Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 64

Thread: JJSieve Discussion

  1. #1
    Forgotten Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    64

    jjsieve

    What is jjsieve exactly, I've been experimenting with it the last few days and it seems to work on my athlon64

  2. #2
    I searched jjsieve and found a thread discussing some testing that happened a month or so ago, any update on when this client will be availiable? If it offers a significant speed boost (as seems to be suggested) I'm sure we'd all be keen to see it!



  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    271
    Have a look at the bottom of the 1st post in this thread. It's attached there.
    Quad 2.5GHz G5 PowerMac. Mmmmm.
    My Current Sieve Progress: http://www.greenbank.org/cgi-bin/proth.cgi

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    61
    Does it being posted here mean that we can use it for regular sieving now? I guess it is not "released" yet, but are we confident it will find all the factors "proth_sieve" will find?

  5. #5
    Old Timer jasong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Arkansas(US)
    Posts
    1,778
    Jjsieve is very dependable and, I'm told, will even find factors that proth sieve might miss.

  6. #6
    How about clients for other operating systems? I run 3 of my sievers on FreeBSD, also is there any documentation related to this?



  7. #7
    Related to this jjsieve discussion, I got some questions.
    In the above zip file, one finds jjsieve, jjsievecmov5, jjsievecmov6, jjsievecmov7. What is the meaning of this?
    What about sse2 (there was such a jjsieve a while ago)?
    And is there a Linux binary?
    Can the joint sieve subproject take advantage of the impovements, too?

    That's about it, for the moment, I guess... Yours, H.
    ___________________________________________________________________
    Sievers of all projects unite! You have nothing to lose but some PRP-residues.

  8. #8
    Knight of the Old Code KWSN_Dagger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Western Canada
    Posts
    61
    There is an SSE2 version out there, but the one listed in this forum is old (EDIT not any more!). Joe O can explain more than I.
    jjsieve - no CMOV, no SSE, no SSE2
    jjsieveCMOV5 no SSE, no SSE2
    jjsieveCMOV6 SSE, no SSE2, small to medium cache
    jjsieveCMOV7 SSE, no SSE2, medium to large cache
    jjsieveSSE2
    Last edited by Joe O; 04-27-2006 at 05:43 PM.
    When in doubt, kick it until it works.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    61
    I tried the CMOV7 version on my AMD64, I got a 5% speed increase. Nice to see the ETA shorten by 10 hours but I look forward to the SSE2 version.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    61
    The SS2 version is now added. I got about 12% speed increase using that on my AMD64 and I got about 15% speed increase on my AMD MP2400 using the CMOV5 version. I think this is great!

  11. #11
    Linuxlinuxlinux. Possible? I can compile it if necessary. P4, 3.06GHz. H.
    WineWineWine! Grin! <--------------------Edit
    Last edited by Joe O; 04-28-2006 at 10:41 AM.
    ___________________________________________________________________
    Sievers of all projects unite! You have nothing to lose but some PRP-residues.

  12. #12
    Hi

    I have been crunching some range and found about 10+ factors.
    Are the factor well received in the DB?
    And what about the scoring stuff?

    Can we use jjsieve as production stable?

    Any update will be appreciated.

    Thank you

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    271
    Scores (updated twice a day):-

    2006: http://www.aooq73.dsl.pipex.com/2006/scores.htm
    All time: http://www.aooq73.dsl.pipex.com/scores.htm

    Probably best to look at just the 2006 scores...

    Note that only factors for n < 20M are scored at the moment.

    Meanwhile, the disk in one of my Athlons has died. Was about 97% through a 1T range on it so it shouldn't take long to finish off but will be delayed a week or so. It now becomes a diskless host and I get another bunch of magnets to play with.
    Quad 2.5GHz G5 PowerMac. Mmmmm.
    My Current Sieve Progress: http://www.greenbank.org/cgi-bin/proth.cgi

  14. #14
    Greenbank

    Thank you for the heads up.
    But how do you explain this
    http://mattford.org.uk/sob/userinfo.php?user=84

    1022500 1022510 0 Complete March 21, 2006 March 15, 2006
    1023060 1023110 0 Complete March 21, 2006 March 19, 2006
    1029700 1029750 2 Complete April 11, 2006 March 31, 2006
    1033150 1033200 0 Complete April 11, 2006 April 8, 2006
    1034120 1034170 4 Complete April 22, 2006 April 14, 2006
    1036000 1036050 2 Complete April 22, 2006 April 19, 2006
    1044800 1044850 4 Complete April 25, 2006 April 24, 2006
    1046800 1046850 2 Reserved April 22, 2006 April 27, 2006
    1049700 1049800 2 Reserved April 24, 2006 April 28, 2006
    1101000 1101005 ? Complete March 21, 2006 Unknown
    1102000 1102100 ? Complete March 21, 2006 Unknown

    Total factors found = 16

    The things don't add up....

  15. #15
    The factors found on the SoB reservation site is simply a note that the user who runs the test can make, it's completely unrelated to the sieve scoring stats and is probably best to be ignored.

    Anyone mind if I make a seperate thread to discuss jjsieve as it's kind of off topic here...?



  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt
    Anyone mind if I make a seperate thread to discuss jjsieve as it's kind of off topic here...?
    Go ahead. No askingneeded, I think. H.
    ___________________________________________________________________
    Sievers of all projects unite! You have nothing to lose but some PRP-residues.

  17. #17
    Right, so is this officially released? Stable? Cross-platform?



  18. #18
    Forgotten Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    US
    Posts
    64
    Just tried the JJsieveSSE2, seems a good bit faster then JJsieveCMOV7. My numbers went from about 540kp/s to over 580kp/s on my athlon 64 3000+

    Now all i need is a linux version of it!

  19. #19
    Knight of the Old Code KWSN_Dagger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Western Canada
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by pixl97
    Just tried the JJsieveSSE2, seems a good bit faster then JJsieveCMOV7. My numbers went from about 540kp/s to over 580kp/s on my athlon 64 3000+

    Now all i need is a linux version of it!
    I'm averaging 680 kp/s with highs of 695.
    When in doubt, kick it until it works.

  20. #20
    I'm itching to get my hands on this, I've got an AMD64 3000+ on FreeBSD currently running at 481kps. Also an AMD Barton XP3000+, again on FreeBSD, running at 543kps. Basically I'd really like a FreeBSD client, I can offer SSH access if someone wants to compile one?



  21. #21
    Knight of the Old Code KWSN_Dagger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Western Canada
    Posts
    61
    Also works fine for combined sieving with PSP. Speeds of 383 kp/s so far. Not bad when your going through 20k's. Big to Joe O for making this lil one run.
    When in doubt, kick it until it works.

  22. #22
    I've been running JJsieve with wine in FreeBSD and here's the basic summary of what I get, on my Athlon XP3000+, with CMOV7 I get about 530kp/s compared to a previous 540kp/s (so actually a reduction). However, on my AMD 64 3000+ with the SSE2 client I get a speed of about 570kp/s compared to a previous speed of 450kp/s, so that's about a 26% increase in speed! Good work!



  23. #23
    On my P4 2400 I am running @ 300kp/sec.
    Only a "minor" increase with 25kp/sec but glad to have it.

    BTW my Athlon 1 ghz (proth sieve) is running @ 275 kp/sec

  24. #24
    Moderator Joe O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    West Milford, NJ
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt
    I've been running JJsieve with wine in FreeBSD and here's the basic summary of what I get, on my Athlon XP3000+, with CMOV7 I get about 530kp/s compared to a previous 540kp/s (so actually a reduction). However, on my AMD 64 3000+ with the SSE2 client I get a speed of about 570kp/s compared to a previous speed of 450kp/s, so that's about a 26% increase in speed! Good work!
    Please try CMOV6 on both machines. You may be pleasantly suprised. CMOV6 outruns CMOV7 on many Athlons, even keeping up with SSE2 on some AMD64's. YMMV
    Joe O

  25. #25
    Moderator Joe O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    West Milford, NJ
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by cedricvonck
    On my P4 2400 I am running @ 300kp/sec.
    Only a "minor" increase with 25kp/sec but glad to have it.

    BTW my Athlon 1 ghz (proth sieve) is running @ 275 kp/sec
    You didn't state what version you were using. Please try both CMOV5 and CMOV6 on these machines and report the timings.
    Joe O

  26. #26
    Joe_O :

    P4 2400 - JJSieve SSE2 => 300 - 301kp/sec
    P4 2400 - JJSieve Cmov => unknown because range in progress
    P4 2400 - Proth Sieve 0.42 SSE2 => 275 kp/sec

    Athlon 1 Ghz - JJSieve Cmov => unknown because range in progress
    Athlon 1 Ghz - Proth Sieve 0.42 CMOV => 275 kp/sec

  27. #27
    Thanks for the advice, I've tried the other versions and they definitely run better.
    AMD Athlon XP3000+ Barton:

    Proth Sieve: 540 kp/s
    JJSieveCMOV5: 580 kp/s
    JJSieveCMOV6: 580 kp/s
    JJSieveCMOV7: 550 kp/s



  28. #28
    Senior Member Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    406
    Blog Entries
    2

    Speeds

    At the risk of causing anyone to do an emergency run to the restroom....


    I am running a test across an entire range of P (from P=100G and up)

    You will be pleased to know the client is doing FABULOUS.

    Riesel and SoB are performing at 187 kp/sec and 940 kp/sec respectively.

    I even am (shudder) testing using an Intel (Prescott) core... LOL
    It is doing great.

    Using 7 machines, I have a combined (summing the 'kp/sec') of 5940 kp/sec,
    with the Intel in the suite of 7.

    This is using ver 0.102a of the client.

    Even a P4 Prescott getting 130 kp/sec on Riesel says something.. doesn't it?

    When reporting back info to Joe or myself, please make sure (as joe pointed out) to let us know what version and any other pertinent info.

    Chuck




    A FDC in training, fellow supporter of Firefox.

    Proudly crunching with AMD & ATI power.
    If you want The Best you must forget the Rest
    >>>>>>>>>and join Free-DC<<<<<<<<<<<

  29. #29
    Knight of the Old Code KWSN_Dagger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Western Canada
    Posts
    61
    With JJSieve SSE2 i'm getting 160kp/s on Riesel with my X2 4200 for a total of 320 kp/s.

    On SoB I was running max 697kp/s for each core.

    With PSP not combined ~ 450kp/s
    Combined ~ 388kp/s

    ver 0.102a
    When in doubt, kick it until it works.

  30. #30
    Chuck,

    One nice feature I liked to see ported from proth sieve to JJSieve (or whatever) is the following:

    If you start the client up: JJSieve 157670 157700
    I expect the client should interpret this as following:

    pmax=1576700000000000
    pmin=1577000000000000

    Instead of JJSieve 1576700000000000 1577000000000000

    Risks of doing starting the client up with the extra zeros, you can crunch a wrong range.

    Is this possible?

    BTW, who did the development of this new sieve client?
    It is quite unclear for me.
    I assume you, Greenbank, Vjs and Joe_O ?
    Only for information purposes of course


    RieselSieve : P4 - 3000

    JJSieve SSE2 = 79kp/sec
    Proth Sieve SSE2 = 60 - 64 kp/sec

    Strange things, I expected a higher crunch rate... anyways thx
    Last edited by cedricvonck; 05-07-2006 at 07:12 AM.

  31. #31
    Senior Member Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    406
    Blog Entries
    2
    The expansion of the -c command line argument to accept an 'exact' pmin and pmax was Joe's decision. I believe Joe can put it to rest, but given the desire to have a restart (after shutdown or your pc powerfails, etc)... you are restarting at an exact P... so why not be able to specify it from the start.

    Also, the desire to do network task distributed sieving required the server to distribute exact Pmin, Pmax and receive Pcompleted as non-rounded numbers.

    I understand your request for a more friendly interactive entry mechanism. How about putting in PRS -d -w -c 145260G 145360G (where the "G") puts up the extra zeros for you? This would mandate K=Kilo, M=Meg, G=Gig, T=Tera, P=Penta.. expressed as powers of 10^{3,6,9,12,15,etc} Is that ok?

    As for who did the work??? Joe and myself. Vjs has been here in the background and is famous for being the silent type... I would not be surprised to find some of his work in here.

    Plain and simple.... Joe gets 99% of the credit as far as I am concerned as he is the team leader and made sure everything got done. My job was to double check, experiment, verify things in 64 bit, etc. I did all the odd stuff. Joe is the Keystone to PRS's success in Windows as I see it. (He may say otherwise, but "" Joe, you know better.... LOL ""), I am the Linux/Unix side guy and the 64 bit guy. I know we watched each other's back in development, but I have to give Joe the credit for being the stronger of the two of us.... hands down.

    There is no Mac code (Alex / Mark) in our code at all.

    There are no plans at present to make the source open because we are simply 'static' for the moment. We both need a break. I have the complex task of mastering the new 64 bit stack frames going back to GCC... YES, I said GCC. Intel is our 32 bit compiler, but I MUST have GCC for Linux and BSD as well as 64 bit executables.

    The code is already 64 bit native. There is ONE asm module in the whole thing and it is worth the effort in speed to keep it for now. It's very tiny, but critical to doing some lightning fast math.

    With the changes we still have before us, this is the reason we won't be releasing the source yet... It will be complete and uniform first... Anything else could lead breaking the accuracy / stability / intelligence / reliability which has been put into the code. I am not saying anyone is a dummy, but it is VERY easy to break the code or (worse) slow it down or cause bad factors. We want this all rock solid before it all comes out.


    Now, if you will forgive me... It's 5 am, time for breakfast, etc.... Lots to do today.

    I will be aroudn later.


    [[[[[[ Joe: Please do correct me if my slumbery mind has rambled and/or misrepresented anything ]]]]]]


    Thanks
    Chuck


    /*edit -
    Working on a 'process note' for all..... PRS SSE2 version, using 2.8 Ghz Prescott core.. 130+ on Riesel.. as compared to 79+ without using the 'tweaks'. I will report the stats for SoB as well when completed. *end edit */




    A FDC in training, fellow supporter of Firefox.

    Proudly crunching with AMD & ATI power.
    If you want The Best you must forget the Rest
    >>>>>>>>>and join Free-DC<<<<<<<<<<<

  32. #32
    Thank you !

  33. #33
    Moderator Joe O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    West Milford, NJ
    Posts
    643
    The true and proper name for this program was to be CJJSieve, but a typo resulted in jjsieve. (Chuck, that was a typo wasn't it? and please explain to me again why we couldn't correct it.)
    The next name we chose was PSR52 (PrimeSierpinskiRiesel) or was it PRS52(Prime Riesel Sierpinski or ProthSieve)?
    At one time, I suggested (threatened?) SPQR but a guy name Caesar said that had already been used.
    We've had a lot of people testing this program. Pepe, Lars, Bruce to name just a few. To all of you "Thank You". Our emphasis has been on reliability, and I think that we have achieved it. There is more to do, but for now, we are putting a hold on further development. We all need a break, and the immediate needs have been met.
    Joe O

  34. #34
    Moderator vjs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    ARS DC forum
    Posts
    1,331
    Nope not me, I realized very early on that Joe and Chuck are far far beyond me when it comes to coding. If I can take any credit whatsoever it would be putting these two masterminds together.

  35. #35
    Senior Member Chuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    406
    Blog Entries
    2

    Arrow PRS52, CJJSieve, or JJsieve... That is the question

    /* edit --- Comment withdrawn */
    Last edited by Chuck; 05-08-2006 at 03:20 PM.




    A FDC in training, fellow supporter of Firefox.

    Proudly crunching with AMD & ATI power.
    If you want The Best you must forget the Rest
    >>>>>>>>>and join Free-DC<<<<<<<<<<<

  36. #36
    If I understand correctly, the question is about the name of the thing. THE NAME??? The least important thing at all, isn't it? But if you insist on my opinion, I prefer jjsieve, because it is easy to pronounce and remember, unlike PRS52 etc., and it looks better, too. For me jj stands for a revolutionary breakthrough, and is originary.
    If he wants, Chuck can change his Alias to Juck, if he wants to.

    Yours H.
    ___________________________________________________________________
    Sievers of all projects unite! You have nothing to lose but some PRP-residues.

  37. #37
    Moderator Joe O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    West Milford, NJ
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by hhh
    If he wants, Chuck can change his Alias to Juck, if he wants to.

    Yours H.
    Only if you change yours to JJJ. <G>
    Joe O

  38. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    271
    Just to clarify. I've had nothing to do with this sieve, Rogue and I have been working on porting proth_sieve to G5 PPC assembly for PowerMacs but this is completely separate to the work that Chuck and Joe_O have been doing for x86.

    Good work gentlemen.
    Quad 2.5GHz G5 PowerMac. Mmmmm.
    My Current Sieve Progress: http://www.greenbank.org/cgi-bin/proth.cgi

  39. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe O
    The true and proper name for this program was to be CJJSieve, but a typo resulted in jjsieve. (Chuck, that was a typo wasn't it? and please explain to me again why we couldn't correct it.)
    The next name we chose was PSR52 (PrimeSierpinskiRiesel) or was it PRS52(Prime Riesel Sierpinski or ProthSieve)?
    At one time, I suggested (threatened?) SPQR but a guy name Caesar said that had already been used.
    We've had a lot of people testing this program. Pepe, Lars, Bruce to name just a few. To all of you "Thank You". Our emphasis has been on reliability, and I think that we have achieved it. There is more to do, but for now, we are putting a hold on further development. We all need a break, and the immediate needs have been met.

    instead of SPQR.. perhaps you could call it PQRS as in lmo-PQRS-tuv

  40. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by hhh
    Linuxlinuxlinux. Possible? I can compile it if necessary. P4, 3.06GHz. H.
    WineWineWine! Grin! <--------------------Edit
    Wine is bad!!! At least in my experience:

    430 kp/s top for JJSieveSSE2 under Wine
    500 kp/s top for proth_sieve_sse2

    Setup:
    Linux 2.6, Athlon 64 3000+, 1 GB Dual Channel DDR
    Currently sieving @ 1062.3 T

    edit: transposed the 4 and the 3
    Last edited by royanee; 05-18-2006 at 01:46 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •