| Author |
Message |
|---|
|
|
|
Are we done with this sub-project now?
The 'port' has been empty for a while now: http://prpnet.mine.nu:13001/
Thanks
____________
35 x 2^3587843+1 is prime! |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
 
|
Are we done with this sub-project now?
The 'port' has been empty for a while now: http://prpnet.mine.nu:13001/
Thanks
More work needs to be loaded into the server. I don't recall who has responsibility for that. |
|
|
|
|
|
New work added.
Lennart |
|
|
|
|
|
Brand new PRPNet user here. I just learned about Wall-Sun-Sun primes on Wikipedia the other day, and found this program was looking for them. Can we have some more work units to crunch? Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Brand new PRPNet user here. I just learned about Wall-Sun-Sun primes on Wikipedia the other day, and found this program was looking for them. Can we have some more work units to crunch? Thanks!
There are work.
http://prpnet.mine.nu:13001/
I will add more soon.
Lennart |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
|
I hope to release an OpenCL version of wwww in the coming weeks. On my computer (with my GPU), the GPU code is WallSunSun code is 25x faster than the CPU code. |
|
|
|
|
|
That would be awesome!
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, this would be great news!
I am happy to help test if there is need.
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
What will be the GPU requirements for this upcoming application?
____________
My first prime number: 5391 x 2^347513 +1 |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
What will be the GPU requirements for this upcoming application?
It's OpenCL (since I have ATI cards). It doesn't use FP. |
|
|
|
|
|
when will it be released? My notebook is with ati, what is the minimum card? |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
when will it be released? My notebook is with ati, what is the minimum card?
I can run it on a 6 year old MacBook Pro, but it is actually slower on that GPU than the CPU.
Until I get to beta testing (a couple of weeks away), I won't know what the minimum card it can run on is. |
|
|
Scott Brown Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 17 Oct 05
Posts: 2222
ID: 1178
Credit: 9,226,545,170
RAC: 3,264,511
                                        
|
when will it be released? My notebook is with ati, what is the minimum card?
I can run it on a 6 year old MacBook Pro, but it is actually slower on that GPU than the CPU.
Until I get to beta testing (a couple of weeks away), I won't know what the minimum card it can run on is.
The OpenCL minimum for ATI is HD4xxx cards or newer, but those cards were not available 6 years ago (the first in that series came out mid-2008)? What card are you running it on?
____________
141941*2^4299438-1 is prime!
 |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
|
I believe it is an ATI Mobility Radeon X1600, but I don't have the computer in front of me. |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
|
The server is going to dry out soon. Might be a good time to upgrade to 5.0.8. |
|
|
|
|
The server is going to dry out soon. Might be a good time to upgrade to 5.0.8.
WALLSUNSUN port 13001 ran dry.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Port is empty now. |
|
|
|
|
|
For the challenge we need more WUs. |
|
|
LumiukkoVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 7 Jul 08
Posts: 164
ID: 25183
Credit: 719,735,161
RAC: 107,980
                          
|
|
WALLSUNSUN port 13001 is dry.
--
Lumiukko |
|
|
|
|
|
Port will be empty in 24 hours. Please consider a refill.
____________
676754^262144+1 is prime |
|
|
|
|
|
pls refill |
|
|
|
|
pls refill
Done.. Little late
Lennat |
|
|
|
|
|
EDIT: I'm a dumb @$$. I had this in my prpclient.ini
//server=WIEFERICH:100:10:prpnet.mine.nu:13000
server=WALLSUNSUN:100:10:prpnet.mine.nu:13000
Not one of these are showing up on the PRPNet-Stats site. It looks like it's only WSS. My WFS work units seems to be updating.
This is just a sample that I'm posting below. There are a few dozen more. Can someone check to see if Primegrid got these? I would hate to be doing these for nothing.
[2013-01-20 15:36:59 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85938100000000000:85938200000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 292 seconds
[2013-01-20 15:42:01 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85938200000000000:85938300000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 302 seconds
[2013-01-20 15:46:53 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85938300000000000:85938400000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 292 seconds
[2013-01-20 15:51:46 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85938400000000000:85938500000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 293 seconds
[2013-01-20 15:56:41 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85938500000000000:85938600000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 294 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:01:32 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85939800000000000:85939900000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 290 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:06:23 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85939900000000000:85940000000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 291 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:11:15 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85940000000000000:85940100000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 292 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:16:05 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85940100000000000:85940200000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 290 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:20:56 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85940200000000000:85940300000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 290 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:25:54 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85966600000000000:85966700000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 290 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:30:48 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85966700000000000:85966800000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 293 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:35:41 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85966800000000000:85966900000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 292 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:40:33 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85966900000000000:85967000000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 292 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:45:34 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85967000000000000:85967100000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 300 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:50:35 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85967100000000000:85967200000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 301 seconds
[2013-01-20 16:55:44 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85967200000000000:85967300000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 308 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:00:51 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85967300000000000:85967400000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 307 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:05:51 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85967400000000000:85967500000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 300 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:10:54 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85967500000000000:85967600000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 303 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:35:00 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 85999900000000000:86000000000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 303 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:40:07 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000000000000000:86000100000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 307 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:45:06 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000100000000000:86000200000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 299 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:50:02 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000200000000000:86000300000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 295 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:54:58 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000300000000000:86000400000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 296 seconds
[2013-01-20 17:59:54 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000400000000000:86000500000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 296 seconds
[2013-01-20 18:04:54 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000500000000000:86000600000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 300 seconds
[2013-01-20 18:09:56 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000600000000000:86000700000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 302 seconds
[2013-01-20 18:14:55 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000700000000000:86000800000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 298 seconds
[2013-01-20 18:19:56 CST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 86000800000000000:86000900000000000 Program: wwwwcl Time: 301 seconds |
|
|
 RogerVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11
Posts: 1137
ID: 120786
Credit: 267,933,772
RAC: 7,827
                
|
|
Hi brinktastee,
Yes, needs to be:
server=WALLSUNSUN:100:2:prpnet.mine.nu:13001
Did you do these WSS units with your AMD GPU? Would be first time this works if true.
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
Hi brinktastee,
Yes, needs to be:
server=WALLSUNSUN:100:2:prpnet.mine.nu:13001
Did you do these WSS units with your AMD GPU? Would be first time this works if true.
Sorry no. Nvidia GTX 460 on Linux. |
|
|
|
|
|
After more than two months, WSS produced a new near find.
____________
676754^262144+1 is prime |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
                            
|
|
Just for the record.
We have recently found nearest Wieferich, see Wieferich - it has been a while
Nearest WSS is: 13850430391107241 (0 -2 p) found Tuesday 23rd of October 2012 09:56:47 PM
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
|
what are the criteria using wwwwcl and wwwwcl64? it seems it cant run on my computer while uncommenting the lines |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
what are the criteria using wwwwcl and wwwwcl64? it seems it cant run on my computer while uncommenting the lines
wwwwcl is an OpenCL version of the client software. Run "wwwwcl -l" or "wwwwcl64 -l" from the command prompt to see if it can detect a video card that can run the software. |
|
|
|
|
|
wwwwcl v2.2.2, a GPU program to search for Wieferich and WallSunSun primes
Platform 0 has no available devices. Here is a list of platforms and devices:List of available platforms and devices
Platform 0 is a Intel(R) Corporation Intel(R) OpenCL, version OpenCL 1.1
No devices
Platform 1 is a NVIDIA Corporation NVIDIA CUDA, version OpenCL 1.1 CUDA 4.2.1
Device 0 is a NVIDIA Corporation GeForce GTX 660 Ti
[2013-03-06 15:09:05 GST] : Could not find completion line in log file [wwww.log]. Assuming user stopped with ^C
[2013-03-06 15:09:05 GST] Total Time: 0:00:01 Total Work Units: 0 Special Results Found: 0
[2013-03-06 15:09:05 GST] Client shutdown complete
Hi, anyone know how I can get this to run please? I assume I've missed a parameter somewhere. |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
wwwwcl v2.2.2, a GPU program to search for Wieferich and WallSunSun primes
Platform 0 has no available devices. Here is a list of platforms and devices:List of available platforms and devices
Platform 0 is a Intel(R) Corporation Intel(R) OpenCL, version OpenCL 1.1
No devices
Platform 1 is a NVIDIA Corporation NVIDIA CUDA, version OpenCL 1.1 CUDA 4.2.1
Device 0 is a NVIDIA Corporation GeForce GTX 660 Ti
[2013-03-06 15:09:05 GST] : Could not find completion line in log file [wwww.log]. Assuming user stopped with ^C
[2013-03-06 15:09:05 GST] Total Time: 0:00:01 Total Work Units: 0 Special Results Found: 0
[2013-03-06 15:09:05 GST] Client shutdown complete
Hi, anyone know how I can get this to run please? I assume I've missed a parameter somewhere.
In the wwww.ini file, look for this line:
//platform=0
change it to:
platform=1 |
|
|
|
|
In the wwww.ini file, look for this line:
//platform=0
change it to:
platform=1
Thanks, I didn't have a wwww.ini (I did look for one before I posted my question).
I've created it and added the line.
Thank you. |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
Thanks, I didn't have a wwww.ini (I did look for one before I posted my question).
I've created it and added the line.
One should be included in the distribution. I recommend that you play with the number of threads and blocks to optimize performance while avoiding screen lags.
// The settings in this file are used to set various values that cannot be set via command line
// switches. Except where noted, the command line switches will override values specified here.
// platform and device specify the platform and device to run on
//platform=0
//device=0
// blocks is a multiplier used to set workgroup size
//blocks=1000
// threads is the number of concurrent threads to execute
//threads=2
// minprime and maxprime set the range to be searched
//minprime=
//maxprime=
// These settings will override the default settings for blocks and threads and they will
// also override the command line switches
//wallsunsun_threads=5
//wallsunsun_blocks=4000
//wieferich_threads=2
//wieferich_blocks=3000
|
|
|
|
|
One should be included in the distribution...
Ah, there is one in the same directory as the batch files (that create the sub-directories and copies the programs etc.) but it wasn't copied to the sub-directory. It is just one long unreadable line in notepad, I guess it has some trick chars or something that makes it look ok in some other text editor.
I don't know where to start with the parameters you mentioned so I'll leave them commented out I guess.
Thanks again.
|
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
One should be included in the distribution...
Ah, there is one in the same directory as the batch files (that create the sub-directories and copies the programs etc.) but it wasn't copied to the sub-directory. It is just one long unreadable line in notepad, I guess it has some trick chars or something that makes it look ok in some other text editor.
I don't know where to start with the parameters you mentioned so I'll leave them commented out I guess.
Thanks again.
Use a better editor like Notepad++ or TextPad.
Regarding the parameters, run wwwwcl on its own varying values of -b and -t and when you find the "sweet spot", put those settings into the ini file. Trust me, if you don't try to do that then your throughput will be many times lower than possible. |
|
|
|
|
Regarding the parameters, run wwwwcl on its own varying values of -b and -t and when you find the "sweet spot", put those settings into the ini file. Trust me, if you don't try to do that then your throughput will be many times lower than possible.
A wu is taking me c.450 seconds. I don't know if that is awful or not.
I'm not going to spend too much time on this now seeing that it's so complicated and I don't even know the ranges of the parameters for my card.
I'll park it for now. Thanks for your time rogue.
Peter |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
Regarding the parameters, run wwwwcl on its own varying values of -b and -t and when you find the "sweet spot", put those settings into the ini file. Trust me, if you don't try to do that then your throughput will be many times lower than possible.
A wu is taking me c.450 seconds. I don't know if that is awful or not.
I'm not going to spend too much time on this now seeing that it's so complicated and I don't even know the ranges of the parameters for my card.
I'll park it for now. Thanks for your time rogue.
Peter
Run a range of about 1e9, i.e. -p100e9 -P101e9. When the program completes it will tell you wall time, what percentage of time was spent in the GPU, and the percentage of utilization in the GPU. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ports are down. 15:27 CST
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding the parameters, run wwwwcl on its own varying values of -b and -t and when you find the "sweet spot", put those settings into the ini file. Trust me, if you don't try to do that then your throughput will be many times lower than possible.
OK I tried 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000 block size and 4000 looks the quickest.
Then tried threads 1 through 6 and 5 looks best. With 4000 and 5 the difference was startling but, as you implied, the lag becomes apparent. Before and after:
[2013-03-10 20:57:53 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16652560000000000:16652570000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 446 seconds
[2013-03-11 11:16:40 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16659730000000000:16659740000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 448 seconds
[2013-03-12 11:56:56 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16674900000000000:16674910000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 40 seconds
[2013-03-12 11:57:38 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16674910000000000:16674920000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 40 seconds
[2013-03-12 11:58:20 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16674920000000000:16674930000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 39 seconds
[2013-03-12 11:59:01 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16674930000000000:16674940000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 39 seconds
[2013-03-12 11:59:43 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16674940000000000:16674950000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 39 seconds
[2013-03-12 12:00:25 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16674950000000000:16674960000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 39 seconds
[2013-03-12 12:01:06 GST] Server: WALLSUNSUN, Range: 16674960000000000:16674970000000000 Program: wwwwcl64.exe Checksum: 0000000000000000 Time: 39 seconds
|
|
|
|
|
|
At current pace, the server will run dry in less than a week.
Please consider a refill.
____________
676754^262144+1 is prime |
|
|
|
|
At current pace, the server will run dry in less than a week.
Please consider a refill.
Done..
Lennart |
|
|
|
|
|
Are there any options in either the prpclient.ini or wwww.ini file that will allow the program to continue if it runs into an error? I've looked at all the start/stop options and none of them seem to be a good fit.
Running some WSS's and every now and then it gives me a fatal error that it must be a bug (probably due to over clocking) and the quits. (Yes I know, part of the issue is to lower my clocking which I've done). |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
Are there any options in either the prpclient.ini or wwww.ini file that will allow the program to continue if it runs into an error? I've looked at all the start/stop options and none of them seem to be a good fit.
Running some WSS's and every now and then it gives me a fatal error that it must be a bug (probably due to over clocking) and the quits. (Yes I know, part of the issue is to lower my clocking which I've done).
As to your first question, not really. There are checkpoints and it can restart from a checkpoint. The software cannot "self detect" crashes and retry. If you are over-clocking, then you cannot blame the software for occasional crashes. |
|
|
|
|
As to your first question, not really. There are checkpoints and it can restart from a checkpoint. The software cannot "self detect" crashes and retry. If you are over-clocking, then you cannot blame the software for occasional crashes.
LOL - I fully understand the perils of overclocking and have reduced them a bunch. Just wondered on the ability to continue regardless of errors like boinc does.
However, you are correct on the o/c and thanks for the reply.
Cheers Rick
____________
@AggieThePew
 |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
           
|
LOL - I fully understand the perils of overclocking and have reduced them a bunch. Just wondered on the ability to continue regardless of errors like boinc does.
Boinc doesn't recover from errors, it's the individual applications that do that.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
There's roughly two days of work at current pace. Don't let the port dry pls.
____________
676754^262144+1 is prime |
|
|
pschoeferVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 20 Sep 05
Posts: 664
ID: 845
Credit: 2,274,837,745
RAC: 795,782
             
|
|
There might be a major problem with our Wall-Sun-Sun Search. I did some tests using
wwww v1.3 on i7 980X @ 4 GHz running Win7 x64 and
wwwwcl64 v2.2.2 on NVIDIA GTX 570 in the same machine:
>wwww.exe -tWallSunSun -p1943809e9 -P1943810e9 -s1000 -v
wwww v1.3, a program to search for Wieferich and Wall-Sun-Sun primes.
Searching for WallSunSun primes between 1943809000000000 and 1943810000000000.
The largest prime in the sieve is 44088971 (using 2666438 primes) using
approximately 15015 KB of memory.
Searched to 1943809734386521 (73.44 done)
1943809740863047 is a special instance (+0 -219 p)
Searched to 1943810012103960 (100.00 done)
The search completed in 205.18 seconds (138445.59 tests per second)
Spent 6.39 seconds sieving and 198.69 seconds testing
Tested 28406266 values (2.84 pct) of the range
Primes tested 28406266. Checksum 0000000086dd3d3d. Time 205.180000
>wwwwcl64.exe -TWallSunSun -p1943809e9 -P1943810e9 -s1000
wwwwcl v2.2.2, a GPU program to search for Wieferich and WallSunSun primes
setting 4000
Sieve started: (cmdline) 1943809000000000 <= p < 1943810000000000
Sieve complete: 1943809000000001 <= p < 1943810000000000 28406266 primes tested
Clock time: 4.09 seconds at at 6945287 p/sec.
Processor time: 2.62 sec. (0.42 init + 2.20 sieve).
Seconds spent in CPU and GPU: 0.14 (cpu), 17.03 (gpu)
Percent of time spent in CPU vs. GPU: 0.82 (cpu), 99.18 (gpu)
CPU/GPU utilization: 0.64 (cores), 1.00 (devices)
Percent of GPU time waiting for GPU: 63.28
CPU version confirms near-WSS 1943809740863047 (0 -219 p) as found by Lumiukko on 2012-01-20, who most likely used a CPU for this as well (OpenCL version was not available back then). GPU version doesn't.
>wwww.exe -tWallSunSun -p20694402e9 -P20694403e9 -s1000 -v
wwww v1.3, a program to search for Wieferich and Wall-Sun-Sun primes.
Searching for WallSunSun primes between 20694402000000000 and 20694403000000000.
The largest prime in the sieve is 143855981 (using 8117717 primes) using
approximately 41632 KB of memory.
Searched to 20694403012122840 (100.00 done)
The search completed in 202.37 seconds (131511.59 tests per second)
Spent 8.43 seconds sieving and 193.65 seconds testing
Tested 26614000 values (2.66 pct) of the range
Primes tested 26614000. Checksum 00000000767ec139. Time 202.370000
>wwwwcl64.exe -TWallSunSun -p20694402e9 -P20694403e9 -s1000
wwwwcl v2.2.2, a GPU program to search for Wieferich and WallSunSun primes
setting 4000
Sieve started: (cmdline) 20694402000000000 <= p < 20694403000000000
20694402225421357 is a special instance (+0 -922 p)
Sieve complete: 20694402000000001 <= p < 20694403000000000 26614000 primes tested
Clock time: 4.70 seconds at at 5662545 p/sec.
Processor time: 4.24 sec. (1.25 init + 3.00 sieve).
Seconds spent in CPU and GPU: 0.90 (cpu), 17.64 (gpu)
Percent of time spent in CPU vs. GPU: 4.85 (cpu), 95.15 (gpu)
CPU/GPU utilization: 0.90 (cores), 1.00 (devices)
Percent of GPU time waiting for GPU: 55.06
In this case, the GPU version confirms 20694402225421357 (0 -922 p) found by Lumiukko on 2013-06-08, CPU version does not.
____________
  |
|
|
LumiukkoVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 7 Jul 08
Posts: 164
ID: 25183
Credit: 719,735,161
RAC: 107,980
|
There might be a major problem with our Wall-Sun-Sun Search. I did some tests using
wwww v1.3 on i7 980X @ 4 GHz running Win7 x64 and
wwwwcl64 v2.2.2 on NVIDIA GTX 570 in the same machine:
...
CPU version confirms near-WSS 1943809740863047 (0 -219 p) as found by Lumiukko on 2012-01-20, who most likely used a CPU for this as well (OpenCL version was not available back then). GPU version doesn't.
Yes, that one was found by CPU (Core i7 940) in a Linux-PC (Ubuntu).
In this case, the GPU version confirms 20694402225421357 (0 -922 p) found by Lumiukko on 2013-06-08, CPU version does not.
Yes, that one was found by GPU (GTX 480) in the same PC.
--
Lumiukko |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
CPU version confirms near-WSS 1943809740863047 (0 -219 p) as found by Lumiukko on 2012-01-20, who most likely used a CPU for this as well (OpenCL version was not available back then). GPU version doesn't.
Argh! I have little time to debug this, but I'll see what I can do. |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
|
Until I determine the cause of the problem, this project should be suspended. |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
Until I determine the cause of the problem, this project should be suspended.
Both WWWW projects or just WSS?
EDIT: Wieferich appears to be ok.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
|
And is there an easy way to stop the server from sending out new work, without taking it down completely (which prevents people from returning completed work)?
EDIT: I set CompletedTests=10 in WWWWRange for all unsent tasks. This prevents them from being sent out, and they can easily be changed back to 0 later. I couldn't find any explicit way to tell the server not to send out work.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
I can duplicate the discrepancies posted by pschoefer on linux, wwww 1.3, wwwwcl 2.2.3. My CPU checksums match his (wwwwcl does not display a checksum).
-- Gary |
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
|
I've found and fixed the problem. I've sent the fixed code to Michael. This bug only affects WallSunSun. Unfortunately all the work done with wwwwcl on WallSunSun has to be thrown away. Any near misses that are correct are purely accidental and others might be wrong.
I'm sorry for the inconvenience this will cause everyone. |
|
|
|
|
|
"Stuff" happens. Chin up! Lets just be happy the bug was found.
I really appreatiate all the hard work done by you volunteer developers and envy your skills!
____________
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
"Stuff" happens. Chin up! Lets just be happy the bug was found.
I really appreatiate all the hard work done by you volunteer developers and envy your skills!
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Bumps in the road like this are merely the cost of doing business. The good news is we know which program did which tests, so we don't have to retest everything.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
:( My two near ones might not be near. :(
:) Happily, y'all figured this one out quick!
More wwwwcl in my future after the various challenges end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
about how much work needs to be redone?
Does this bug affects all versions of wwwcl or just specific version? (from rogues answer i assume its all versions)
will the stats remain unaltered?
after i finish my gnf sieve range i might switch my gpu back to wwwcl.
Unfortunately no one can assure that programs run 100% without bugs so lets try to redo the work asap :-)
____________
|
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
|
A bit different question.
Is there a way to estimate near-hit changes? Roger?
We can compare it with results so far, perhaps in graph distribution or some table using ranges.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
about how much work needs to be redone?
About 87%. :(
As one would expect, a large majority of the work was done by the GPU version of the program.
Does this bug affects all versions of wwwcl or just specific version? (from rogues answer i assume its all versions)
I believe it's all versions of wwwwcl.
will the stats remain unaltered?
I suspect that the only stats that will be changed is the count of near-WSS's discovered. I don't see any reason to change the amount of tasks done, credit, etc. The work was still done.
after i finish my gnf sieve range i might switch my gpu back to wwwcl.
No need to do so immediately. For one thing, the WSS port will remain closed until we have new software built and tested and available to download. I don't want to rush back into production until we're sure that everything is working correctly. A delay of a couple of days is ok at this point if it insures we have everything just right.
Unfortunately no one can assure that programs run 100% without bugs so lets try to redo the work asap :-)
Exactly. I look at it as an opportunity to discover primes (or near primes) we missed the first time through.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11
Posts: 1137
ID: 120786
Credit: 267,933,772
RAC: 7,827
|
|
WSS near hits over the PRPNet tested range to date:
x-axis (Value tested) is logarithmic, y-axis is the A value of the near-find.
Looks reasonably well spaced. |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
Looks reasonably well spaced.
Yes, it does.
What I ment was to compare theoretic expactions (I can't find them) with returned results (those are available).
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
|
Once you turn the port/project back on I will put my 570 on it.
The sad part, I found a near miss and now it's missed LOL.
As said before, "stuff happens". But, around here when it does, it gets fixed :)
Edit: based on the stat page it looks like the port is back up - is that correct?
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
pschoeferVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 20 Sep 05
Posts: 664
ID: 845
Credit: 2,274,837,745
RAC: 795,782
|
|
So it was some kind of good luck that I didn't "find" anything during the last 3 weeks. The only reason I did those tests yesterday was to find out if I just had been unlucky (nobody else had more than 50000 tests without a near WSS) or if it's not working correctly on my hardware.
What I ment was to compare theoretic expactions (I can't find them) with returned results (those are available).
According to McIntosh and Roettger, we can expect ln(ln(y))-ln(ln(x)) near WSS primes between x and y for a fixed A value.
Thus, the expected number of near WSS primes with |A|<=1000 (2001 possible values) for 9.7e14 to 207e14 is
2001*[ln(ln(207e14))-ln(ln(9.7e14))]=170.04
We had 176 hits in that range, so, from that point of view, there was no indication that there's something wrong.
OTOH, this means that we can expect to find one new near WSS for every false positive we had. :)
____________
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
based on the stat page it looks like the port is back up - is that correct?
The port is up, so people can return work that's in progress, but no new work is being sent out.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
based on the stat page it looks like the port is back up - is that correct?
The port is up, so people can return work that's in progress, but no new work is being sent out.
thanks for the clarification :) |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
According to McIntosh and Roettger, we can expect ln(ln(y))-ln(ln(x)) near WSS primes between x and y for a fixed A value.
Thus, the expected number of near WSS primes with |A|<=1000 (2001 possible values) for 9.7e14 to 207e14 is
2001*[ln(ln(207e14))-ln(ln(9.7e14))]=170.04
We had 176 hits in that range, so, from that point of view, there was no indication that there's something wrong.
OTOH, this means that we can expect to find one new near WSS for every false positive we had. :)
Thanks, this is what I was looking for.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
Once you turn the port/project back on I will put my 570 on it.
The sad part, I found a near miss and now it's missed LOL.
As said before, "stuff happens". But, around here when it does, it gets fixed :)
Plus another 1. I want to compete in the challenges but after they're over, I'll get crunching. |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11
Posts: 1137
ID: 120786
Credit: 267,933,772
RAC: 7,827
|
According to McIntosh and Roettger, we can expect ln(ln(y))-ln(ln(x)) near WSS primes between x and y for a fixed A value.
This looks to be the for the number of Wieferich primes and near finds. Is corroborated by Dorais and Klyve. Does it follow that this is the number of expected Wall-Sun-Sun primes and near finds as well?
I was also interested to read that the Wieferich search can be extended to other bases. Does anyone know the status of those searches? Can WSS be extended to other bases?
Ref: http://oeis.org/A001220 |
|
|
pschoeferVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 20 Sep 05
Posts: 664
ID: 845
Credit: 2,274,837,745
RAC: 795,782
|
According to McIntosh and Roettger, we can expect ln(ln(y))-ln(ln(x)) near WSS primes between x and y for a fixed A value.
This looks to be the for the number of Wieferich primes and near finds. Is corroborated by Dorais and Klyve. Does it follow that this is the number of expected Wall-Sun-Sun primes and near finds as well?
For both Wieferich and Wall-Sun-Sun (=Fibonacci-Wieferich) and any prime p, integer A can take p different values and in both cases we assume a "probability" of 1/p for a fixed A. So it's not surprising that we end up with the same expectations.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any more news and/or updates on when WSS might be back up?
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
Any more news and/or updates on when WSS might be back up?
Yes, actually. There's one test of the server I need to make, then we should be able to open it up again.
I'm not sure what Iain's plan is for releasing the new wwwwcl app. You'll need that to continue crunching with a GPU. Any numbers crunched on the old wwwwcl will be discarded once the new server software is running.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
The new PRPNet packages will be released later on today! Will update the sticky post in this forum when they are ready.
Cheers
- Iain
____________
Twitter: IainBethune
Proud member of team "Aggie The Pew". Go Aggie!
3073428256125*2^1290000-1 is Prime! |
|
|
|
|
|
The new prpclient packages containing wwwwcl 2.2.5 are now available. Details and download links are in this thread. If there are any problems with it please let me know!
- Iain
____________
Twitter: IainBethune
Proud member of team "Aggie The Pew". Go Aggie!
3073428256125*2^1290000-1 is Prime! |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks much for the updated info!
Cheers
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
|
The WSS port is turned back on. Please don't use the old opencl client; any results from the old client will be discarded and you won't get credit for the work.
This should be considered a mandatory upgrade.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
I have so far 8 emails like the one below. Not sure what to make of it. Have these been double checked and found to be near?
Wall-Sun-Sun special instance lld (0 +908798113) p was found by PRPNet!
sm5ymt@
11:39 AM
This a near Wall-Sun-Sun Prime. Although it is not a Wall-Sun-Sun Prime, it will be recorded as a special
instance. It also helps us to verify that the search algorithm is corect and increases the hope that that a
new Wall-Sun-Sun Prime will be found someday. It was found on machine asus-i7-950, instance
asus-i7-950 using the program wwwwcl.
____________
|
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
I have so far 8 emails like the one below. Not sure what to make of it. Have these been double checked and found to be near?
Wall-Sun-Sun special instance lld (0 +908798113) p was found by PRPNet!
sm5ymt@
11:39 AM
This a near Wall-Sun-Sun Prime. Although it is not a Wall-Sun-Sun Prime, it will be recorded as a special
instance. It also helps us to verify that the search algorithm is corect and increases the hope that that a
new Wall-Sun-Sun Prime will be found someday. It was found on machine asus-i7-950, instance
asus-i7-950 using the program wwwwcl.
We're not sure what to make of them, either.
I happened to fix a typo in the email system of the prpnet server while I was putting in the changes to support the wwwwcl fix, so perhaps the email may have never worked for WWWW. After I fixed it, the server may have sent out a bunch of emails for all the near-finds it ever found on WSS. And two thirds of those would probably be false. :(
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
pschoeferVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 20 Sep 05
Posts: 664
ID: 845
Credit: 2,274,837,745
RAC: 795,782
|
|
I can confirm that wwwwcl v2.2.5 produces the same results as the CPU version for the test ranges I did last week. :)
Unfortunately, it crashes on my ATI cards, but that's not a new problem.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
That must be it since I've never seen one of these emails from any of the 10 I've found in the past.
But I've never seen an email from the other wwww project either and I've found 10 over there too. hmm |
|
|
|
|
|
I just downloaded and unzipped the 5.2.4 for windows (only saw 1 zip file) and now it's complaining about the 32 vs 64 bit. My system is a 32 bit so is there a different zip file for the 32 bit windows? |
|
|
|
|
|
I think you just rem out the x64 executables in the prpclient.ini file. I think.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Rick,
If I'm correct are you talking about the prpclient.exe itself? I just checked and I included a 64-bit exe only by mistake. I will get a 32-bit version and let you know when the package is available. On the plus side, you don't need the new client to run WSS again, just the new wwwwcl 2.2.5
Cheers
- Iain
I just downloaded and unzipped the 5.2.4 for windows (only saw 1 zip file) and now it's complaining about the 32 vs 64 bit. My system is a 32 bit so is there a different zip file for the 32 bit windows?
____________
Twitter: IainBethune
Proud member of team "Aggie The Pew". Go Aggie!
3073428256125*2^1290000-1 is Prime! |
|
|
|
|
Hi Rick,
If I'm correct are you talking about the prpclient.exe itself? I just checked and I included a 64-bit exe only by mistake. I will get a 32-bit version and let you know when the package is available. On the plus side, you don't need the new client to run WSS again, just the new wwwwcl 2.2.5
Cheers
- Iain
Hi Iain, the prpclient.exe itself. Thanks for checking. I'd gone ahead and replaced all the files from the program folder just to have the latest updates. I will copy an older prpclient.exe over for now.
Cheers mate!
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iain, I copied over an older prpclient.exe and started the run. I noticed the current download package has wwwwcl.exe and wwwwcl64.exe but no wwwwcl32.exe
I tried the wwwwcl.exe and it tells me I have a missing .dll
Not sure what I did wrong.
Cheers |
|
|
|
|
Iain, I copied over an older prpclient.exe and started the run. I noticed the current download package has wwwwcl.exe and wwwwcl64.exe but no wwwwcl32.exe
I tried the wwwwcl.exe and it tells me I have a missing .dll
Not sure what I did wrong.
Cheers
Did you check that Visual Studio 2010 and 2012 redistributable are installed? If you don't have these, the program will not run.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you check that Visual Studio 2010 and 2012 redistributable are installed? If you don't have these, the program will not run.
I'd installed them before to run the wss. Do I need to reinstall?
Rick |
|
|
|
|
Did you check that Visual Studio 2010 and 2012 redistributable are installed? If you don't have these, the program will not run.
I'd installed them before to run the wss. Do I need to reinstall?
Rick
There could also be a problem with none static linked app. |
|
|
|
|
|
How have I been using 5.2.4 for... I don't know, a few weeks now?I had it for the recent PRPNet challenge. Was it available elsewhere? I've searched in the "Call for...." thread for a link to wwwwcl v. 2.2.5 just so I can make sure I've got that.
Edit: My prpclient.exe was last modified on the 21st April, and wwwcl64.exe on the 12th March. I haven't renamed any version numbers. |
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, it crashes on my ATI cards, but that's not a new problem.
Crashes on mine too (7970).
Does the developer(s) need a pc to remote into to debug this? I would be happy to be a guinea rat. You could load what ever and degug to your hearts content!
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Never mind, I downloaded something called 2.2.4 from somewhere, but have now updated my files from the official link (which is where I thought I got them before). Anyway, I didn't see in the wwww thread that wwwcl v. 2.2.5 had been released, either (but I've updated all of the files). |
|
|
|
|
|
Any news on the when the 32 bit versions of the programs might be available or did I miss that notice?
Cheers |
|
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for the 32 bit prpclient build to arrive, sorry!
The wwwwcl.exe in the 5.2.4 package should be 32-bit - is it working for you, or are you still missing a DLL? Can you try running wwwwcl.exe from the 5.2.2 package - if this works then I can check if anything changed in the build process between the two.
Thanks
- Iain
Any news on the when the 32 bit versions of the programs might be available or did I miss that notice?
Cheers
____________
Twitter: IainBethune
Proud member of team "Aggie The Pew". Go Aggie!
3073428256125*2^1290000-1 is Prime! |
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for the 32 bit prpclient build to arrive, sorry!
The wwwwcl.exe in the 5.2.4 package should be 32-bit - is it working for you, or are you still missing a DLL? Can you try running wwwwcl.exe from the 5.2.2 package - if this works then I can check if anything changed in the build process between the two.
Thanks
- Iain
Any news on the when the 32 bit versions of the programs might be available or did I miss that notice?
Cheers
I will try that. However, somewhere I had a link that had 2 different downloads. 1 for 32 and 1 for 64. So I was running the 32 download and it had no wwwwcl.exe file. Just one called wwwwcl32.exe.
Edit: ok - copied over the wwwwcl.exe from the 5.2.2 build and it looks to be running
wwwwcl.exe v2.2.2, a GPU program ....
and then the test started.
put the wwwwcl.exe from the 5.2.4 build back and it gave me the missing MSVCP100.dll message and told me to reinstall the app. |
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for the 32 bit prpclient build to arrive, sorry!
Do you need the 32bit version of prpnet client? I have one compiled some times ago. See here |
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for the 32 bit prpclient build to arrive, sorry!
Do you need the 32bit version of prpnet client? I have one compiled some times ago. See here
I'm sure I will but I was able to copy over an older version and it's running "somewhat" - I was just going to wait until Iain had the new one compiled. Thanks very much however for the link.
I just need a working 32 bit wwwwcl program now :)
also, do i need to reinstall the windows visual studio thing to get the current wwwwcl.exe to work?
Cheers Rick |
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for the 32 bit prpclient build to arrive, sorry!
Do you need the 32bit version of prpnet client? I have one compiled some times ago. See here
I'm sure I will but I was able to copy over an older version and it's running "somewhat" - I was just going to wait until Iain had the new one compiled. Thanks very much however for the link.
I just need a working 32 bit wwwwcl program now :)
also, do i need to reinstall the windows visual studio thing to get the current wwwwcl.exe to work?
Cheers Rick
Yeah, I have asked to get the new source code but not getting yet. What .dll was missing? Which version do you have installed, Visual C++ Redistributable 2010 or 2012? |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I have asked to get the new source code but not getting yet. What .dll was missing? Which version do you have installed, Visual C++ Redistributable 2010 or 2012?
MSVCP100.dll is the missing .dll
not sure what you mean on the Visual C++ - I installed the one from a link I got on our forum - I'm thinking I remember it was 2010 |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I have asked to get the new source code but not getting yet. What .dll was missing? Which version do you have installed, Visual C++ Redistributable 2010 or 2012?
MSVCP100.dll is the missing .dll
not sure what you mean on the Visual C++ - I installed the one from a link I got on our forum - I'm thinking I remember it was 2010
Here's the link to download VC++ Redistributable Packages:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2019667
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I have asked to get the new source code but not getting yet. What .dll was missing? Which version do you have installed, Visual C++ Redistributable 2010 or 2012?
MSVCP100.dll is the missing .dll
not sure what you mean on the Visual C++ - I installed the one from a link I got on our forum - I'm thinking I remember it was 2010
If the version is compiled with visual studio 2012 you need Visual C++ Redistributable 2012. |
|
|
|
|
|
thanks for the suggestions and help but no luck so far. I did have C++ 2012 installed but did a repair anyway to see if that helped but no luck still missing the .dll so now I'm just waiting on a 32 bit wwwwcl.exe program.
Cheers |
|
|
|
|
thanks for the suggestions and help but no luck so far. I did have C++ 2012 installed but did a repair anyway to see if that helped but no luck still missing the .dll so now I'm just waiting on a 32 bit wwwwcl.exe program.
Cheers
Do you have C++ 2010 installed too and perhaps MS Framework 4? |
|
|
|
|
Do you have C++ 2010 installed too and perhaps MS Framework 4?
No I don't think I have C++2010 installed. I'd only installed one instance back a few weeks ago to run WSS. So today when I downloaded and "repaired" 2012 I figure I have just the 2012. I'm not sure I have MS Framework.
I did just find I had C++ 2008 which I just removed. I have .net framework 3.5
I think it's something to do with the wwwwcl.exe program since v2.2.2 does work but the version in the 5.2.4 download does not. |
|
|
|
|
|
You can load VC++ Redistributables 2005, 2008, 2010, and 2012 all on the same box. It won't hurt anything.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
I will try that. However, somewhere I had a link that had 2 different downloads. 1 for 32 and 1 for 64. So I was running the 32 download and it had no wwwwcl.exe file. Just one called wwwwcl32.exe.
Hi Rick,
At the last release I merged the 32 and 64 bit packages. The prpclient.exe should be a 32-bit one (currently it's not, my mistake!), and there should be 32 and 64 bit versions of the various helper apps.
Can you try Reb's build of the prpclient and let me know if it works for you? If so I'll put it in the official package and repost it.
Files are here: Prpclient 5.2.4 32 bit and wwwwcl 2.2.5 32 bit
Cheers
- Iain
____________
Twitter: IainBethune
Proud member of team "Aggie The Pew". Go Aggie!
3073428256125*2^1290000-1 is Prime! |
|
|
|
|
|
Success! I'm now able to run 32 bits with valid units returned. I downloaded the builds by Rebirther for the prpclient.exe and the wwwwcl32.exe, cranked up prpclient and it seems to be running fine. I will know 100% sure once the stats refresh to see if I'm on the board.
thank you Rebirther for the new compiled versions and Iain for your support
Cheers, Rick
____________
@AggieThePew
|
|
|
|
|
|
The updated windows package containing these executables is now uploaded.
Thanks for testing!
- Iain
____________
Twitter: IainBethune
Proud member of team "Aggie The Pew". Go Aggie!
3073428256125*2^1290000-1 is Prime! |
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, it crashes on my ATI cards, but that's not a new problem.
Crashes on mine too (7970).
Does the developer(s) need a pc to remote into to debug this? I would be happy to be a guinea rat. You could load what ever and degug to your hearts content!
Is there any work going on to fix this issue?
I would love to use my 7970 on this project. ;)
____________
|
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
Is there any work going on to fix this issue?
I would love to use my 7970 on this project. ;)
I believe it's still AMD who should fix the problem. Something got broken during Catalyst drivers upgrades and (only) Catalyst 12.8 works.
See Call for wwwwcl beta testers (OpenCL)
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11
Posts: 1137
ID: 120786
Credit: 267,933,772
RAC: 7,827
|
|
For AMD wwwwcl Wieferich works with Catalyst 12.8, but I've never been able to get Wall-Sun-Sun to work. I played with the code a bit but the problem appears to be in the OpenCL section. Unless rogue wants to create some short test programs, or someone else is willing to learn OpenCL, I can't see us making progress. wwwwcl Wieferich works so the basic framework is OK.
As to why Catalyst 12.8 works but not later ones, I am unwilling to find out, as it seems a one way "upgrade". I'll have to bite the bullet at some point.
____________
|
|
|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1219
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
|
For AMD wwwwcl Wieferich works with Catalyst 12.8, but I've never been able to get Wall-Sun-Sun to work. I played with the code a bit but the problem appears to be in the OpenCL section. Unless rogue wants to create some short test programs, or someone else is willing to learn OpenCL, I can't see us making progress. wwwwcl Wieferich works so the basic framework is OK.
As to why Catalyst 12.8 works but not later ones, I am unwilling to find out, as it seems a one way "upgrade". I'll have to bite the bullet at some point.
The problem appears to be in the driver. I've reached out to AMD and the closed every support ticket I've opened telling me that I didn't provide them the information I needed without ever telling me what they needed from me. I submit a ticket. It gets assigned to an engineer. Through their ticket system I'm told to supply other information without telling me what they need. I respond asking what they need. They close the ticket a few days later telling me that I didn't respond to them. Either their ISP is blocking e-mails from me or their automated support system is crap. I think that the problem they have with me is that I want free support for something they supply freely. I would think that they would care that their drivers work. Apparently I am wrong.
I'm quite okay if they want to tell me that my code is the problem, but I have yet to get a satisfactory answer as to why it works almost everywhere else. The problem is that their driver crashes during the compile phase for some GPUs. Either the OpenCL compile phase should fail and provide a meaningful message when the application starts or it my code should produce bad output. In those two cases it would imply a problem with my software. Since their driver crashes, it is a problem with the driver.
If someone wants to work with AMD to solve the problem, go for it. |
|
|
rroonnaallddVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 3 Jul 09
Posts: 1213
ID: 42893
Credit: 34,634,263
RAC: 0
                
|
If someone wants to work with AMD to solve the problem, go for it.
If AMD had not fired most of their software developers...
Do you have contact with "gipsel"? He optimized the Milkyway code and maybe he can help.
____________
Best wishes. Knowledge is power. by jjwhalen
 |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11
Posts: 1137
ID: 120786
Credit: 267,933,772
RAC: 7,827
|
If someone wants to work with AMD to solve the problem, go for it.
I totally appreciate your efforts rogue. AMD is known for poor driver support. Just means they don't sell as many GPUs, their loss.
Maybe we should do a mass email to them until they give support? |
|
|
|
|
|
A couple of weeks ago, 288larson has found 3035882499810007 (0 -2 p).
Today, Lumiukko has found 6336823451747417 (0 -1 p).
Thats the nearest a near WSS can get.
It would be great if Primegrid could find the first known WSS prime this year.
____________
676754^262144+1 is prime |
|
|
|
|
A couple of weeks ago, 288larson has found 3035882499810007 (0 -2 p).
Today, Lumiukko has found 6336823451747417 (0 -1 p).
Thats the nearest a near WSS can get.
It would be great if Primegrid could find the first known WSS prime this year.
That is cool! It's just a matter of time before we find one :) .
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Today, Lumiukko has found 6336823451747417 (0 -1 p).
Thats the nearest a near WSS can get.
It would be great if Primegrid could find the first known WSS prime this year.
Congratulations. Nice find indeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
How far are we with recrunching the WSS work done with the problematic versions of wwwwcl? |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
How far are we with recrunching the WSS work done with the problematic versions of wwwwcl?
Leading edge is 763702e10, trailing edge is ~3 days old and is 695075e10.
This also gives some idea about progress in ~3 days.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
How far are we with recrunching the WSS work done with the problematic versions of wwwwcl?
Leading edge is 763702e10, trailing edge is ~3 days old and is 695075e10.
This also gives some idea about progress in ~3 days.
Okay. Is it known what is the largest WU/range in the database that had been crunched with the problematic wwwwcl versions? If I understand things correctly, when the trailing edge passes that number, then everything would have been rechecked. |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
Okay. Is it known what is the largest WU/range in the database that had been crunched with the problematic wwwwcl versions? If I understand things correctly, when the trailing edge passes that number, then everything would have been rechecked.
If I have numbers correctly, leading edge was 2138636e10 with problematic wwwwcl version so we have ~3x to go.
And yes, once trailing edge is beyond this number, everything will have been rechecked.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
How far are we with recrunching the WSS work done with the problematic versions of wwwwcl?
There are 1,273,771 ranges remaining to be retested, and we've completed 515,796 ranges. We're 28.8% done, and it's just under a month since WSS was restarted.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
How far are we with recrunching the WSS work done with the problematic versions of wwwwcl?
There are 1,273,771 ranges remaining to be retested, and we've completed 515,796 ranges. We're 28.8% done, and it's just under a month since WSS was restarted.
Thanks Michael. That's exactly the information I was looking for. |
|
|
|
|
<snip> If I understand things correctly, when the trailing edge passes that number, then everything would have been rechecked.
<snip> And yes, once trailing edge is beyond this number, everything will have been rechecked.
Thanks for the confirmation. I appreciate it. |
|
|
|
|
|
I see the leading edge topped 10^16 a few hours ago I think. Nice!
--Gary |
|
|
|
|
|
Another close one for 288larsson! 15964140260512343 (0 -2 p)
____________
|
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
|
Checking on my WSS client, I found it started doing some older ranges like 16662980000000000, while leading edge is 17235020000000000.
I thought myself: ok, someone's else WUs expired and client picked them up.
Client-server communication works as it shold:
[2013-08-28 09:08:42 SE(e] Total Time:160:06:33 Total Work Units: 15924 Special Results Found: 1
[2013-08-28 09:08:42 SE(e] WALLSUNSUN: Returning work to server prpnet.primegrid.com at port 13001
[2013-08-28 09:08:42 SE(e] WALLSUNSUN: INFO: Test for range 16662800000000000:16662810000000000 was accepted
...
[2013-08-28 09:08:47 SE(e] WALLSUNSUN: INFO: All 25 test results were accepted
Well, perhaps not the case since HUGE number of WUs are pending.
http://u-g-f.de/PRPNet/pending_stats.php?proj=WSS
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
Sysadm@NbgVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 5 Feb 08
Posts: 1195
ID: 18646
Credit: 520,742,024
RAC: 173,768
            
|
Well, perhaps not the case since HUGE number of WUs are pending.
http://u-g-f.de/PRPNet/pending_stats.php?proj=WSS
at official site, too
http://prpnet.primegrid.com:13001/pending_work.html
____________
Sysadm@Nbg
my current lucky number: 113856050^65536 + 1
PSA-PRPNet-Stats-URL: http://u-g-f.de/PRPNet/
 |
|
|
288larssonVolunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 17 Apr 10
Posts: 131
ID: 58815
Credit: 4,008,084,107
RAC: 2,635,179
             
|
Checking on my WSS client, I found it started doing some older ranges like 16662980000000000, while leading edge is 17235020000000000.
I thought myself: ok, someone's else WUs expired and client picked them up.
Client-server communication works as it shold:
[2013-08-28 09:08:42 SE(e] Total Time:160:06:33 Total Work Units: 15924 Special Results Found: 1
[2013-08-28 09:08:42 SE(e] WALLSUNSUN: Returning work to server prpnet.primegrid.com at port 13001
[2013-08-28 09:08:42 SE(e] WALLSUNSUN: INFO: Test for range 16662800000000000:16662810000000000 was accepted
...
[2013-08-28 09:08:47 SE(e] WALLSUNSUN: INFO: All 25 test results were accepted
Well, perhaps not the case since HUGE number of WUs are pending.
http://u-g-f.de/PRPNet/pending_stats.php?proj=WSS
Hi Reduced to 20 WUs at a time
http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=5157 |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
|
WSS latest WUs - 2000079e10
We need to get up to 2138636e10 in order to complete all results that need to be crunched again.
Good progress.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
|
We are at 2140227e10 and again in uncharted territory, well done.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
...the expected number of near WSS primes with |A|<=1000 (2001 possible values) for 9.7e14 to 207e14 is
2001*[ln(ln(207e14))-ln(ln(9.7e14))]=170.04
We had 176 hits in that range, so, from that point of view, there was no indication that there's something wrong.
OTOH, this means that we can expect to find one new near WSS for every false positive we had. :)
So did the number of "true" near-finds match the number of "false" near-finds in the rechecked range?
____________
Proud member of Team Aggie the Pew
"Wir müssen wissen. Wir werden wissen."
"We must know, we shall know."
- David Hilbert, 1930 |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
...the expected number of near WSS primes with |A|<=1000 (2001 possible values) for 9.7e14 to 207e14 is
2001*[ln(ln(207e14))-ln(ln(9.7e14))]=170.04
We had 176 hits in that range, so, from that point of view, there was no indication that there's something wrong.
OTOH, this means that we can expect to find one new near WSS for every false positive we had. :)
So did the number of "true" near-finds match the number of "false" near-finds in the rechecked range?
I'm not sure if there's an easy way to find out, but I'm almost certain the answer is absolutely not. I'm pretty sure we tested at least one of the questionable near finds and it was false.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
...the expected number of near WSS primes with |A|<=1000 (2001 possible values) for 9.7e14 to 207e14 is
2001*[ln(ln(207e14))-ln(ln(9.7e14))]=170.04
We had 176 hits in that range, so, from that point of view, there was no indication that there's something wrong.
OTOH, this means that we can expect to find one new near WSS for every false positive we had. :)
So did the number of "true" near-finds match the number of "false" near-finds in the rechecked range?
I'm not sure if there's an easy way to find out, but I'm almost certain the answer is absolutely not. I'm pretty sure we tested at least one of the questionable near finds and it was false.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear with the question. I meant only "Did we get close to 176 new near-finds in the recheck range, which would be about the number of false positives we got the first time?"
I thought it was very interesting that the rate of false positives actually matched the expected distribution for the range, which made it more difficult to discern that something was actually amiss originally.
____________
Proud member of Team Aggie the Pew
"Wir müssen wissen. Wir werden wissen."
"We must know, we shall know."
- David Hilbert, 1930 |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
...the expected number of near WSS primes with |A|<=1000 (2001 possible values) for 9.7e14 to 207e14 is
2001*[ln(ln(207e14))-ln(ln(9.7e14))]=170.04
We had 176 hits in that range, so, from that point of view, there was no indication that there's something wrong.
OTOH, this means that we can expect to find one new near WSS for every false positive we had. :)
So did the number of "true" near-finds match the number of "false" near-finds in the rechecked range?
I'm not sure if there's an easy way to find out, but I'm almost certain the answer is absolutely not. I'm pretty sure we tested at least one of the questionable near finds and it was false.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear with the question. I meant only "Did we get close to 176 new near-finds in the recheck range, which would be about the number of false positives we got the first time?"
I thought it was very interesting that the rate of false positives actually matched the expected distribution for the range, which made it more difficult to discern that something was actually amiss originally.
As of right now, there are 169 finds total, and 102 of those were found after the port was reopened.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
|
Anothe one, albeit not the golden one...yet.
Wall-Sun-Sun special instance 26108665075382551 (0 +291) p was found by PRPNet!
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm trying to run WSS on my old mac pro 1.1 running 10.7.5 with a nvidia 470 I just threw in.
I get this error
./prpclient
[2014-04-05 18:41:58 CDT] PRPNet Client application v5.2.8 started
[2014-04-05 18:41:58 CDT] User name brinktastee at email address is brink@brainlaser.com
[2014-04-05 18:41:58 CDT] WALLSUNSUN: Getting work from server prpnet.primegrid.com at port 13001
[2014-04-05 18:41:59 CDT] WALLSUNSUN: PRPNet server is version 5.2.8
Hi! Welcome to PrimeGrid's Wall-Sun-Sun Prime Search.
wwwwcl v2.2.5, a GPU program to search for Wieferich and WallSunSun primes
Sieve started: (cmdline) 28713310000000000 <= p < 28713320000000000
Fatal Error: Not prime: p = 28713310000000049 c10 = 580 c11 = 15853. The code must have a bug.
[2014-04-05 18:42:08 CDT] : Could not find completion line in log file [wwww.log]. Assuming user stopped with ^C
[2014-04-05 18:42:08 CDT] Total Time: 0:00:11 Total Work Units: 0 Special Results Found: 0
[2014-04-05 18:42:08 CDT] Client shutdown complete
It thinks for a few seconds and pukes all over itself.
Is anyone running WSS on a mac with an nvidia card?
Has anyone seen this error before?
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I got a similar error and deleted the log file and it worked. If a unit errors the next run will not work until I get rid of the log file. Not sure this will help you but thought it might be worth a try. |
|
|
|
|
|
I gave that a try this morning but got same result as before.
____________
|
|
|
Dave
Send message
Joined: 13 Feb 12
Posts: 2861
ID: 130544
Credit: 1,015,178,712
RAC: 1,066,509
 
|
|
I just got this as well
This is no good if you're trying to maintain consistent work for a challenge
[2014-04-06 20:24:39 GDT] : Could not find completion line in log file [wwww.log]. Assuming user stopped with ^C
[2014-04-06 20:24:39 GDT] Total Time: 2:02:48 Total Work Units: 35 Special Results Found: 0
[2014-04-06 20:24:39 GDT] WALLSUNSUN: Returning work to server prpnet.primegrid.com at port 13001
[2014-04-06 20:24:40 GDT] WALLSUNSUN: INFO: Test for range 28835120000000000:28835130000000000 was accepted
[2014-04-06 20:24:40 GDT] WALLSUNSUN: INFO: Test for range 28835130000000000:28835140000000000 was abandoned
[2014-04-06 20:24:40 GDT] WALLSUNSUN: INFO: All 2 test results were accepted
[2014-04-06 20:24:40 GDT] Client shutdown complete
Wait I did change to 50% CPU on BOINC so I wonder if there's a link there(still doing Cullens).
If it does it again I'll switch back to 25% CPU.
Edit: I switched back to 25% anyway as the GPU usage was higher. |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have anything else like boinc running.
Is the version on the ftp site, where you download the prpclient zip file, the latest wwwwcl executable? Is there a beta or something floating around I could try on my mac?
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a curious guy. The limit of the Wall-Sun-Sun application appears to be 2^62. This means that there is at 20:31 CET (18:31 GMT) about 458,306,102 ranges remaining (propably a little less). So now to those with appropriate knowledge, exactly how much work is 458,306,102 ranges for the following 4 conditions:
1. Fastest GPU
2. Slowest GPU
3. Fastest CPU
4. Slowest CPU
Can anyone come up with a more or less adequate calculation? :) |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
I'm a curious guy. The limit of the Wall-Sun-Sun application appears to be 2^62. This means that there is at 20:31 CET (18:31 GMT) about 458,306,102 ranges remaining (propably a little less). So now to those with appropriate knowledge, exactly how much work is 458,306,102 ranges for the following 4 conditions:
1. Fastest GPU
2. Slowest GPU
3. Fastest CPU
4. Slowest CPU
Can anyone come up with a more or less adequate calculation? :)
I can't answer those particular 4 questions, but assuming that the time per task doesn't change as P goes up (it might or might not), that would take my slightly overclocked GTX 580 580.91 years to complete all those tasks.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, it was a sufficient answer :) |
|
|
|
|
|
As i had a near miss result today, i was wondering whats the definition of a near miss?
I couldn't find any explanation in the forum with the search function |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
As i had a near miss result today, i was wondering whats the definition of a near miss?
I couldn't find any explanation in the forum with the search function
Try Welcome to the Wall-Sun-Sun Prime Search in PSA PRPNet Projects thread
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
Try Welcome to the Wall-Sun-Sun Prime Search in PSA PRPNet Projects thread
Thank you and shame on me i coudn't use the most obvious source |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1900
ID: 352
Credit: 3,332,924,884
RAC: 1,427,842
|
|
Progress made: 40e15 as of 2014-04-24
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*1 + 8*3 + 9*11 + 10*1 + 11*1 + 12*3 = 186 |
|
|
|
|
|
WSS prime found?!
The stats page http://u-g-f.de/PRPNet/ shows, that zunewantan has found a prime (not a near find)! I hope it's true. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wow that would be wonderful if true. |
|
|
Michael GoetzVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10
Posts: 13570
ID: 53948
Credit: 249,585,592
RAC: 130,832
|
|
Sorry, folks, it's a computation error. There's no prime.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Sysadm@NbgVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 5 Feb 08
Posts: 1195
ID: 18646
Credit: 520,742,024
RAC: 173,768
|
WSS prime found?!
The stats page http://u-g-f.de/PRPNet/ shows, that zunewantan has found a prime (not a near find)! I hope it's true.
its not only me ;-)
you may have a look at the bottom of this page
while it is not prime, may you notice me, if you do any manual correction serverside, so I can fix the stats-database on my side after that too?
#1: it is hidden so I deleted the row at my "finds" table
____________
Sysadm@Nbg
my current lucky number: 113856050^65536 + 1
PSA-PRPNet-Stats-URL: http://u-g-f.de/PRPNet/
|
|
|
|
|
