[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5e549f65f086db9c5cbef52767777012@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 01:54:57 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Incremental mode in 1.7.9.14
On 14 May, 2013, at 1:21 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> 1e-3: 20055g, 67326p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 329.5g/s 22189Kp/s 22189Kc/s 1304GC/s
> 0.01: 20057g, 67238p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 329.1g/s 22133Kp/s 22133Kc/s 1302GC/s
> 0.1: 20187g, 67455p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 331.2g/s 22345Kp/s 22345Kc/s 1314GC/s
> 0.5: 20199g, 67626p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 331.4g/s 22415Kp/s 22415Kc/s 1318GC/s
> 0.9: 20019g, 65721p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 328.5g/s 21589Kp/s 21589Kc/s 1272GC/s
> 1.0: 20062g, 67417p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 329.2g/s 22198Kp/s 22198Kc/s 1306GC/s
> powi: 20079g, 67474p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 329.5g/s 22235Kp/s 22235Kc/s 1308GC/s
> 1.7.9: 20286g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 1016GC/s
> For giving more weight to short words, my gut feeling is this is too steep. A simple and less steep function would be "1 / (1 << length)":
Just for completeness, using that last function instead:
20046g, 66877p/g 0:00:01:00 0.00% 328.9g/s 21999Kp/s 21999Kc/s 1295GC/s
Not better in this test. Maybe I should do this after each test:
$ cut -d: -f2 ../run/john.pot | perl -e 'foreach (<>) { chomp; $l{length()}++ } foreach (sort keys %l) { printf("%d%10d\n", $_, $l{$_}) } '
0 1
1 7
2 7
3 275
4 653
5 1411
6 11667
7 5174
8 851
...and maybe I should do all tests with --max-len=10 as well. So many alternatives.
magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
