|
nicehash. enter top hashrate desired; enter btc willing to spend... point at pool... buy.
In the next few min I should see over 1Ph at the posted address above.
**edit**
{"hashrate1m": "1.2P", "hashrate5m": "780T", "hashrate1hr": "212T", "hashrate1d": "11T", "hashrate7d": "1.96T", "lastupdate": 1447263435, "workers": 12, "shares": 394873976, "bestshare": 779718067.55643559}
|
|
|
|
am i correct in last night or yesterday that was the first orphaned ck solo block? im going to put another .15 in nicehash for a second try... but I put a 500T top; so its about an hour of hashing time for .15 this was all btc from nowhere. nothing lost. http://solo.ckpool.org/users/1Q8HjG8wMa3hgmDFbFHC9cADPLpm1xKHQM |
|
|
|
|
im going to try a .15btc 500th rental today for poops and giggles =)
|
|
|
|
|
My Antminer S3 is doing some strange things to me recently.
It randomly goes "offline" and when I log into the web interface it shows that the asic boards disconnected in the logs.
If I reboot the whole machine, it starts working fine. Happened twice today. once noticed when I woke, and the next when I came back home recently.
It has a Thermaltake 750W power supply (plenty of 12V wattage for the S3) and I haven't really had any issues other than only one asic chip showing as an X when the system gets over 44C on a hot day. (I will be re-thermal pasting them as when I opened it originally there were signs of paste on the heatsyncs that was smeared around almost like a spill or careless application)
Has anyone else seen this type of behavior? It acts like it cant connect to a pool but the network interface is up, and my internet is connected... Its as if cgminer on the antminer isn't launching because of the asic boards being reported as disconnected in the system.
Maybe its just a thermal paste issue..... Its gone weeks at 250M with no issues at all other than the random X on a hot day.
Typical temps are 28-39C when cool, and 40-44C when it gets hot inside.
|
|
|
|
|
ok, Ill simplify because there is some confusion. And part of it was my mistake.... For that I am totally sorry. Reading labels through jumbles of wires can be annoying.
I am running the U3 on the same circuit as my pc that draws a steady 650W; and a 110W PC power supply powering a Gridseed Blade; and the U3; all on one 15A 110V circuit. I have my Antminer S3 on a separate circuit.
The specifics on my power supply that I am running the U3 on:
110V 2.5A
12V 7.5A
So... technically. It does now make sense why it is working fine. And also explains my 5A power supply causing very strange outputs/readings.
I am 100% certain the issue is with the power circuitry on the U3. More filtering and ripple control is my first guess... because its the most logical.
The fact that I used regular dialectic grease on the heatsync shouldn't be much of a factor IMHO.
Mine zombied out over the night.
So whats the deal with the R1? are you guys using it as a miner controller? Is it that you reprogram the firmware to recognize and mine off a U3 along with the router's built in ASIC?
|
|
|
|
I thought a RpI2 could ru it with easy. No?
I was thinking of setting up a few at various locations .
It will, but the block chain size is getting to be the problem with running it on a Pi (it takes a 64GB SD card to run it now or it did). Sooner or later, it's going to take a 128 GB SD to run, or a USB HD on the Pi. And I don't know how much lag time USB HD would have on a node. same. I even tried storing the blockchain on a USB HDD and it still wouldn't stay running. People out thetre have a way to turn one into just a transaction verifying node (no --generate command I believe); But that doesnt solve my problem of needing a fallback if CK goes/shuts down =) |
|
|
|
|
[2015-11-10 04:59:45] Pool 0 message: Block 382903 solved by 122ki3sRnLQVmVYQqNTuPxjudb4tMQUpcf @ solo.ckpool.org!
[2015-11-10 04:59:46] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
just saw it
|
|
|
|
Everyone is working on unique work on all pools - even changing just 1 bit in the work template gives completely different results to every miner. The difference on other pools is they are all trying to generate a block to the same generation address(es). With this pool, every unique bitcoin address has its own generation address as part of the block it's trying to solve. This "pool" is in a sense only pooled miners on one node, but each unique miner is mining their own unique coinbase generation transaction. The result is the same as true solo mining to your own bitcoind locally - however you are now trusting your hashrate to my node to handle your workload which means you have the element of trust involved in the pool operator (i.e. me) that you are truly working on what you think you are working on (though that happens with every pool) so it's not in the strictest sense true solo distributed mining. But you get the bonus of the ultra low latency high performance node at an extremely low fee for the service.
Exactly the answer I seek =) I thought it would work this way. I think it would be very convoluted if it worked the other way. I am very happy to not have to run a bitcoinD service on my cellular connection. The miners are fine. barely much traffic. But; just running a node... man. GB of data. =) Yeah; I mine from T-mobile! You do provide a great service for that. If a RasPi could reliably run as a full node... I would have been doing that at a remote site. but; so far; I am happy with what I found here! (and over trying to get other stuff to work right 24/7) |
|
|
|
|
with my settings on the page back, with volts at 830; and the old cgminer (yes, its what works, and I dont want to go through the rigamarole to compile in windows; yes lazy)...
I am seeing A:54000 R:0 HW:5
Thats an ok HW rate to me (about 1 hour uptime). It normally wants a replug once every other day. sometimes goes a week without touching it.
This is on a 2.5A power supply that it shipped with.
The average hashrate is 62.24GH right now.
I have the diff set at 1K because it mines to a solo account.
The math as far as power consumption and settings doesnt make sense.... It defies logic. it should be having trouble doing its job; that's for sure. I wonder what my oscilloscope will show me once I finally bring it home.
aside from thinking the harmonics of the power draw keeping the device charged with just enough juice to stay stable.... its a strange thought.
I do have a little bit of active cooling on it, but presently, its minimal. I also replaced the thermal grease with dialectic grease last time I took it apart to clean it.
|
|
|
|
|
CK; am I correct in assuming that each user (bitcoin address mined to) is solving for a hash for a block with a transaction to themselves?
In another way of asking, if another guy is mining, does the block seed hash change because of his bitcoin address compared to mine? or is the winning hash just the "stamp" or "seal"" and the pool server writes the transaction based on who the winning hash came from?
Are we truly "Solo" mining, or is it more "pooled"....
I have always been curious on this "mechanic" of solo pools.
|
|
|
|
|
With a U3 and an S3, I have yet to see a share over 970M....
I see 1-20M semi-often... so I am just waiting for my luck to come around =)
|
|
|
|
Hypothesis. Sounds like the problem then is power supply noise. Presumably each device adds noise back upstream to the PSU which gets carried to the other devices. In which case a high quality linear power supply or generous filtering on the power source going to each device should make them more reliable.
I agree. I switched my U3 from a 2.5A power supply (one it shipped with) with a 5.0A power supply and my results were a little baffling. With my U3 on the 2.5A supply it shipped with my settings were: --bmsc-voltage 0830 --bmsc-freq 0982 Hashrate: 58-67Gh/s Switching to the 5.0A with the same settings netted me 43.0Gh/s at most at any time. With the new power supply I tried countless combinations and found this to be the best: --bmsc-voltage 0805 --bmsc-freq 1306 Hashrate: 53-60Gh/s I am 100% certain the power supply to the antminer is the direct cause of the issue. Its a 5.0A that came with a USB hub I bought; and I dont use the hub to feed juice, so the amperage is pretty much wasted there. But; the power supply is noisy as hell on a logic sense. When I finally get enough room cleared here to bring home my oscilliscope; I'd be able to do more of an in-depth analysis. Nothing changed the presence of HW errors. They happen and they don't happen. These I would throw a big high bet at the power control/regulation circuitry. I am assuming the ripple in my lower amperage supply is the most "harmonically stable" compared to my other for my unit running like it does. |
|
|
|
Hey all, new to the pool. I have decided that Slush's pool and it's "sprinkling" of change on me is tough(about $4.75-$5.00 per day). I run an Antminer S4 that hashes at about 2.5TH/s.
Just picked up and revived the unit from another user, I have one more S4 with a bad beagle board and 2 bad hash boards that I am hoping to fix to use half of the units efficiency.
The one S4 should be sufficient for solo mining, yes? I realize it has somewhat low odds but I feel the power this baby consumes will not be made up from Slush's pool.
Thanks!
Presently I only have an S3 and U3 pointed at this solo pool. [altcoin pool ad removed] |
|
|
|
I pulled 2 billion with a compac stick mining at 9gh.
So 31 x 2 billion = 62 billion or winner.
My point is 9gh x 31 = 279gh.
We had an s3 winner at 50 billion diff.
31? Why X31? Your statements didn't seem to make sense to me as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
Its like the U3 gets stuck in some sort of initialization loop and some of the circuitry is allowing spikes by design. I really dont feel like making a schematic for this thing to look for possible culprits...
How it is translating to sound.... a HV discharge is my only logical recourse. I doubt those capacitors are the source of the sound... maybe the cause if they are over-rated for the device...
Its intriguing for sure; and possibly could help point out some of the stability issues we have had.
My recent issue is with getting Minera to read my hardware. It worked fine for months (with either gridseeds or my U3 hooked up) then started going offline for half a day now and then... then finally it just wouldn't go 'online'. it would do an infinite loop when choosing "start miner" because the app wont run properly, and I cant find logs to show what exactly is going on. I can only find the logs/reminants of the last instance when it was hashing. When I say "online" here; people who use minera will know what I am talking about, the miner "online" status light.
But so far my U3 is still online (I have hotplugged it a few times in these days). Started cgminer on 10-23-15, and its still going. When it get a little too hot it starts spitting out invalid nonce/HW errors, but usually recovers fine. Its running on my main box, with 11 gridseeds, and a GTX980 all while I use the PC for my day to day stuff. (dual xeon server)
To keep it a little cooler, I have it balanced on the top of a powered on gridseed 5chip. The gridseed fan helps keep it much cooler.
|
|
|
|
the beeping sounds like an on and off high voltage discharge... Cycle the power and usb and it comes back. I have had mine up and running with few beeping errors and zombies. Its a cage type (2nd edition). I am using the brick it came with. cgminer 4.6.1 settings: --bmsc-voltage 0830 --bmsc-freq 0982 AVG: 62.19G WU: 868.8/m Typical up-times are 2-4 days. sometimes a week or more. I think when the power fluxes at home I get a zombie or a beeping sound from the unit itself. It really reminds me of a short distance HV discharge. The internet is back on at the ranch again a week or two ago, so i started mining again. See for yourself. http://solo.ckpool.org/users/1Q8HjG8wMa3hgmDFbFHC9cADPLpm1xKHQMMinera did an excellent job of keeping my miner online before. But oddly, now I cant get it to work again, it wont detect either mining device. So my Pi is now a VPN host once again. I think I give up on minera. |
|
|
|
|
another sub note; I have been putting share size on my small machines up high. Share count means nothing; share size is everything. I think it will help on server overhead no? Plus it keeps my logs compact to see what kind of time spacing between my big shares on them =)
|
|
|
|
So far the pool has solved 110 blocks and hasn't had an orphan. While I've gone to great effort to optimise this pool to minimise the risk, nothing can entirely remove the risk of orphans given the way block solving works. It's a little scary to think about but at some stage someone will find a block and it will be orphaned...
thats always a risk with mining... but its accepted IMHO. Halving the "value" of a block will a solve the hashrate growth problem for sure; but the raise in value of BTC will keep it in check I think.... not right away; but a short time after halving it will pick back up and normalize. (depending on how the value stabilizes or raises in the future) I have hopes that my little Antminer U3 will hit a block; if you see "1Q8H...KHQM" than know that a simple 63Gh machine just earned its keep.... lol. I tried for months to get it to connect to and use a local bitcoind daemon, but for some reason it wouldn't generate any shares... It was hooked to a PI with Minera... but for some reason after being online for a month straight; Minera started rebooting the PI randomly, and then started acting like a mining device wasn't even plugged into USB no matter what I tried. I knew this was happening because that same Pi was my VPN gateway as well. I'm on the bandwagon for the 'mining' long haul. I get free electricity; so I have been slowly massing good mining equipment and hooking it up here and there =) |
|
|
|
It seems like a good idea for me. The mentioned altcoin could be forced to be tied to Bitcoin value, and could be a brand new altcoin that could only be "mined" by changing satoshis to make it appear.
In fact, it could be named "satoshi-Tx" (satoshi for transfers LOL) and have the exact value of a satoshi, with his own chain.
But I guess that would be complicated to.
This seems somewhat reasonable... Hell.. it doesn't exactly need to be tied to bitcoin... But... Bitcoin would be the base for large/non time sensitive transactions; and an alt would be for the smaller quicker needs. not rocket science, and it doesn't need to be elaborated ANY further than this concept. This wouldnt change volatility; nor is it intended to. This wouldnt fork BTC, nor is it intended to. There are TONS of Altcoins out there to pick from.... We just need to figure out what works for what type of scenario. (day to day groceries, small instant on-the-street-peer-to-peer transactions (flea market, food vendor, gambling sites, etc). People act like waiting 10-60 min for a block to confirm a transaction is haneous... but honestly; its fine. The block size, well; We need to discourage people from making a million small transactions to fill up the blocks.... That would be the only way that BTC itself would need to change in order to be sure the altcoin takes over the smaller stuff. Maybe something as simple as scaling network fees based upon transaction spacing. Obviously something would need to be done about the exchanges.... or exchanges will have an inflated TX fee. So this idea isn't as good as others... I think a larger block size will over inflate the blockchain and cause some future problems.... I wont put my finger on it just yet; but that's my opinion..... And Im not claiming to be an expert; but... if you can spoon feed people the concept that altcoins Vs. BTC will just be like the comparison between a dollar bill and a paycheck likewise.... they might understand. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
