Put all of your command line arguments towards the beginning with the pool at the end. The just put a space and start your next pool another -o set of parameters. Add as many pools and/or servers as you want.
Hello: I tried this, but I did it wrong. What do I need to correct? cgminer-3.1.1-windows\cgminer.exe --scrypt -I 20,20,20,20 -o -u xxx.1 -p x --thread-concurrency 22400 --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --lookup-gap 2 --gpu-engine 905,905,905,905 --gpu-memclock 1250,1250,1250,1250 --auto-fan --config C:\xxx\x\x\cgminer-3.1.1-windows\cgminer.conf stratum+tcp://us-west.multipool.us:3352 -o stratum+tcp://us-east.multipool.us:3352 -u xx.1 -p x --thread-concurrency 22400 --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --lookup-gap 2 --gpu-engine 905,905,905,905 --gpu-memclock 1250,1250,1250,1250 --auto-fan --config C:\x\x\x\cgminer-3.1.1-windows\cgminer.conf Uh, OK, Lets go back to your original post's command line cgminer.exe --scrypt -I 20,20,20,20 -o stratum+tcp://us-west.multipool.us:3352 -u XXX.1 -p XX --thread-concurrency 22400 --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --lookup-gap 2 --gpu-engine 905,905,905,905 --gpu-memclock 1250,1250,1250,1250 --auto-fan --config C:\XXX\xxx\xxx\cgminer-3.1.1-windows\cgminer.conf
I would change it to cgminer.exe --scrypt -I 20,20,20,20 --thread-concurrency 22400 --gpu-threads 1 --worksize 256 --lookup-gap 2 --gpu-engine 905,905,905,905 --gpu-memclock 1250,1250,1250,1250 --auto-fan --config C:\XXX\xxx\xxx\cgminer-3.1.1-windows\cgminer.conf -o stratum+tcp://us-west.multipool.us:3352 -u XXX.1 -p XX -o "failover pool stuff here" I've never used the .conf file so I don't know what the ramifications are with combining that with command line options. I would recommend using one or the other and not both. Sam |
|
|
|
|
Put all of your command line arguments towards the beginning with the pool at the end. The just put a space and start your next pool another -o set of parameters. Add as many pools and/or servers as you want.
|
|
|
|
I've struggled to find time to complete the update to include more block statistics and more unknown hashrate sources. I've had to give up for the moment, and so I've posted this week's update based on the old scripts.
You can only do what you can do when you can do it. I appreciate what you do do. Thanks, Sam |
|
|
|
 Just got the new version on cgminer (3.10.0) and I currently run 3 BFL jalapenos. I finally figured out how to get it to recognize the 3 jalapenos(old version I had used --disable-gpu, but now I have to use --usb :3), If there is another way like the old please let me know. Now my problem is that I can not figure out how to set the Intensity like I could in the old cgminer using --intensity d. Please help. Thanks in advance. You can't set intensity because there's no GPU mining in 3.10. So how can I mine with GPUs now? Is it just CPU? CGMiner is ASIC and Bitcoin only from now on. |
|
|
|
How do I tell cgminer to ignore all devices that aren't running on WinUSB?
My Bitburners are running on cgminer and Antminers on bfgminer, but cgminer is spamming the "Install WinUSB" error constantly.
The device I'm using identifies itself as BBF, and if I use the --usb BBF:0 command it doesn't help (drive not recognised or somesuch).
Any clues?
In the readme under Advances USB Options it says --usb 1:2,1:3,1:4,1:* allows you to select which devices to mine on with a list of USB bus_number:device_address All other USB devices will be ignored So if you know the bus number and address you can specify which devices you want to mine with explicitly. I had trouble with Windoze using this method as the assignment seems to be a bit random. |
|
|
|
I know that is all that matters to you. Which is why it is improper for you to try and browbeat a pool op in lowering or getting rid of his fee's. He knows what his costs, R&D, and reinvestment costs. We, especially you, do not.
I doubt the pool operator will change anything only because I like it to happen  But why should he stop people from expressing their views? This pool is changing drastically and constantly. Major updates, which are very costly and have risk, are under way right now. This pool is very responsive to customers needs and wishes. This, in my opinion, is not the right place to express pool fee views since it isn't just this pool your irritated with. Your earnings theology could and should be discussed in a separate thread. |
|
|
|
I was under the impression that this thread is not support only, but general discussion of the pool and its services. At least I see nothing mentioned in the title, nor in the 1st post for it being support only thread.
Maybe the admin can clarify that.
All pool threads are for support. But many have been derailed and have caused pool ops to stop using them at all. Which is what we BTC Guild users would hate to have happen. |
|
|
|
The fact is people who mine with their own equipment pay 0 fees. Whatever I mine with my share of the pool I withdraw at 100%.
That is what matters to me and I assume a lot of other people.
Btw how does Slush provide 0% fees. Who is subsidizing that?
I know that is all that matters to you. Which is why it is improper for you to try and browbeat a pool op in lowering or getting rid of his fee's. He knows what his costs, R&D, and reinvestment costs. We, especially you, do not. Slush is not a free pool. The last I heard anyway. |
|
|
|
I also have no problems paying fees if they are reasonable - anything above 0.5% for a very large pool is unreasonable in my opinion as the costs associated with running such a pool are much smaller than the revenue generated even at 0.5%. But that's just me  Again, this really isn't the place for your anti free market rhetoric. Create a thread just for this and I would happily post in to debate this subject with you in a civilized manner, as would many others. To try and keep debating this in a pools support thread is improper. |
|
|
|
if we want to protect the network, miners should have a choice, eligius has 0 fees, ghash has 0 fees , btcguild has fees up to 7.5%
You do have a choice. Choose between a 0 fee pool or a fee pool. You do NOT have the right to tell a person what he should charge for a good or service. You do have the right not to buy or use that good or service though. Also Ghasheeo is not 0 fee. Others are paying the fee for the freeloaders. If I were a fee payer I would be irritated by their allowing freeloaders on my dime. Of course the extra hash rate does lower the variance, that is important to many. Still that is that pools choice. I don't see how people using the market service and paying fees there has anything to do with the pool being 0 fee. It's 2 different services after all. How hard is that to comprehend? If you're purely connecting your hashing power to the pool, yes it is a 0 fee pool. However, if you by GHS from their market, you pay a transaction fee on that market, then you pay per share your Gh/s generates as a maintenance fee for using their processing power. So, in essence, some people are paying for their hashing at the pool and others are not. Currently, those that are using the cloud hashing are paying a fee of 4.55% for PPLNS compared to the 3% paid at BTC Guild. I for one have no problem paying fees because someone has to pay to keep the servers going to process all the shares that we submit. Below is a link to the fees ghash charges. https://cex.io/maintenanceWhich makes my point. Thank you for posting the facts, which I didn't feel like researching, to prove my point that it is NOT free operation. Someone is paying for it and subsidizing those who choose not to pay for it. Again that is all the reason I need to not make use of that pool/service. |
|
|
|
Also Ghasheeo is not 0 fee. Others are paying the fee for the freeloaders. If I were a fee payer I would be irritated by their allowing freeloaders on my dime. Of course the extra hash rate does lower the variance, that is important to many. Still that is that pools choice.
I don't see how people using the market service and paying fees there has anything to do with the pool being 0 fee. It's 2 different services after all. How hard is that to comprehend? [/quote] I called subsidy. They could not do that if they did not have their own high end ASIC's and people paying for their other products and services. If I were a paying customer I would not be ok with it. But I'm not and I guess it is ok with they paying customers they do have. All I am saying there is no such thing as something for nothing. Why is that so hard to comprehend? |
|
|
|
if we want to protect the network, miners should have a choice, eligius has 0 fees, ghash has 0 fees , btcguild has fees up to 7.5%
You do have a choice. Choose between a 0 fee pool or a fee pool. You do NOT have the right to tell a person what he should charge for a good or service. You do have the right not to buy or use that good or service though. Also Ghasheeo is not 0 fee. Others are paying the fee for the freeloaders. If I were a fee payer I would be irritated by their allowing freeloaders on my dime. Of course the extra hash rate does lower the variance, that is important to many. Still that is that pools choice. |
|
|
|
Why not start the difficulty at 32 or 64 and let it go down if necessary as opposed to going up from a too low of a level? That would seem better for everyone.
The only way to know your hashing rate (and thus adjust your difficulty) is if you're actually submitting shares. Starting that high would make low hash rate miners virtually unusable on the pool. Yes, it averages out over time, but most users have no clue how difficulty works in the first place and would just see BTC Guild not giving them any credit for an hour. It's very quick to adjust a miner UP in difficulty (or they can just set it themself). It's much harder to know if a miner needs to be adjusted down. Well I guess the best thing to do is to let your miner run for an hour or so and see what difficulty the pools sets it to and then change your worker minimum difficulty to that level. I just updated my worker by the way. |
|
|
|
|
Why not start the difficulty at 32 or 64 and let it go down if necessary as opposed to going up from a too low of a level? That would seem better for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Also back in 2011 there was no pool even close to DeepBit size that was free.
That's kind of my point. From what I can piece together Ghash is NOT a free pool. It is. There is no such thing as something for nothing. As I said they have their own ASIC revenue and they have plenty of "customers" paying them. |
|
|
|
Also back in 2011 there was no pool even close to DeepBit size that was free.
That's kind of my point. From what I can piece together Ghash is NOT a free pool. |
|
|
|
My prediction is that if BTCGuild does not lower fees it will continue to lose position within the total network speed share.
Again, I disagree. Saying BTCGuild is loosing network share isn't a completely honest statement. BTCGuild is NOT loosing hashrate. I'm not even sure BTCGuild is loosing it's network percentage, but I haven't been keeping tabs on that so I don't really know. It's just smaller than GHash at the moment. |
|
|
|
in my opinion the #1 reason for people using Ghash.io is the lack of fees, which made the pool so big.
I disagree. People tend to glom onto the larger/largest hashrate pool(s) with the assumption that they must be doing something right, regardless of fee's. I believe that has been proven out by Deepbit's past success. Ghash has the benefit of having their own large farm(s) of high end ASIC's. So they are large even if they have no other miners. And that is why they charge no fee's, not because of altruistic generosity, but because they create their own revenue and don't need the fees. |
|
|
|
Didn't work for me when I did it ages ago with FPGAs. But I didn't spend a lot of time on it. I wasn't eager to miss out on 50 BTC blocks because something was set up incorrectly.
Hmm, I don't know what problem you may have had. But I have solo mined with ufasoft, phoenix and many versions of CGMiner and they have all worked. Of course with high hashrate ASIC's it probably wouldn't be efficient enough. I started using Graet's solopool.net when I found out about it. It would be nice if the QT Clients supported stratum and/or CGMiner supported GBT. Maybe one day . |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
