20150405, 07:12  #56 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
11·71 Posts 
Thanks for the encouragement, much appreciated! I have each of the 24 cores that run do batches of 1000, so actually i'm already busy testing into the 4M range a tad. Up to 4.22M now. Within a few weeks that'll be 4.5M.
Yet will take 6+ months for the batches there to finish. If i keep 24 cores running then by end summer 2015 majority of the cores should be far over 4.5M with up to 4.5M nearly covered entirely. If there is a prime within a few weeks, it's 50% odds it's > 4M. After that just 1 core out of 24 still searches < 4M. About 3 months from now the last core should have finished < 4M range. 
20150405, 07:21  #57 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
11×71 Posts 
4.5M however if i divide it by the last prime found n=3140225
Then 4.5 / 3.14 = (roughly) 1.43x Knowing it used to produce on average each factor 1.2 a prime, and not seldom 2 hide nearby, i hope that it still keeps going at 1.2x by then :) Do not forget however how lucky i was when i started the formula, finding 3 primes and all 3 were at the start of a range of 1000 exponents that each core processes :) 
20150519, 20:19  #58 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
11575_{8} Posts 
Vincent,
Are you running the ranges manually or with prpnet/llrnet? Carlos 
20150519, 20:36  #59 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
11×71 Posts 
Hello, i have no option but to run everything manual.
Machines that are networked here are getting hacked so terrible and i need to do the security on my own of them. So the only thing that has even remotely a chance of not crashing 20 times a day is by using airgapped machines. Also this linux machine which is on the internet crashes regular. Fighting such systematic attacks that i get over the internet against my computers as i have IP number the same for 15 years now, is total impossible. It takes me a lot of extra time  but that's how it is. I have written several tools, recently one to split up ranges to many cores. If i start then the cores at the same time with a script they roughly also finish at same time finishing range. That's very useful :) So each 8 core Xeon here then is easier to maintain. Before that i just used big batches that run for very long time and keep on back of an envelope an administration which core to regular check for being idle first :) So with a few tools i split up the ranges into small files that get get started manual. I'm searching in the 4.2 million now yet it'll take months for the slowest core to finish 4M. There is very little to check up to 4M though and i'm taking into account it's possible next 2 primes are around 4.5M. Will take some time until i'm there :) 
20150519, 20:40  #60 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
3·1,663 Posts 
So what's the gap to complete up to 4M? Can I be of assistance after I finish my current RPS Second Megabit Drive ranges? Please let me know.
Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 20150519 at 20:43 
20150519, 21:03  #61 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
1415_{8} Posts 
Feel welcome, i have about 1224 cores that crunch at it (most of time 24 real cores).
Statistically spoken I'm closing in on 2 megaprimes so you could be very lucky even if you just crunch a handful of numbers :) Please contact me in message or skype: diepchess 69 is very thick formula, about 55k each million to check. 
20150519, 21:07  #62  
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
3×1,663 Posts 
Quote:


20180415, 21:03  #63 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
11·71 Posts 
We're searching with 2 persons now at 69. Seems there is gap after last one which is 69 * 2 ^ 3140225  1
We busy 5.5+ mln now and this is very fat weight. 
20201121, 15:08  #64 
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
30D_{16} Posts 
finished thanks to big work of Paul until 7M. I'm still having a few cores above 7M.
If someone wants to take over let me know. For my current (outdated) hardware i'm at the limits of what is possible to achieve here for 69. Please note the statistical math supports the idea that there should be a 3d prime not too far away from the found 2 primes at 6.8M. So if someone has big hardware and wants a shot at it let me know will then email the LLR output files exactly which exponents above 7M have been tried (up until 7.05M i had about 28 cores running until a few hours ago, some of which finished their batches). k=69 is kind of 'behind' in number of produced primes so it's possible there is a bunch of them at 7m  8m range. 
20201204, 17:13  #65  
Jun 2012
Boulder, CO
2^{4}·3·7 Posts 
Quote:


20201204, 19:17  #66  
Sep 2006
The Netherlands
11×71 Posts 
Quote:
Way further away than i had guessed!! It had so many primes below 3.14M. If we do math from there then it's 6.8M which is factor 2 and 11+M is really far away again. That's like factor 1.7 again. 
