|
You're on linux so bring up 'top' while it's happening, press H to enable thread mode, and see what thread(s) is/are consuming CPU at the time. The bitcoin daemon has lots of threads that are named so you may be able to track which particular thread is consuming CPU and hence figure out what it's doing.
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest you put your post in the support thread for whichever pool you mine at instead of listing details that mean nothing by themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
OOC, given the block size debate is currently an issue, would it be too much to ask to signify what pools are running? legacy, segwit, BU or miner's choice?
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to use CGMiner on a ZedBoard with Zynq FPGA+ARM?
No. You'd have to write your own driver for it. |
|
|
|
Right, and I said bitcoin. Moving topic. |
|
|
|
|
There's no such thing as hard drive mining with bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
I think I found what is the cause of empty blocks. When p2pool receives a newer block header it immediately attempts to mine on top of it until it receives the corresponding block template from bitcoind. This can take some time as currently p2pool fetches templates on fixed intervals (AFAIK). The relevant code can be found here. Let's look at the empty block ( 00000000000000000201d592fcfcf59af02bdfe822123154a4a724ec7ffa0982) and the one before it ( 0000000000000000000e689d993b465aaa23e56e87d0f6c649de4b98830f789c). The time interval between them is exactly 1487923858-1487923258=600 seconds! This indicates that the p2pool node was still mining without the block template from bitcoind. I made a patch so that p2pool tries to fetch a new block template as soon as empty work is detected and give up working on the new block header if it can't get the template. Good work, that explains it. You may also wish to decrease the time interval as well since transactions change so frequently. I noticed a long time ago when proxying to p2pool that stratum updates were few and far between. I suggest 60 seconds instead of 10 minutes... The stratum specification says it should be under 90 seconds IIRC. |
|
|
|
|
Dear users mikesw, phongnui, orionberry and cobramining, you are still trying to log in with a regular username instead of a bitcoin address. Your username MUST be a valid bitcoin address to be able to mine here. Note that I've blocked a few IP addresses that are using invalid usernames. If you have confirmed that you have a correct username and are still having trouble connecting, message me your IP address and I'll unblock it.
|
|
|
|
I'll be upgrading the DE server in the near future to a more powerful dedicated one. It will still be located in DE and the server details won't change for any of you. Those mining on there should be redirected seamlessly without needing to do anything. I'll give notice once this process is complete.
All DE miners have been migrated to the new server seamlessly; it appears no miners were lost or had any downtime in the transfer. The new server is substantially more powerful than the old one, with equivalent performance to the main solo pool. Miners will not notice any difference, but this is to further minimise block change latencies and risk of orphans being produced. Additionally this server has DDoS protection as the main pool server does. You may wish to check your ping times since it's in a slightly different location, though they should be very respectable if you're in or near DE. |
|
|
|
Hi, everyone. A friend of mine told me I could use my CPU to process bitcoin transactions (to "blockchain" - his words) in order to make some additional money while my home computer is running. After a few days of searching I finally found the https://bitcoin.org/en/download page where to download a blockchaining software. And here comes my question: is that requirement for 100GB real? I mean do I really need 100GB free space on my hard drive in order to run the blockchaining software or is it just a tentative figure for the size it might reach some day in the distant future? You can run the bitcoin core software in "pruned" mode which will take up no more than 2GB and it will still propagate transactions. If you are confusing terminology and thinking about "mining" and not "processing transactions" which is designed to make you money from bitcoin block generation, then no - you cannot meaningfully use an ordinary CPU to do bitcoin mining; it is all done with specialised hardware these days called ASICs. |
|
|
|
One way to not mine empty ones, change The min size, but a empy block brings coins...
Block creation options:
-blockminsize=<n> Set minimum block size in bytes (default: 0)
-blockmaxsize=<n> Set maximum block size in bytes (default: 750000)
-blockprioritysize=<n> Set maximum size of high-priority/low-fee transactions in bytes (default: 0)
This doesn't alter what's going on inside p2pool that mines an empty block (whatever that is). Perhaps the merged mining is the culprit... that almost certainly causes far more losses than any gains people think mining bullshit worthless coins might have. At 5-10% more reward due to transactions currently, one really should try and mine transaction containing blocks as much as possible. |
|
|
|
Why wait 95% on a soft-fork? What happens if segwit miners starts mining segwit blocks right now?
Because of the way the soft fork works, unless a consensus is reached, the other nodes will simply reject all those blocks as invalid until the 95% is reached, so if a miner mines segwit blocks they end up being seen as invalid by all the other nodes and all the mining work is wasted. Once another 2 blocks are mined elsewhere on the network, even the miner's node will switch to the non-segwit mined blocks. |
|
|
|
Empty block?  Again... UGH sorry guys, don't know what is going on. Both blocks found today we're by me. And this is what I have in my settings. blockmaxsize=970000 mintxfee=0.0001 minrelaytxfee=0.0001 maxconnections=100 gen=1 I don't understand why I mined one block with no fees and another with low fees. My apologies. It's in the p2pool code itself. If I recall correctly I believe a bug report was made a long time ago but the cause never found and a fix never committed. |
|
|
|
Empty block? Again... UGH And at a time when fees are potentially up to 2BTC  |
|
|
|
the reason why they could mine so fast is because of more than 90k unconfirmed transactions.
That's nonsense; the two are unrelated. There are many many threads on the forum about empty blocks. Search and you will find your answers. It has been answered thousands of times before. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085800.0 |
|
|
|
|
You can't "redirect" a block; it is found at a particular address and can't be changed.
|
|
|
|
|
Lauda your tolerance and persistence is commendable. However your effort is wasted. Selectively ignoring about 4 bitcointalk trolls in this argument will make your life much more enjoyable and any discussions regarding scaling much more useful as it increases the signal to noise ratio to about 100x higher.
EDIT: Of course people who respond by taking offence means they know they're trolls themselves, otherwise why would they get offended and think I was talking about them?
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing bullshitspeak is the reason.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
