Multi Reservation talk:1-NMax

PrimeGrid NMax and date appear to be incorrect

Can you provide a link that shows that the effort has fully reached n=5500000? We could not locate it.

1. Per this primes page, the largest prime is n=5185268 as of 2024-07-07.
2. Per this drive page, the MinN in progress is n=5159656, the MaxN in progress is n=5193992 as of 2024-07-07.

We only update the NMax every few months and use the MinN in progress since that is the smallest test that is still outstanding. Here it is n=5159656.

In this case, we would probably update it when the effort reached n=5200000. Also when updating the NMax, the date needs to be updated.

Are the above links correct? If so and you prefer that it be updated now, then NMax should be n=5160000 (rounded off) and date should be 2024-07-07. --Gd barnes (talk) 07:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

I rounded down (to n=5.15M) and applied the change myself based on prior precedent. Please sign your posts (I had to sign yours above) and don't use so many line breaks. --Happy5214 (talk) 15:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

PG uses the same status page of all k<1200, but changes the range of current searched values. A clear date of begin or end of such ranges seems not listed or hidden in their forum posts. It's also hard to give/find a date of for example a found Sierpinksi prime an days/weeks after that found the completed range to this n-value. It's a pity from begin of PG. Automated prime findings but nobody there to keep some history, their Wiki contains also almost no information about these ranges. Karbon (talk) 20:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

I figured this would generate some conversation. Alexander, I don't think that you should be dictating others writing style especially in informal discussions such as this. I find the run-together paragraphs to be nearly unreadable and the post was intended for Rytis. Here, paragraph breaks were needed for readability and I have re-inserted them. I simply forgot to sign my post. Further: I had intended to give Rytis a day to respond before making the correction. It seemed like the reasonable thing to do since he administers the effort. I guess we will carry on and see if he responds. -- Gary Barnes (talk) 23:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll try not to get too offended, since I was the one to complain about the line breaks. In the end, Karsten was actually the one who removed them. Whether he did it as a result of my reply or on his own is uncertain. I thought about removing the syntax, but I would have kept the overall formatting. MediaWiki automatically creates paragraphs when you separate runs of text with blank lines, so I would have removed the double <br> tags, which should have left the same visual result. In the end, I only added the partial signature and left the post itself alone. --Happy5214 (talk) 20:42, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, the bad change to 5500000 was done by me out of a misunderstanding on my side of what NMax meant. I thought it defined the range that was reserved, and not the range that was already completed. Thank you for correcting the mistake. The links in the first post in this discussion are correct. /JeppeSN (talk) 05:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)