting the 1st of April on SGS LLR and it's expected that there will be so many primes found, that the primes found with PPS LLR and n below 666666 will not make it anymore in the top5000 list.
Edit: Double sewn keeps better ;) |
|
|
STE\/EVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 05
Posts: 573
ID: 103
Credit: 3,631,506,192
RAC: 5
|
|
Simple Solution, Don't run the Challenge ... Lol'z
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
About two weeks from now is looking promising as an absolute latest date for this, presuming we are still within ~12k!
____________
|
|
|
|
|
About two weeks from now is looking promising as an absolute latest date for this, presuming we are still within ~12k!
Here's one, joint with Lennart,
4071*2^654359+1 is not prime.
"created" 16:36; sent 19:3x; finished 20:11. Your post just arrived
20:17 (all UTC). Looks like the within 12k is good.
I managed to confuse myself about the reln beween increases
in n (for eg n = 654359) and the number of tasks. Do we know
how many tasks there are to finish n=666666? Of course, there's
replications; usually two. But 2*12K doesn't fit the rate at which
tasks are being completed. I've finished another 2500 since this
morning; over 6000 in under 20 hours.
-Bruce* (100 pages, 20 tasks/page of valid pps llr's in just a
few hours) |
|
|
STE\/EVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 05
Posts: 573
ID: 103
Credit: 3,631,506,192
RAC: 5
|
|
I threw my Pharm on this for the next 10 days or so to help out, after that I'll have to run/finish the SOB's I've started or they'll hit their Deadline if I don't ... :/ ... That & I want the SOB's finished before the Challenge starts so they don't interfere any with the Challenge ...
____________
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
|
I managed to confuse myself about the reln beween increases
in n (for eg n = 654359) and the number of tasks. Do we know
how many tasks there are to finish n=666666?
Looking at the range stats page for PPS LLR, they appear to be using all(???) odd k's betweem 1201 and 9999. That's 4400 k's if they're using them all, for each n value. Multiply that by 2 (because at least 2 results are sent for each work unit), and that's 8800 results per 'n'.
12k values of 'n' to go, so 8800 x 12000 = 105.6 million results still be sent out.
At least, before sieving.
A lot of those k,n combinations should have been elliminated by the sieving process, so the actual number is going to be a whole lot less than that.
So maybe a different approach...
The current outstanding WUs span a range of about 200 'n's, and consist of 34,275 WUs. Extrapolating that to 12K values of 'n', and accounting for two results per WU, we get about 4.1 million results. That's my best guess for how may results we need to process.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
One post and less than 48 hours later we are back on target. Thank you to all who answered the call!
I'll provide 48 hour updates so everyone can gauge when they can return to their regular schedules. Thanks again!
____________
|
|
|
|
|
I managed to confuse myself about the reln beween increases
in n (for eg n = 654359) and the number of tasks. Do we know
how many tasks there are to finish n=666666?
Looking at the range stats page for PPS LLR, they appear to be using all(???) odd k's betweem 1201 and 9999. That's 4400 k's if they're using them all, for each n value. Multiply that by 2 (because at least 2 results are sent for each work unit), and that's 8800 results per 'n'.
12k values of 'n' to go, so 8800 x 12000 = 105.6 million results still be sent out.
At least, before sieving.
A lot of those k,n combinations should have been elliminated by the sieving process, so the actual number is going to be a whole lot less than that.
So maybe a different approach...
The current outstanding WUs span a range of about 200 'n's, and consist of 34,275 WUs. Extrapolating that to 12K values of 'n', and accounting for two results per WU, we get about 4.1 million results. That's my best guess for how may results we need to process.
How do I read this table anyway?
____________
Thanks,
Jim
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
|
I managed to confuse myself about the reln beween increases
in n (for eg n = 654359) and the number of tasks. Do we know
how many tasks there are to finish n=666666?
Looking at the range stats page for PPS LLR, they appear to be using all(???) odd k's betweem 1201 and 9999. That's 4400 k's if they're using them all, for each n value. Multiply that by 2 (because at least 2 results are sent for each work unit), and that's 8800 results per 'n'.
12k values of 'n' to go, so 8800 x 12000 = 105.6 million results still be sent out.
At least, before sieving.
A lot of those k,n combinations should have been elliminated by the sieving process, so the actual number is going to be a whole lot less than that.
So maybe a different approach...
The current outstanding WUs span a range of about 200 'n's, and consist of 34,275 WUs. Extrapolating that to 12K values of 'n', and accounting for two results per WU, we get about 4.1 million results. That's my best guess for how may results we need to process.
How do I read this table anyway?
For each K value (1st column), it shows the number of WUs completed (not very useful), the number in progress, and the current range of n values being worked on.
The total at the bottom tells you how many total are being worked on. The total n values are distorted because the k<1200 rows go up to 999999.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
I managed to confuse myself about the reln beween increases
in n (for eg n = 654359) and the number of tasks. Do we know
how many tasks there are to finish n=666666?
Looking at the range stats page for PPS LLR, they appear to be using all(???) odd k's betweem 1201 and 9999. That's 4400 k's if they're using them all, for each n value. Multiply that by 2 (because at least 2 results are sent for each work unit), and that's 8800 results per 'n'.
12k values of 'n' to go, so 8800 x 12000 = 105.6 million results still be sent out.
At least, before sieving.
A lot of those k,n combinations should have been elliminated by the sieving process, so the actual number is going to be a whole lot less than that.
So maybe a different approach...
The current outstanding WUs span a range of about 200 'n's, and consist of 34,275 WUs. Extrapolating that to 12K values of 'n', and accounting for two results per WU, we get about 4.1 million results. That's my best guess for how may results we need to process.
How do I read this table anyway?
For each K value (1st column), it shows the number of WUs completed (not very useful), the number in progress, and the current range of n values being worked on.
The total at the bottom tells you how many total are being worked on. The total n values are distorted because the k<1200 rows go up to 999999.
That is the part (999999) I didn't understand.
____________
Thanks,
Jim
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
So maybe a different approach...
The current outstanding WUs span a range of about 200 'n's, and consist of 34,275 WUs. Extrapolating that to 12K values of 'n', and accounting for two results per WU, we get about 4.1 million results. That's my best guess for how may results we need to process.
Wow, that's pretty good. On average, there's roughly 150K candidates per n=1K of work. Adaptive replication is used so it's not necessarily 2 tasks per candidate...but you can use that as a worst case scenario. Therefore, ~3.6M tasks remain to n=666666.
The last 24 hours picked back up and has increased to 230K tasks per day.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
So maybe a different approach...
The current outstanding WUs span a range of about 200 'n's, and consist of 34,275 WUs. Extrapolating that to 12K values of 'n', and accounting for two results per WU, we get about 4.1 million results. That's my best guess for how may results we need to process.
Wow, that's pretty good. On average, there's roughly 150K candidates per n=1K of work. Adaptive replication is used so it's not necessarily 2 tasks per candidate...but you can use that as a worst case scenario. Therefore, ~3.6M tasks remain to n=666666.
The last 24 hours picked back up and has increased to 230K tasks per day.
Of which I contribute maybe 75/day. Oh well, every little bit helps.
Jim |
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
So maybe a different approach...
The current outstanding WUs span a range of about 200 'n's, and consist of 34,275 WUs. Extrapolating that to 12K values of 'n', and accounting for two results per WU, we get about 4.1 million results. That's my best guess for how may results we need to process.
Wow, that's pretty good. On average, there's roughly 150K candidates per n=1K of work. Adaptive replication is used so it's not necessarily 2 tasks per candidate...but you can use that as a worst case scenario. Therefore, ~3.6M tasks remain to n=666666.
The last 24 hours picked back up and has increased to 230K tasks per day.
Just to give people an idea of how this translates to individual machine power, here are some typical (on average...results will vary slightly) 24/7 total crunching outputs for a few machine types (HT enabled if present):
i7-975 - 960 workunits per day
i7-860 - 860 workunits per day
i5-650 - 535 workunits per day
E8400 - 430 workunits per day
T8100 - 290 workunits per day
Pent D 3.2 - 230 workunits per day
Pent 4 3.8 - 145 workunits per day
T2450 - 110 workunits per day
Pent M 2.1 - 55 workunits per day
Atom N270 - 20 workunits per day
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
|
|
Q6600 = ~615 results per day.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
|
Atom N270 - 20 workunits per day
LOL
Just for kicks, I once ran TWO WUs on an N450 based netbook. Just two. (The 450 is significantly faster than the 270.)
The Atoms do a really nice job at surfing the web, but when it comes to floating point, OUCH! I couldn't believe how slow it was running LLR. Not sure if it contributed to the poor performance, but I ran two at once (the 450 is either dual core, or single core with HT; I forget which.)
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
rroonnaallddVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 3 Jul 09
Posts: 1213
ID: 42893
Credit: 34,634,263
RAC: 0
|
The Atoms do a really nice job at surfing the web, but when it comes to floating point, OUCH! I couldn't believe how slow it was running LLR. Not sure if it contributed to the poor performance, but I ran two at once (the 450 is either dual core, or single core with HT; I forget which.)
N450 = single core with HT...
____________
Best wishes. Knowledge is power. by jjwhalen
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
We are now within 12K of the goal (n=666666). Currently n is at 654902.
The last 24 hours has increased to 268K tasks per day.
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
We are now within 10K of the goal (n=666666). Currently n is at 656682. That's 2K's in 3 days. If we can sustain this rate, we should reach the goal around the 25th.
____________
|
|
|
STE\/EVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 05
Posts: 573
ID: 103
Credit: 3,631,506,192
RAC: 5
|
|
I'll have to pull out around the 17'th-18'th so I can finish the SOB's I have partially started before their Deadlines hit ...
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
We are now within 8K of the goal (n=666666). Currently n is at 658892. That's another 2K's in 3 days. With this sustained rate, we should reach the goal around the 25th.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not to count the chickens before they've hatched, but that would make two "honorary soothsayers," now wouldn't it.
I'm not actually good at predicting things - so tell me, what's gonna happen once SGS and PPS are at the same "n"? I know that SGS is a fixed-n search, but will PPS just keep getting higher and higher indefinitely? I seem to remember hearing that (and it makes sense).
That is, once PPS LLR is no longer a "critical" project, what changes, if any, will we see in it?
____________
|
|
|
VatoVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Feb 08
Posts: 840
ID: 18447
Credit: 640,741,675
RAC: 529,287
|
|
I'd advise everyone to go get as many top 5000 SGS primes as they can whilst it lasts...
There'll still be enough folks doing PPS to continue the eventual end of SGS on the big list.
____________
|
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1948
ID: 352
Credit: 6,000,044,170
RAC: 1,496,195
|
There'll still be enough folks doing PPS to continue the eventual end of SGS on the big list.
How about make it another countdown: when SGS 666666 drops off the Top5000 list.
____________
My stats |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
That is, once PPS LLR is no longer a "critical" project, what changes, if any, will we see in it?
Once n=666666 is reached, PPS will continue to n=670K. Afterwards, we'll return to our original commitment for the Proth Search project and take k<1200 to 1M...currently at 820K. 1200<k<10000 will continue to be released along with the smaller "focused" k ranges.
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update
Another 3 days and we've completed another 2K's. :) We are now within 6K of the goal (n=666666). Currently n is at 660853. With this sustained rate, we should reach the goal around the 25th.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...we are having prime reporting issues at the moment. Therefore, prime submission has been suspended. Rytis is away for the week so earliest resolution could be this weekend.
____________
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
|
|
John,
What happens after PPS reaches n=666666? I see there as only being a few possible option, and all of them push either PPS or SGS off the bottom of the top 5000 primes list.
1) PPS keeps doing what it's doing, n, climbs above 666666, and within a month (if not days) SGS is permanently below the Top 5000. No further primes found by the SGS project will be in the top 5000.
2) PPS shifts to a higher K range, with lower N values, in which case PPS is below the top 5000 threshold.
3) PPS shifts to a higher N value, cementing itself above the top 5000 floor, but instantly pushing SGS below the floor. (And I suspect this would only be a Pyrrhic 'victory' at best for PPS, since I suspect that PPS is going to always be at the threshold of falling off the list since the vast number of primes it finds is essentially defining where the bottom of the list is at any point in time.)
Or am I missing something here?
Mike
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
John,
What happens after PPS reaches n=666666?
Please see two posts above for immediate plans.
Longer term, we'll continue to fulfill our commitment to the Proth Search project by taking lower k ranges to higher n levels. Your option 3 closely resembles this approach.
Couple of things to consider on why SGS will remain in the Top 5000 for longer than a month:
- The top of SGS is at position ~3000. Therefore, 2000 primes need to be found above n=666666 to push all of SGS primes off the list. Even at 10 primes a day, that's still 200 days away.
- There are two side effects of searching higher n's...longer testing times and lower density of primes. Of course, hardware and software improvements along with more participation helps nullify the longer tests but the lower density of primes will still slow Top 5000 primes progress.
Also, I'm not certain your suspicion that "PPS is going to always be at the threshold of falling off the list" will come true. Once PPS surpasses SGS at n=666666, the buffer for PPS will jump from 3 weeks to over 30 weeks. Here are some current Top 5000 positions to consider:
- 670K is at 2919
- 700K is at 2476
- 750K is at 1890
- 800K is at 1480
- 850K is at 1185
- 900K is at 945
- 950K is at 706
- 1M is at 535
For PPS to be on the threshold of falling off the list, ~2000 primes above 670K will need to be found. That's quite a task for such high n's.
It is true that some k<10000 will remain at 670K while lower k's are searched to higher n's. However, we'll continue to monitor progress and make adjustments as necessary.
Of course, should a constant n search start somewhere above PPS, we'll have to reconsider the approach. :)
____________
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13951
ID: 53948
Credit: 390,871,478
RAC: 116,990
|
|
Thanks John; that clarifies things a lot.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update - within 5K of n=666666
A nice speed up over the last 24 hours has brought us 1K closer. Currently n is at 661822.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...we are having prime reporting issues at the moment. Therefore, prime submission has been suspended. Rytis is away for the week so earliest resolution could be this weekend.
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update - within 4K of n=666666
A increase rate has been sustained for another day. Currently n is at 662684.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...we are having prime reporting issues at the moment. Therefore, prime submission has been suspended. The problem should be resolved in the next day or so.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the failure to predict the milestone,
Seems I didn't carry the two.
Kowalski's reply to Skipper (So we didn't go lunar?) in Nickelodeon's The Penguins of Madagascar Launchtime episode (depending on location you might be able to watch it there).
Oh well, onwards to 670K! |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update - within 3K of n=666666
We've slowed down a bit as it looks like the next FFT crossover has been reached. Currently n is at 664086.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay.
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update - within 2K of n=666666
Currently n is at 664759.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay.
____________
|
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
Countdown Update - within 2K of n=666666
Currently n is at 664759.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay.
Subproject status is showing 662232 as the min n. Does that mean there are stragglers that far behind the current outgoing WU's?
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
Subproject status is showing 662232 as the min n. Does that mean there are stragglers that far behind the current outgoing WU's?
Yes. "stragglers that far behind" - it's only 4 days old. :)
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Subproject status is showing 662232 as the min n. Does that mean there are stragglers that far behind the current outgoing WU's?
Yes. "stragglers that far behind" - it's only 4 days old. :)
My wingman's host took 6,481 cpu secs compared to my 353 for WU 171798451. I should not have been surprised given Scott's earlier post of 20 WU per day for an atom: Atom(TM) CPU D510 @ 1.66GHz , but was! |
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
Subproject status is showing 662232 as the min n. Does that mean there are stragglers that far behind the current outgoing WU's?
Yes. "stragglers that far behind" - it's only 4 days old. :)
My wingman's host took 6,481 cpu secs compared to my 353 for WU 171798451. I should not have been surprised given Scott's earlier post of 20 WU per day for an atom: Atom(TM) CPU D510 @ 1.66GHz , but was!
My guess is that it is a 2 core with HT turned on.
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1948
ID: 352
Credit: 6,000,044,170
RAC: 1,496,195
|
|
I'm getting some ^665666, were are within 1K.
(olders one ^663363, I'm waiting for wingman to complete it)
About 888.888 WUs on PPS LLR, will be 4M credit in two days - just when we hit the goal.
Perfect timing to move towards SoB numbers.
____________
My stats |
|
|
|
|
I'm getting some ^665666, were are within 1K.
(olders one ^663363, I'm waiting for wingman to complete it)
Who will be the first to report the successful completion of an ^666666 WU?
(Got a 665775 WU)
About 888.888 WUs on PPS LLR, will be 4M credit in two days - just when we hit the goal.
Perfect timing to move towards SoB numbers.
Milestones all around then!
I'll be hitting half of your PPS LLR credits (2M) hopefully in the next 12 hours or so. Just itching to get into ' the dual Sierpinski problem' project mixed up with a few SoBs and WOOs once the countdown finishes. |
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
|
got a couple with 665808...getting really close. Looks like Pooh Bear 27 is going to be the best Soothsayer!
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
mfbabb2Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 10 Oct 08
Posts: 510
ID: 30360
Credit: 20,308,147
RAC: 20,806
|
got a couple with 665808...getting really close. Looks like Pooh Bear 27 is going to be the best Soothsayer!
Technically, the target should be met when the last "k" for lowest remaining "n=666666" validates (not just the first WU returned). Although the difference is probably only a day or so.
____________
Murphy (AtP)
|
|
|
mackerelVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 08
Posts: 2639
ID: 29980
Credit: 568,393,769
RAC: 4,473
|
|
Interesting measure, but it can be delayed if, for example, someone downloads them and doesn't crunch them before the deadline which appears to be 2 days. Then you'd have to wait again for someone else to get sent the unit and complete it.
There appear to be 4998 "k" in the project, so there are up to that many tests at n=666666 less whatever sieve has eliminated. Maybe it'll suffice as a milestone the moment all n=666666 are sent out, regardless of when they are completed. But the gap between that and the first such unit being sent out might not be much anyway. My single fastest computer could do that alone in under 4 days, and I'm sure there's a lot more processing power on the project than my single fastest computer! |
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
got a couple with 665808...getting really close. Looks like Pooh Bear 27 is going to be the best Soothsayer!
Technically, the target should be met when the last "k" for lowest remaining "n=666666" validates (not just the first WU returned). Although the difference is probably only a day or so.
Yep...we'll likley hit the first one on 3/26...Since Pooh Bear selected the 27th (and Jeff17's choice was more than halfway through 3/29), that should put it fairly close to that.
And technically, one would have a good argument that the target should be when the last workunit is sent out rather than recieved back, since after that a new range has to be loaded into the system so that PPS LLR does not run dry. The returned or validated workunit could be "gamed" (i.e., I could suspend an older workunit for a while to get it to a desired date for submission, etc.).
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well now here's another question or point of view.. how many k's are in the n=666666 range? and if the goal is get the n=666666 done then it would seem to me that correct time and date would be the very last n=666666 sent out.
just throwing out more options since my guess is later than Pooh Bear's.. HA
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
mackerelVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 08
Posts: 2639
ID: 29980
Credit: 568,393,769
RAC: 4,473
|
|
Rick, as I mentioned earlier there appear to be 4998 "k" in the project, which would lead to as many tests at n=666666. But I don't know how many would be removed by sieve so it could be a lot less.
Scott, there could be gaming of getting work too, for example someone could download a big cache just to get the units out faster. I'm not sure any system therefore is really immune to manipulation. |
|
|
|
|
|
Gaming to be the first person with an n= double devil evil bunny w/u requires far to much mental effort for us canines (makes our fuzzy little brains hurt).
But ...
we would grin from ear to ear and our tails would wag for days just to be the initial finder of the first prime at that n.
____________
There's someone in our head but it's not us. |
|
|
|
|
And technically, one would have a good argument that the target should be when the last workunit is sent out rather than recieved back, since after that a new range has to be loaded into the system ...
Seems reasonable to me --- we want to see, and then finish
tasks above n=666K; which should start shortly after the last
666K task is sent. The person straggling in with the last doublecheck
below 667K shouldn't be regarded as defining our progress through
the primes below 667K. Also, from the first post, there's the issue of
the April Challenge ... Hmm. Guess a slow doublecheck could cause
some of the last Proths below 667K to not make the Top 5000. Perhaps
we should track pending Proth primes, and provide "honorable mention"
to any prime finders with first primes that miss the Top 5000 for this
reason.
I'm having a different issue regarding John's parenthetic comments
attached to the updates. I'm listed with 50 primes, to land in the
69th spot among PrimeGrid prime finders. Astonished to have broken into
the top 100, having just shortly ago gotten on the top 500. Guess the
progress on the last easiest primes qualifying for top 5000 makes
the manual checks more difficult. Anyway, the 50 was 42 Proth,
8 from the SG search (not to say 8 SG primes, as they occur in a
quadruple giving two SG chances and a twin prime chance, none of
which has happend yet).
For short 42+8 primes verified, with another 13+2 pending. My 50
was split 20+30, with 30 doublechecks; and I'm itching for emails
reporting new prime non-doublechecks.
Bet I'm not the only one! -Bruce* (first prime found Feb 1st, 2011.) |
|
|
|
|
got a couple with 665808...getting really close. Looks like Pooh Bear 27 is going to be the best Soothsayer!
Technically, the target should be met when the last "k" for lowest remaining "n=666666" validates (not just the first WU returned). Although the difference is probably only a day or so.
Yep...we'll likley hit the first one on 3/26...Since Pooh Bear selected the 27th (and Jeff17's choice was more than halfway through 3/29), that should put it fairly close to that.
John did say We are now taking dates on when the n=666666 milestone might be reached. I took it as when the first WU is returned since it is a meaning of the word reached as there are many k for a n. Also he did put cromdio down twice with the second date in for all n complete.
I am sure that he will clear this up very soon since I got an WU with n=666,016!
|
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
|
Well, no matter what is decided, it at least looks like some primes are being reported again...at least Lennart has reported some since they are now showing up on the front page (I know, because one of mine was the last one reported before the validator error was noticed and reporting was suspended).
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update - within 500 of n=666666
Currently n is at 666194.
As for reaching n=666666, the goal was simply to reach it. At this point, PPS (LLR) is well ahead of the Top 5000 buffer. Even the upcoming SGS (LLR) Challenge probably won't interfere with this progress.
It is possible for PPS (LLR) to be completed through n=666666 before the Challenge. Right now it looks like there's a 4 day lag between leading and trailing edges. As for the number of candidates at n=666666, there are 122 (out of 4400) remaining after the sieve.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay.
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Countdown Update - within 300 of n=666666
Currently n is 666382. Min n outstanding is 664045.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay.
John, could you explain what a problem was?
The issue is resolved, all new primes submission will be correct, we'll hope.
It seems that I have to put up with the fact that prime 7935*2^659188+1 is already recorded to Lumiukko and will not be returned to me, right? |
|
|
|
|
Countdown Update - within 300 of n=666666
Currently n is 666382. Min n outstanding is 664045.
Thank you to everyone participating in this monumental effort.
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay.
"9917*2^666651+1 is not prime" is getting close ... BD* |
|
|
|
|
|
running n=666667 and higher tasks right now...
____________
There are only 10 kinds of people - those who understand binary and those who don't
|
|
|
Scott BrownVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2379
ID: 1178
Credit: 17,813,215,843
RAC: 5,544,768
|
Well, no matter what is decided, it at least looks like some primes are being reported again...at least Lennart has reported some since they are now showing up on the front page (I know, because one of mine was the last one reported before the validator error was noticed and reporting was suspended).
Well...it has been several hours since (or at least since I noticed) that Lennart got credited with some new PPS primes, but I don't see that anyone else has done so??? Does this mean that the backlog is still on hold? Lennart, how is it that you were able to get primes credited, but no one else has? I hope that whatever "fix" that was put in place didn't mess up something else like notification e-mails?
Edit:
And just noticed that the newest of the newly reported primes by Lennart is one on which I was the double checker...that means that the 8 most recent primes were definitely reported after the suspension of prime reporting had happened...is prime reporting back on or not? if not, how did Lennart report these???
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
|
|
|
|
|
Edit:
And just noticed that the newest of the newly reported primes by Lennart is one on which I was the double checker...that means that the 8 most recent primes were definitely reported after the suspension of prime reporting had happened...is prime reporting back on or not? if not, how did Lennart report these???
I did check some primes when we first found out about this problem.
I know that the primes I submitted was correct. The bad thing was that I did not mark all primes I checked .
Later when I was going to check them and mark the finder it was to late. They where purged and moved to backup files.
Lennart |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
GOAL ACHIEVED
Currently n is 666773. Min n outstanding is 664229. Also, it looks like PPS (LLR) might be clear through 666666 before the Challenge. Another update will be posted once all work below n=666666 has been completed.
Based on Puzzle-Peter's post, looks like Pooh Bear 27 is PrimeGrid's Honorary Soothsayer. Congratulations!
You'll notice now that the HIGH PRIORITY note has been removed from PPS (LLR). This has been over a year undertaking and we wish to thank everyone who contributed to this effort. It is far from over but the threat of PPS (LLR) falling out of the Top 5000 has been put to rest...at least for now. ;)
Once n=670K has been reached, our focus will turn to smaller k ranges and higher n (corresponding to PG's commitment to the Proth Search project). First up will be k<1200 for 820K<n<1M. After that, k<10 will be pushed towards n=5M intermixed with k<10000 from 670K towards 700K. Therefore, WU lengths will vary.
FYI...the validation problem that was occasionally reversing finder/DC'er has been resolved. However, the backlog of primes must manually be reviewed before prime submission can be restarted. We apologize for the delay. NOTE: All backlogged primes for now are still safe from falling out of the Top 5000.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
GOAL ACHIEVED
Currently n is 666773. Min n outstanding is 664229. Also, it looks like PPS (LLR) might be clear through 666666 before the Challenge. Another update will be posted once all work below n=666666 has been completed.
Based on Puzzle-Peter's post, looks like Pooh Bear 27 is PrimeGrid's Honorary Soothsayer. Congratulations!
Congratulations to Poor Bear and everyone else!
By the way, what is happening to WU 171823275? It is the listed as the lowest n (664229) so I would have thought that of would have been resent by now. |
|
|
|
|
|
Congrats Pooh Bear and PrimeGrid!
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
|
|
|
woooh! |
|
|
|
|
|
All hail "Pooh Bear the Soothsayer" and congratulations to everyone else!
Also interesting to note (at least in my case) that some w/u's (higher k/n pairs) are now taking longer to run.
Size of the FFT has increased.
FFT length: 48K vs FFT length: 64K
EDIT: Actually not just in my case - found a validated w/u http://www.primegrid.com/workunit.php?wuid=172759106 where run-times and FFT increased for both me and the wingman.
____________
There's someone in our head but it's not us. |
|
|
|
|
|
At some point in the last day while helping with this effort I found a prime, I hope that I am the initial finder and not the double checker (since I already have double checked a proth prime at a much lower n value), but really I am more interested in seeing what the n level is (hoping for 666 666). So I can't wait for the submission backlog to be over with.
____________
 |
|
|
LumiukkoVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 7 Jul 08
Posts: 165
ID: 25183
Credit: 870,147,967
RAC: 45,202
    
|
...
It seems that I have to put up with the fact that prime 7935*2^659188+1 is already recorded to Lumiukko and will not be returned to me, right?
This one seems to be fixed now at TOP5000 list, as it is not recorded for me anymore:
7935*2^659188+1
--
Lumiukko |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1948
ID: 352
Credit: 6,000,044,170
RAC: 1,496,195
|
|
Latest unfinished is ^666804 so we are well into >666666 range.
____________
My stats |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
Latest unfinished is ^666804 so we are well into >666666 range.
As Honza points out, PPS (LLR) is now completely clear of n=666666. Congratulations to all who participated in this push to keep PPS (LLR) in the Top 5000 Primes database.
Once n=670K has been reached, our focus will turn to smaller k ranges and higher n (corresponding to PG's commitment to the Proth Search project). First up will be k<1200 for 820K<n<1M. After that, k<10 will be pushed towards n=5M intermixed with k<10000 from 670K towards 700K. Therefore, WU lengths will vary.
We apologize for the extended delay in resolving the prime backlog issues. NOTE: All backlogged primes for now are still safe from falling out of the Top 5000.
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
n for PPS is approaching 670K. It should be reached within the next 24 hours. This is a reminder that the focus will switch to smaller k but higher n. First up will be 100<k<1200 for 820K<n<1M. After that, k<10 will be pushed towards n=5M intermixed with k<10000 from 670K towards 700K. Therefore, WU lengths will vary.
Prime submission to the Top5000 primes database has been resumed. It will take about a week to clear the backlog. NOTE: All backlogged primes (PPS & SGS) are still safe from falling out of the Top 5000.
If you are showing a prime on your account page, expect it to be submitted within the week. Please consider choosing Automatic Prime Submission to help facilitate this process.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
It has been mentioned that when n=1 million has been reached for 100< k < 1200, the PPS LLR will switch to pushing k< 10 towards n= 5 million. Question is, what is the current upper tested value of n for these small k's? |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
It has been mentioned that when n=1 million has been reached for 100< k < 1200, the PPS LLR will switch to pushing k< 10 towards n= 5 million. Question is, what is the current upper tested value of n for these small k's?
The actual k's will be 5, 7 , 9. 3 is already well ahead in the 321 Prime Search (min n outstanding = 7175819).
It's not possible to determine exactly what's been searched since we do not have all the residues for these k's. We have a subset of residues compliments of previous searchers who were kind enough to share them with us.
Candidates that have residues will be assigned a single replication. If the results match, that WU is done. If they don't match, additional tasks will be created until matching residues are found. For candidates that we don't have residues for, the normal adaptive replication will apply.
k=5 [n=5330000] However, there hasn't been a prime since n=1777515. Therefore, it is possible that primes were missed.
k=7 [n=1600000] However, there are primes found up to n=3511774. It looks like this was searched to 3.7M. There is also data suggesting that this was searched up to 5M, but it's incomplete.
k=9 [n=1600000] However, it may have stopped at n=1560000. The next k range currently shows these as possible n limits:
k=11 [n=1600000]
k=13 [n=3100000]
k=15 [n=2500000]
k=17 [n=1600000] with a prime listed at n=1990299
k=19 [n=2500000]
k=21 [n=1700000] with a prime listed at n=1830919
k=23 [n=1520000]
k=25 [n=1780000]
k=27 [n=1520000] with a prime listed at n=2218064
k=29 [n=1600000]
k=31 [n=1760000]
NOTE: k=27 is part of the 27121 Prime Search located in PG's PRPNet. It currently shows a limit of n=3758564. We have all residues for this k. :)
____________
|
|
|
