I'm pretty happy with my testing so far. But the memory utilization is still climbing, 408MB so far.
Found this memory leak and it's now fixed in git, but there won't be a new version out just yet as I fix other issues first. Thanks for the update. I look forward to testing the new version when it's ready. I've been testing version 4.2.2 for 2 days now and it looks like the memory utilization is stable at 16.5 MB RAM with GBT now. Also it seems stable and reliable with BE's. I would still like the ability to sign the block though. Not a fan of the cycling display, it's going to cause someone to go into an epileptic fit.  I sent a donation for solo mining support. Thanks, Sam |
|
|
|
i found the btcguild thread .
Cool! Welcome to the thread. |
|
|
|
Fee Update (3/31/14)
Don't forget to let Organofcorti know about the changes for the Bitcoin Mining Pools List. |
|
|
|
Regarding Bitcoind, yes, adding addnode=relay.eligius.st helped a lot, thank you for the tip. It now picks up new blocks on the network in less than a minute. I also opened port 8333 on the router to run it as full node and used maxconnections=22 to try to limit traffic
Why limit your Bitcoind connections? I have seen mine with 120+ connections, and it seems to work ok. I get block height change updates 20 to 30 seconds after said block stamp, with around 30 connections, as viewed on blockchain.info. With around 60 connections it seems to be closer to 10 seconds or less. I don't have any static connections to "super nodes". Those block time stamps aren't always correct. I saw one yesterday that was 8 minutes in the future. |
|
|
|
|
ckolivas has already commented on this.
When you have disconnection and you reconnect, since work isn't tied to difficulty, when you reconnect and submit a unit of work the pool doesn't know what difficulty the work was done at so it doesn't know at what rate to pay for that share. So it is lost effort.
I think that is the gist anyway.
|
|
|
|
Hello all,
I started mining solo few days ago and I noticed a significant lag in new network block detection by both my Bitcoin Core (v0.9.0-beta 64-bit) and further by BFGMiner (3.10.0). When I see a new block on blockchain.info, from that point it takes about 60 seconds for it to appear in my Bitcoin-Qt's debug.log and then it further takes about 120 seconds for my BFGMiner to report "New block detected on network". That's about 3 minutes of lost time, since I am pretty sure that my ASIC miners won't start mining the new block until both my Bitcoin Core and BFGMiner know about it.
That's bizarre. Do you have regular pools in your failover list? If not try adding some and see when they detect a new block versus your Bitcoin-QT Client. Maybe that will help with getting new work sooner too?? |
|
|
|
I can't understand it as it has always logged me in automatically with another computer I use (rarely) - it's like the saved credentials have disappeared but nobody knows my password...
I think it's called a session cookie. They tend to expire after a while. |
|
|
|
|
Did you try posting in BTC Guilds support thread?
|
|
|
|
I know the poll is tongue in cheek, but I don't like the use of the word "hate".
Too many people reshape public opinion on the basis that anyone who is against "them" are by definition "hateful". It wouldn't bother me that much, but it is too effective and keeps people from thinking objectively.
haha please ignore the second part if it bothers you that I formulated it in a blunt way. just wanted to get a quick overview and yes and no seemed boring Bluntness I have no problem with. I can disagree with people who have different opinions or values than I do without hating them. Hopefully they can too, and I'm sure many do. I really doubt the hash rate will fall though. Plus I don't have anymore hashing hardware to bring to bear. So none of those options apply to me. |
|
|
|
Just another idiotic example of symbology over substance.
I'm pretty sure the Earth is going to survive whether I turn my lights off or not for an hour.
"Symbology" can lead to increased awareness. Awareness of what, exactly? And what benefit would said awareness be? |
|
|
|
Just another idiotic example of symbology over substance.
I'm pretty sure the Earth is going to survive whether I turn my lights off or not for an hour.
It has nothing to do however with the earth not surviving because of the lights turned off. Sounds like it to me. Culled from the Wikipedia article "encouraging individuals, communities, households and businesses to turn off their non-essential lights for one hour as a symbol for their commitment to the planet" |
|
|
|
That may keep them from doing something that actually helps environment and most importantly from politically addressing the problem...
Do you think this "problem" really needs to be addressed "politically"? The last thing we need is more government obstacles motivated by political maneuvering. |
|
|
|
|
I know the poll is tongue in cheek, but I don't like the use of the word "hate".
Too many people reshape public opinion on the basis that anyone who is against "them" are by definition "hateful". It wouldn't bother me that much, but it is too effective and keeps people from thinking objectively.
|
|
|
|
We not only have the lights off in the mining room we have over 30 hamsters running in their wheels that are connected to hand crank electric generators producing electricity for the miners.
Careful, don't want PETA coming after you!  |
|
|
|
|
Just another idiotic example of symbology over substance.
I'm pretty sure the Earth is going to survive whether I turn my lights off or not for an hour.
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty happy with my testing so far. But the memory utilization is still climbing, 408MB so far.
Found this memory leak and it's now fixed in git, but there won't be a new version out just yet as I fix other issues first. Thanks for the update. I look forward to testing the new version when it's ready. |
|
|
|
Hey eleuthria, any idea how this can be the case? Poster claims that a 1thps ASIC he was sold only works at BTC Guild with min diff at 1024, otherwise it will only hash at 12 to 16 Ghps. I found this unlikely to say the least, but the OP sounds sincere: have you tried contacting the company about your findings?
Yup, and they claim that I only can use the machine with BTCGuild with the setting 1024/1THs as minimal diff. So this would be a limitation I can't accept. Did you try BTCGuild with 1024 min diff? You'd need to run it for a day, but at least you'd know if they were completely full of shit or just a little full of shit. Okay, BTCGuild with 1024 min diff works with somewhat over 1 TH/s. However, this means I can't put it on other pools - unless I want my heater to run for 16 GH/s... If I might what aside is it using? I know KnC hardware and Bitfury 400G rigs have issues with low difficulty. The reason for this is that their submit queue at low difficulty get full very quickly and overflows causing a loss of shares. I don't see why setting it to 1024 wouldn't be acceptable. That's the BTCGuild recommended diff they claim that I only can use the machine with BTCGuild
|
|
|
|
|
I do have two different machines I'm mining with and 4.2 seems to be working pretty good on one. But the other machine if when I try to run any 4.x version a bunch of AMU's get turned off and mining is very erratic. It's a low end P3 with 512MB RAM but it works fine with CGMiner versions 3.11 and earlier. Currently running 3.9 with 31 BE's.
|
|
|
|
The other limitation is that bitcoind does not like a lot of persistent connections at the same time so I have reworked the code to drop connections as much as possible allowing multiple cgminer instances to connect to the one bitcoind.
Would this include the connections to the Bitcoin network? My Bitcoin client currently has 70 connections. Should I be restricting the max connections in the client itself? Sam |
|
|
|
There are a number of small improvements/fixes going into the solo mining code as a consequence of this testing which should be wrapped up into a minor bugfix release soon.
If there is going to be an update soon could I ask for 1. Bitcoin Address displayed to verify which address the block reward would go to? I saw that you said you would add this. 2. Ability to sign the block? I'm pretty happy with my testing so far. But the memory utilization is still climbing, 408MB so far. Thanks, Sam |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
