Hi everyone,
I have this idea and I think its worth thinking about .....minergate software dose not work with a lot of older pcs that are still good for mining
Older PCS are only good for mining if they are already paid for and you have free electricity. You need a CPU with AES_NI to have a chance at profitability. and the other software listed is a arse to set up have been trying for weeks.
Weeks? It has been weeks since anyone has posted in this thread, I don't see any previous questions, intelligent or otherwise. So why not just have the website open a connection to the pc so everyone gets a look in you must have the basic skills to do it surely?
You want the web server to open a connection to your PC??? That doesn't require skill, just a user stupid enough to allow it. You're obviously clueless about computers so you probably should not be making suggestions. Questions are more appropriate, preferably intelligent questions that show what you've tried and that you're making an effort. It's also not a good idea to insult the software (calling it an arse) if you want someone to help you. Here's a suggetsion on how to ask a question: I'm new to mining and don't know much about computers so please be patient if I ask stupid questions. I have a PC with a _____ CPU running _____ operating system and i'm trying to run ______ downloladed from ______. When I enter the command ____________ I get the following error _________. I read the instructions and help and googled the error message but didn't find a solution. Can someone please help? |
|
|
|
I was mining into a LTC wallet, but I've switched to a BTC Wallet (liker i was told in an earlier post) but theres still 5 LTC sitting on the old address, is there any way to trigger a transfer? Something an admin could do manually maybe?
N8
We can't transfer/convert balances between addresses. I'm hoping we'll eventually start getting enough hash to start hitting LTC blocks. Then you'll get paid. I think he meant a manual payout of his remaining LTC. |
|
|
|
I have similar thoughts about the miner summary. I would like to see it just below the coin list.
It's nice to order the pools by profitability but the normalization isn't correct for many (most?)
miners.
Here is where the normalization for the pool is: https://github.com/tpruvot/yiimp/blob/yiimp/web/yaamp/core/functions/yaamp.php#L44And I have: $a = array( 'PoS' => 0, 'sha256' => 0, 'scrypt' => 1, 'argon2' => 1, 'scryptn' => 0.5, 'x11' => 5.5, 'x13' => 3.9, 'x14' => 3.7, 'x15' => 3.5, 'zr5' => 3, 'nist5' => 16, 'neoscrypt' => 0.3, 'lyra2' => 1.3, 'lyra2v2' => 2.7, 'quark' => 5, 'fresh' => 5, 'qubit' => 5, 'skein' => 90, 'velvet' => 1.0, 'yescrypt' => 1.0, 'groestl' => 5, 'myr-gr' => 2.5, 'dmd-gr' => 2.5, 'blake' => 300, 'blakecoin' => 5, 'keccak' => 160, ); If anyone has some suggestions to adjust it, let me know. I think your normalization is for AMD. Here are some hashrates for Nvidia that can be used as a guideline. http://cryptomining-blog.com/6369-ccminer-spmod-release-cuda-6-5-vs-cuda-7-5-performance-comparison/ |
|
|
|
 Hi Crackfoo, I find myself switching back and forth looking to see if all my miners are working and looking at the top of page to see what the algo's are paying. Could you please switch the amount payout scheme and the workers scheme please? That way I can stay on the top of page to see my miners are all working and the best paying algo's . If there is a lot of coding to do this.. then never mind.  Also could you lock the algo's in alphabetical order like nicehash does please. Your pool is the best.  Thx so much. I have similar thoughts about the miner summary. I would like to see it just below the coin list. It's nice to order the pools by profitability but the normalization isn't correct for many (most?) miners. But right below means you still have to have 2 pages open..if to the left only one. Must have had a brain fart when I wrote that, I meant below the wallet. Edit: While on the topic the expanded wallet details (pending coins) could use alphabetizing. |
|
|
|
Hi Crackfoo, I find myself switching back and forth looking to see if all my miners are working and looking at the top of page to see what the algo's are paying. Could you please switch the amount payout scheme and the workers scheme please? That way I can stay on the top of page to see my miners are all working and the best paying algo's . If there is a lot of coding to do this.. then never mind. Also could you lock the algo's in alphabetical order like nicehash does please. Your pool is the best. Thx so much. I have similar thoughts about the miner summary. I would like to see it just below the coin list. It's nice to order the pools by profitability but the normalization isn't correct for many (most?) miners. |
|
|
|
is there a gtx 760 kepler kernel code for this miner?
You can change the config to compile for sm3.5. I tried that, it didnt work. ccminer just told me that the compute version is incompatible. 760 is 3.0. Ooops. |
|
|
|
Thx I believe the intent is to list them in order of normalized profitability but it's based on AMD GPU performance. If they can't normalize for Nvidia then I agree just list them alphabetically but only in the pool status. The coin list should stay sorted by profitability. |
|
|
|
Is there a problem with the latest payout? There's no tx id and the deposit hasn't reached my wallet yet after
over two hours.
Yes, it should correct itself on the next payout. In 10-15 mins or so. Looks like it has, new timestamp and a tx id. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Is there a problem with the latest payout? There's no tx id and the deposit hasn't reached my wallet yet after
over two hours.
|
|
|
|
lyra2re2 5mh/s pay .43 quark 7 mh/s pay .49 but doing lyra2re2 ??
That looks like 750ti rates. Most profit switching uses AMD performance for mormalizing profit among algos. Quark is always rated too low for Nvidia GPUs. Nicehash rates quark at about 1.25 x11 but on Maxwell it's closer to 2. Miningpoolhub has different rates for AMD and Nvidia, but it's only for show. I made my own measurements and use my own factors. I also tune lyra2v2 differently for 750ti due to the higher relative performance compared to other Maxwell GPUs. AMD yes I see that everywhere most profit nvidia is quark. X11 is worthless on nvidia. It was doing fine. Here is a little of my bat file all numbers are related to hashrate based on the other algo's hashrate. I could have 7 mh/s quark and 5 mh/s lyra2re2 and put 1 and 1.2 or use the hashrate 7 and 5 doesn't matter. I'll give it over night and see...it maybe the coins that popped up. ccminer.exe -r 0 -a quark -o stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:4033 -u wallet -p x11=3.1,quark=6.6,lyra2v2=4.8,qubit=3.5,neoscrypt=0.185 -d 0,1,2 -i 0,18,0 timeout /t 1 ccminer.exe -r 0 -a lyra2v2 -o stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:4533 -u wallet -p x11=3.1,quark=6.6,lyra2v2=4.8,qubit=3.5,neoscrypt=0.185 -d 0,1,2 -i 0,14,0 timeout /t 1 Have you tried the sample on the multialgo page? If that doesn't work it's a pool problem. |
|
|
|
lyra2re2 5mh/s pay .43 quark 7 mh/s pay .49 but doing lyra2re2 ??
That looks like 750ti rates. Most profit switching uses AMD performance for mormalizing profit among algos. Quark is always rated too low for Nvidia GPUs. Nicehash rates quark at about 1.25 x11 but on Maxwell it's closer to 2. Miningpoolhub has different rates for AMD and Nvidia, but it's only for show. I made my own measurements and use my own factors. I also tune lyra2v2 differently for 750ti due to the higher relative performance compared to other Maxwell GPUs. |
|
|
|
Nice hack. I've always had a soft spot for self modifying code. I once implemented a switch/case that way because there wasn't enough memory for a jump table. I didn't think it was still possible with modern cpus and all their protections. |
|
|
|
Wow those quark profits dropped fast! Did you have wrong estimates for shark, maybe? :-D
My pending dropped by 3x... Please be careful!
Yup, happened on zpool too. Shark was reporting the same btc value for a block as darknet when it should be about .17 dnet. I don't think it affected the profitability calculations. When things settled down I got pretty much what I expected on both pools. |
|
|
|
LOL  From cryptominingblog: The last part of our initial impressions that did not leave us very happy is the fact that there was quite a bit of dust buildup inside the miner, way more than there should be from a normal testing of new hardware before shipping to customer for example. The outside of the miner makes an impressions that it is new (cleaned well), but on the inside – the fans and the heatsinks of the blades with chips have dust that is hard to cleanup with just compressed air without taking the device apart. The amount of dust we should normally be associated with at least of few weeks of usage in normal everyday environment (non server room) and we don’t think that these devices are tested in a very dusty room. So it seems that they have been “tested” for some more time before being shipped to customers… hehe! if someone was still not convinced that they lie when they say "we do not mine" ;-) There are two parts to that comment. Do they have their own farm with their own mining equipment and do they mine with their customer inventory. The latter is assumed to be false while the former is likely the target of such a claim. Miners don't seem more likely to be passed off as new when used than other electronics. It was probably a production sample that had been stress-tested before shipping to be reviewed. Assuming they knew who they were shipping to they would make sure the unit wouldn't die during the review tests. Either way the reviewer and the producer should have been explicit about the unit's status. And not cleaning it was simply sloppy and unprofessional. |
|
|
|
redtape - i mean redhat - camp are always coming out with ... i know redhat systems - which is one of the reasons i have iot as my desktop AND servers AND miners in the different distros ...
LOL, accepting the latest license agreement in Centos 7 is like playing a puzzle game. You might be just as well off keeping Scientific 6 if you don't need the latest desktop stuff, as both cuda 6.5 & 7.5 are supported. In my case my new PC was also being used as a desktop so I needed a more recent release although I lose cuda 6.5 support. |
|
|
|
|
It's always nice to see a new multipool start up.
The auto-exchange versions of the yaamp pool are convenient for casual miners but don't allow mining a specific coin
or getting paid in the native currency. You get paid in the coin you select regardless of the coin being mined.
It is nice to see a pool that allows single coin mining. It gives miners options not available in the auto-exchange
pools but has that familiar yaamp interface. Given thae yaamp base code does support auto-exchange do you plan
on implementing it in the future? I don't know if it's possible to support both auto-exchange and native mining in
the same pool (IIRC trademybit supported it).
The main benefit of such a feature would be to alllow payment in some native coins where the user has a wallet
while converting the other coins. This would overcome the biggest drawback to native multipool mining in that
the user would no longer require a wallet for every coin mined.
Do you have other plans to distinguish yourself from the crowd?
Good luck with your new venture.
|
|
|
|
as for pools.h ... the only i can find is pools.conf and pools.cpp ... no header file ...
My mistake, I meant pools.cpp. It should have a #include so it can find json_array_foreach. It's still not clear to me whether you're trying to compile the 1.7.4 release or the latest git clone. If you're compiling the right code which includes both the definition of json_array_foreach (#define) and the proper reference to it (#include) and it still doesn't compile there is something bigger going on. its the latest git clone ... as i always do ... but im leaving it for now ... ill look into it more when i have had some sleep - as its 0450 friday morning now - and im just knackered ... the git clone compiles fine in fedora 23 x64 ( the miners and desktop ) - just not centos 7 x64 ( the server ) ... i figured you meant pools.cpp ... ... will look deeper tomorrow at it ... #crysx I editted my previous post and I'm more convinced the two problems are related as they work on some systems but not others. |
|
|
|
as for pools.h ... the only i can find is pools.conf and pools.cpp ... no header file ...
My mistake, I meant pools.cpp. It should have a #include so it can find json_array_foreach. It's still not clear to me whether you're trying to compile the 1.7.4 release or the latest git clone. If you're compiling the right code which includes both the definition of json_array_foreach (#define) and the proper reference to it (#include) and it still doesn't compile there is something bigger going on. Edit: I'm starting to think this problem and the whirlpool problem are related even though the symtoms are reversed. In my case whirpool failed to compile on Centos 6 but works with Fedora 20 and Mint 17. Since the source code is identical the difference must be in the compile environment. Unfortunately my limtited knowledge of the c++ autoconf build system prevents me from going any deeper. |
|
|
|
hi all ... epsylon3 - ive tried to contact you on irc - but as usual you are a very busy man ... i have a small issue that i know has been looked at before a long time ago - so some of you may know how to 'fix' it ... i have just rebuild the main server in the network ( from a crash last week due to power issues ) and im at wits end as to how to rectify the compilation error im getting ... the rebuild was done with centos 7 x64 ( to match the multitude of vps systems granite currently has ) and the compilation of the miners ( both sp and tpruvot ) bomb with different issues ... ccminer-spmod bombs with a declaration issue in whirlpool - so i just changed code to declare the variable and it compile nicely ... so ccminer-spmod78 works and currently hashes without issue ( i have two 750ti oc cards in the server to test ) ... ccminer-tpruvot174 bombs with a json error - and i am unsure how to fix this ... i believe this is an icompatibility issue with the jansson version in centos 7 x64 - but cant figure out what to do to get ccminer-tpruvot174 compiled ... below is the output of the issue ... g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -fopenmp -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -I/usr/local/cuda/include -DUSE_WRAPNVML -O3 -march=native -D_REENTRANT -falign-functions=16 -falign-jumps=16 -falign-labels=16 -MT ccminer-util.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/ccminer-util.Tpo -c -o ccminer-util.o `test -f 'util.cpp' || echo './'`util.cpp
pools.cpp: In function ‘bool parse_pool_array(json_t*)’:
pools.cpp:326:32: error: ‘json_array_foreach’ was not declared in this scope
json_array_foreach(obj, idx, p)
^
pools.cpp:327:2: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘{’ token
{
^
pools.cpp:393:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
}
^
make[2]: *** [ccminer-pools.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
ccminer.cpp: In function ‘bool work_decode(const json_t*, work*)’:
ccminer.cpp:635:34: error: ‘json_array_foreach’ was not declared in this scope
json_array_foreach(txs, idx, p) {
^
ccminer.cpp:635:36: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘{’ token
json_array_foreach(txs, idx, p) {
^
ccminer.cpp:3514:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
}
^
ccminer.cpp:3514:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
ccminer.cpp:3514:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
make[2]: *** [ccminer-ccminer.o] Error 1
any help with this would be very much appreciated ... the other 'issue' - though not an issue with the miner itself - is that i have absolutely no idea how to create a config file for ccminer ... there seems to be NO documentation about it at all ... can anyone help? ... #crysx Have you tried downloading a fresh copy? Did you dl the release or the latest git? The problem is the compiler can't find json_array_foreach which is #defined in compat/jansson/jansson.h. It works for me with the release version. It seems like either the dl is corrupt or a bug was introduced after release. Can't help with the config file, never used it. hi joblo ... tanx for the response ... it is with the latest release - yesterdays git clone ... i dont have this issue with ccminer-spmod78 as mentioned earlier - that is a different issue that is easily fixed ... this one here is a strange one for me ... ive just tried a clone and compile as of a few moments ago and im still getting the same error ... i have installed all the relevant development libraries that are needed - and i dont have an issue compiling other daemons here - so im stumped ... is there some workaround? ... as fort he config file - it seems NO ONE knows how to set one up as no one uses it ... i will require it with the new setup im building after i move - and im organizing it now ... any ideas where i can look? ... #crysx I get the wirlpool error on spmod on some systems but not others, I have no idea why. Actually I don't know how it compiles without the change. Regarding tpruvot, release != git. There was one comit after release, try the release. The error is because the compiler can't find json_array_foreach which is defined in compat/jansson, jansson.h. There should be a line in that file that starts with #define json_array_foreach. There should also be a line near the top of pools.h with #include compat/jansson/janson.h. That is all that is needed, if it's there I have no idea why it's failing. You could also check for previous errors, there may have been a previous non-fatal error that triggered this one. |
|
|
|
hi all ... epsylon3 - ive tried to contact you on irc - but as usual you are a very busy man ... i have a small issue that i know has been looked at before a long time ago - so some of you may know how to 'fix' it ... i have just rebuild the main server in the network ( from a crash last week due to power issues ) and im at wits end as to how to rectify the compilation error im getting ... the rebuild was done with centos 7 x64 ( to match the multitude of vps systems granite currently has ) and the compilation of the miners ( both sp and tpruvot ) bomb with different issues ... ccminer-spmod bombs with a declaration issue in whirlpool - so i just changed code to declare the variable and it compile nicely ... so ccminer-spmod78 works and currently hashes without issue ( i have two 750ti oc cards in the server to test ) ... ccminer-tpruvot174 bombs with a json error - and i am unsure how to fix this ... i believe this is an icompatibility issue with the jansson version in centos 7 x64 - but cant figure out what to do to get ccminer-tpruvot174 compiled ... below is the output of the issue ... g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -fopenmp -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -I/usr/local/cuda/include -DUSE_WRAPNVML -O3 -march=native -D_REENTRANT -falign-functions=16 -falign-jumps=16 -falign-labels=16 -MT ccminer-util.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/ccminer-util.Tpo -c -o ccminer-util.o `test -f 'util.cpp' || echo './'`util.cpp
pools.cpp: In function ‘bool parse_pool_array(json_t*)’:
pools.cpp:326:32: error: ‘json_array_foreach’ was not declared in this scope
json_array_foreach(obj, idx, p)
^
pools.cpp:327:2: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘{’ token
{
^
pools.cpp:393:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
}
^
make[2]: *** [ccminer-pools.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
ccminer.cpp: In function ‘bool work_decode(const json_t*, work*)’:
ccminer.cpp:635:34: error: ‘json_array_foreach’ was not declared in this scope
json_array_foreach(txs, idx, p) {
^
ccminer.cpp:635:36: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘{’ token
json_array_foreach(txs, idx, p) {
^
ccminer.cpp:3514:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
}
^
ccminer.cpp:3514:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
ccminer.cpp:3514:1: error: expected ‘}’ at end of input
make[2]: *** [ccminer-ccminer.o] Error 1
any help with this would be very much appreciated ... the other 'issue' - though not an issue with the miner itself - is that i have absolutely no idea how to create a config file for ccminer ... there seems to be NO documentation about it at all ... can anyone help? ... #crysx Have you tried downloading a fresh copy? Did you dl the release or the latest git? The problem is the compiler can't find json_array_foreach which is #defined in compat/jansson/jansson.h. It works for me with the release version. It seems like either the dl is corrupt or a bug was introduced after release. Can't help with the config file, never used it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
I see quark on top then x11... then it changes to neoscrypt on top...you know make it like nicehash has....the most profitable changes but the algo's stay the same..... thx 
