I'm not familiar with the theory you mention, but the only PSU connection to the hashing modules is +12V, so I don't see how caps on the 3.3V rail could cause this problem. Clearly the actual problem is in the KnC board design. If such current in-rush is possible with a standards-compliant PSU - and it is, as we have seen this with many different well-known PSUs now - their board should should be designed to manage it.
Here is what he had said on the matter. It is untested so do not take it as gospel. But in terms of losing a board for a week or more I think I will play it safe. For this reason I think the plugs having both a jumper and a power resistor to the 3v line are a very good bet. I know you followed instructions, but did you put in the jumper then fire up the supply and check that the voltage was there on the 12V, then shut down the supply, plug the power supply into the Jupiter, then switch on the supply?
If my theory that the current ramp, preventing current surge producing a voltage spike sufficient to blow the caps, the current ramp to ramp up current on the 12V line is actually controlled by a voltage ramp of 0 to 1V produced on the 3.3V line (because the 3.3V will be up to regulated voltage before the 5V or 12V) then putting in the jumper, turning on the supply to check if the jumper is correct and voltage being supplied, then shut down before plugging into Jupiter, since the supply expects that it is plugged into a motherboard having a load on the 3.3V line, it expects that when the supply is turned off the 3.3V line filter capacitors will drain out thru the motherboard. That can't happen without a motherboard or a resistor to ground from the 3.3V line as well as the jumper.
So, if you check the jumper was correctly placed by looking for 12V on the 12V line, then shut down, plugged the supply into the Jupiter, and turned it on, the supply 3.3V line never drained and still had full voltage on its filter caps and the timed ramp voltage that controlled the ramp for the 12v current had remained at max, as if already having timed out its ramp, and BANG, instant max current.
I don't think it's possible for this to be correct. In most (all?) modern ATX PSUs, AC is converted to +12V, and the +12V rail provides the input power to the DC-DC converters that produce the 3.3V and all the other power rails, so it would not be possible for the 3.3V ramp to control the 12V ramp time. |
|
|
|
Kaboom! http://s28.postimg.org/v71hnbm71/SAM_1801.jpg  PSU: OCZ ZX 1250W. Found the Jupiter shut down. Tried to start it and nothing happened. Removed cables, put them back and poof fireworks. Waiting for my RMA. Hashing with 3 boards and not whining. Has anyone tested soy's theory about the 3.3v filter caps on the PSU being the issue causing max current to be delivered and blowing caps? I wanted to but I have no way of measuring more than 10A without frying my mulitimeter so its not a good test. By the by I received my RMA board back yesterday and everything works great! I did put a 2w 18Ohm resistor on a 3.3V line just in case but who knows really. Thanks again KnC! I would suggest if you shut down your PSU for anything, unplug it and give it 10 minutes before starting again, just in case. A bit of paranoia is better than straight up gambling I think. I'm not familiar with the theory you mention, but the only PSU connection to the hashing modules is +12V, so I don't see how caps on the 3.3V rail could cause this problem. Clearly the actual problem is in the KnC board design. If such current in-rush is possible with a standards-compliant PSU - and it is, as we have seen this with many different well-known PSUs now - their board should should be designed to manage it. |
|
|
|
Anyone know how to get cached copies/screen grabbed images of the KNC site from back in June/July/August/September. Also any modifications to their order TOS.
They have quite a few archived versions on the wayback machine at http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.kncminer.com . |
|
|
|
The argument that you will make the same over time is kinda true and kinda not. You could just as well make the argument that you will make the same solo mining as you will in a pool - but it's not really true because difficulty isn't static. If you get paid for your shares NOW, at a rate set by current difficulty, you will make more BTC - unless you are very lucky.
But if you are very lucky, you'll make a lot more BTC. On average you'll make the same amount either way...if no one in your pool is cheating or pool hopping or otherwise taking advantage of being in a pool, anyway. And if you are unlucky you will make a lot less. The point of pool mining is to eliminate such variance as much as possible. You are right that it will be pretty much the same over a long enough time, but AGAIN, we mine on pools to eliminate as much variance as possible. Nowadays, I don't think p2pool does as good a job of that for small miners as some other centralized pools. That being said, I am not attacking p2pool, so I hope that's not what you think. I am a big supporter of the p2pool concept, I mine on p2pool myself, and I promote p2pool to others whenever I can. I just hope that it can be made more friendly to small miners eventually. |
|
|
|
Having miners on Elizium or some other node doesn't change the fact that my 120GHs makes me a small fry that won't get any reward anymore on p2pool.
You are absolutely, positively 100% dead wrong about this. You still get exactly the same reward that you "should" be getting. See any of my last few posts in this thread. Ok I'm wrong. And my wallet is lying to me. And I didn't use those coins that I DIDNT get from p2pool to pay for daycare. Sure whatever You can tell me I'm wrong till you're blue in the face. Fact is over the last few weeks the pittance of power I threw at BTC guild earned me a magnitude more than the majority of firepower I threw at P2pool. I USED and Traded this BTC already so go ahead and huff and puff all you want it doesn't change FACT and Evidence at hand for me. What part of "over time" and "in the long run" do you not understand? Did you miss the part where I'm running a third of the power that you are running? I don't really care about you, but I'm not a big fan of you spreading lies in here. P2pool does NOT cheat people with low hashrates.I guess if you really need that $7 each day for daycare, it may make sense for you to mine somewhere where you can get the steady payout. But you would earn more over time on p2pool. I don't think anyone is contending that p2pool is cheating anyone. The point is that difficulty increases every 10-14 days, and a share a week from now may not be worth the same as a share now. Share variance is just too big for small miners now on p2pool. The argument that you will make the same over time is kinda true and kinda not. You could just as well make the argument that you will make the same solo mining as you will in a pool - but it's not really true because difficulty isn't static. If you get paid for your shares NOW, at a rate set by current difficulty, you will make more BTC - unless you are very lucky. |
|
|
|
have the option at eligius pool
to put difficulty at worker
or not?
and if i can how i can do these???
You can set a minimum difficulty in Configurable Options. ...but it doesn't work... |
|
|
|
|
I have to say I agree with Jedimstr. All the mathematical analysis is accurate, but if you are a small miner, it is not helpful.
In a world where difficulty increases every two weeks at best, going a whole week with no payout at all is just not acceptable - and that is the situation low-hashrate miners are in now with p2pool.
|
|
|
|
any way of running p2pool without full node?
using only standalone lan-connected miners
You can connect to any public p2pool node - here's a list: http://p2pool-nodes.info/When I ran P2Pool in the past, my IP showed up on that page. I started my node up again a little over a week ago, and I see that I no longer show up there. Anyone have any idea why? I can access it from outside my network, so I know it's publicly visible, and I really haven't changed anything at all since the time when it did show up. I had some nodes up that never showed up on there either. I don't believe nogleg.net ever appeared even though it was up for a good 3 or 4 weeks. Maybe someone has to mine at it and find an actual share for it to appear? not sure if that's the case w/ yours, but I know there were 0 shares on nogleg.net My node has been up for 10.2 days and currently has found 374 shares, so that's not it. |
|
|
|
Its already been said that Bertmod doesn't work with 0.99-E properly
Where is that said, just wondering. I don't see any issues or variation... The only issue I've read/seen is that it removes the "advanced" tab. You can still get to the page though by just typing in the address... Edit...NVM, that's for the 0.99-tune for the October miners. The 'advanced' tab disappears when you go to the 'status' tab, but if you then click on other tabs, it will reappear. |
|
|
|
Could you use the flat bar (on the processor side) and the integrated bracket that came unglued to make a sandwich around the heatpipes? Then use a c-clamp or locking pliers (vise-grips) to squeeze all four pipes back into proper alignment?
Just use a full tube of thermal paste! That'll fix it right up! lol
or you could just buy a new one. to easy.. job done  That's crazy talk, man! Just too damn easy for these hardy young DIYers He could save a couple bucks if he doesn't cook this expensive piece of almost irreplaceable electronic equipment Lol |
|
|
|
I tried forcing the pipes by hand to allign so they make a flat surface, but they are not moving and I am afraid that if I apply too much force I can do even more damage.
I might get a small hammer, put a piece of rubber or other cushioning material and hit the end of the piper on the top of the cooler downwards.
That's a precision machined surface. You will never be able to get it flat enough by hand. Just buy a new cooler, and hopefully, get KnC to reimburse you for the damaged one. |
|
|
|
any way of running p2pool without full node?
using only standalone lan-connected miners
You can connect to any public p2pool node - here's a list: http://p2pool-nodes.info/When I ran P2Pool in the past, my IP showed up on that page. I started my node up again a little over a week ago, and I see that I no longer show up there. Anyone have any idea why? I can access it from outside my network, so I know it's publicly visible, and I really haven't changed anything at all since the time when it did show up. |
|
|
|
@xyzzy099
I love the idea of p2pool but I keep hearing there are issues with KnC Miners.
Any stability issues for you?
Is it possible to merge mine(nmc,ixc,dvc) with p2pool and if so how difficult is it to set it up with your own node?
I have not had any issues with stability. If you are running your own node, you can merge-mine any coins that are merge-mineable, but you are effectively solo-mining those coins. |
|
|
|
I've accepted how far off topic this thread is everyday and choose to embrace it  That is a very Zen attitude brother I will strive to reach your level of enlightenment |
|
|
|
I meant the person who creates the pool software. I get how the node works. Also, the block difficulty is the same for all the pools but wouldn't strong machines working on "harder" solutions to the block end up solving them more often?
"Q: Why does my miner say it has found a lot of shares but p2pool say I have only found a few?!
A: The real P2Pool difficulty is hundreds of times higher than on normal pools, but p2pool essentially lies to your miner and tells it to work on relatively easy shares so that it submits shares every few seconds instead of every few hours. P2Pool then ignores any submitted shares that don't match the real share difficulty. By doing this, P2Pool can more accurately report your local hash rate and you can see if you are having problems with too many stale shares quickly"
Wouldn't that increased difficulty increase the luck of the pool?
Well, p2pool is opensource, and has been around for a good while. The author, forrestv, is a reputable member of the bitcoin community, as far as I can tell. The meaning of the question you quote is that most pools set a share difficulty which is relatively low (probably somewhere in the range of 64-512 for KnC miners), and it sets your payout based on how many of those shares you submit versus others also mining on the pool. P2Pool doesn't work that way. It actually has its own block chain, and each block has a difficulty that is considerably higher than the traditional share difficulty, but still much lower than the bitcoin network difficulty (currently this difficulty is in the 300K - 450K range), and your payout is based on how many of those blocks you solve relative to other miners. People mining on P2Pool typically don't have machines that are any 'stronger' than people mining on any other pool. They use the same hardware as people mining on other pools. The block solutions for the P2Pool blocks are harder than typical pool shares, but that doesn't have any effect on how many actual bitcoin blocks get mined by the pool. I think this has already wandered way off topic for this thread, so if anyone has any more questions about p2pool, we should probably take it to the appropriate thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.0 |
|
|
|
I think I'll set up p2pool on my server and see how well it works. They do seem to be "lucky" but isn't that because they are working at a much higher difficulty? As long as the pool operator stays honest, it does look like a good way to keep mining personal.
If you set up your own p2pool node, YOU are the pool operator. P2pool mines on the same bitcoin network as everyone else, and the difficulty on that network is 707M at this writing. You may be thinking about the share difficulty within P2Pool itself, but that is a completely different thing, and doesn't affect how many blocks the pool mines - it only affects how much individual miners get paid per block. |
|
|
|
My hashrate in cgminer goes down, but the rate seen by the pool is pretty close to my actual hashrate, sometimes more, sometimes less, just like any other pool. The bottom line is the payout - and the payout is good If you plan to try P2Pool, I would recommend making your own node - it's not that complicated. I don't know anything about Elizium, but most of the public p2pool nodes charge fees (I'm looking at you, p2pool.org). Thanks for the info I think I'll look into creating my own node the more coin the better Mind you p2pool does not imply more btc. Not if you are currently mining on a pool with no fees, and that pays transaction fees to miners. The current luck of p2pool can't continue forever. Over the long haul, the payout of any pool that does not charge fees and pays transactions to miners should be the same. Personally, I still like p2pool the best. I like getting an instant payout of every block mined. It has the same feel as solo mining, which I find appealing. [EDIT: I should add that using p2pool is the ONLY truly effective way to fight pool centralization, if such things concern you.] |
|
|
|
i don't find the cgminer linux binary 32 bits on the website  To run the binary on a foreign system, it probably needs to be statically linked. The FreeBSD Linux compatibility layer includes dynamic libraries. A given binary may require that you also install any non-standard dynamic libraries required by that binary, of course. |
|
|
|
My hashrate in cgminer goes down, but the rate seen by the pool is pretty close to my actual hashrate, sometimes more, sometimes less, just like any other pool. The bottom line is the payout - and the payout is good If you plan to try P2Pool, I would recommend making your own node - it's not that complicated. I don't know anything about Elizium, but most of the public p2pool nodes charge fees (I'm looking at you, p2pool.org). |
|
|
|
this kinda sucks ... complete 180 of their previous statement on Bitcoin ... =/
This will hinder Bitcoins adoption rate in china ... big time ... ugh...
No it's not, and no it won't. They went out of their way to restate that they are fine with people using bitcoins for online transactions. This is just a clarification of the policy for banking institutions. I seriously doubt that any bank anywhere will ever be allowed to treat bitcoin as equal to the local sovereign currency. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
