Site is down again. So far I like the pool and we had good luck today, but the site is not very stable.  |
|
|
|
Thanks Bloodred. Here is what I am seeing: [Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:15:00, LP connected to bitcoinpool.c
om:8334
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:15:46, b4a9f482, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:15:58, d00770f6, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:01, 3b0cfa4c, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:02, long poll: IO error
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:05, LP connected to bitcoinpool.c
om:8334
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:10, a5f37988, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:31, 7633cdf4, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:37, c4993b08, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:43, 3f4e307f, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:50, f048332a, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 Problems communicating with bitcoin RPC 0 2
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:16:59, warning: job finished, miner
is idle
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:17:02, 680f0546, accepted
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:17:07, long poll: IO error
[Miner0] bitcoinpool.com:8334 17/08/2011 19:17:12, LP connected to bitcoinpool.c
om:8334 It would be great to have any solution configurable - maybe in the settings.cfg catch-all file? |
|
|
|
|
There are probably a zillion things that would be nice to have in 0.6.6, but one that I think would help a lot is some way of maintaining uptime. What I have been gaining by hopping has been outweighed by uptime issues.
For instance, much of today CP was mining on bitcoinpool. However, there were tons of RPC communication issues and stales. I didn't have that problem with other pools, so it seems like it was a pool server issue. This was also the case this past weekend with unitedminers.
Would it be possible to set a threshold of stales/rejected shares or a count of RPC communication errors in a given amount of time and then blacklist that pool for a period (e.g. a certain number of hours)?
|
|
|
|
I downloaded the upgrade patch from 0.6.4 to .5 and when i tried to run upgrade it game me an error saying the bspatch was not found. It went ahead and renamed the cherrypicker.jar file to old. Do I need to install BSpatch to use this upgrade?
Yes, you need it. Follow the upgrade instructions https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=33031.msg441154#msg441154 |
|
|
|
|
Thank you Bloodred for this detailed description. I definitely think the ability to detect (and penalize) very slow pools is appealing. I don't know if I am understanding this properly, but could a high penalty could force you into mining less efficient pools if the range of pool speed is very wide? United Mining is an example where it took them more than 200 hours to find their last block (and over 170 hours so far on this block), but efficiency for a while in the past couple of days was much better than other pools.
I'll try to give DYNAMIC a try in the next day or two and provide feedback
|
|
|
|
CherryPicking has been updated to v0.6.5
Thanks Bloodred!  The new configs for polmine and bitcoinpool are working for me. Can you explain the differences between the three new Dynamic modes? Also, based on your knowledge and simulations is there a configuration (Dynamic vs. normal, shares vs. time, etc.) that you expect to be optimal? |
|
|
|
take my word for it: don't spend any time trying to get mainframe working...
my payout from mainframe has been awful:
avg pps, poolname, eff
0.0000202594021739130 Mainframe 77%
all it has done is lower my overall efficiency: disabled.
Yikes, that is bad. Disabled it is! Thanks |
|
|
|
OK, good to know its not just me...  It seems like their API is working http://mining.mainframe.nl/apiI wonder if they've blacklisted the CP client somehow? |
|
|
|
Thanks for the feedback! Mainframe has never worked for me. Not sure why that is. But I only added it into my pools list yesterday, so I wasn't sure if it was temporary or not.  |
|
|
|
I'm guessing you're using STATIC_FAST, which chooses the fastest pool under 1.0, if you switch to NORMAL it'll always go to the lowest pool.
Yes, I'm using STATIC_FAST. Should I switch to NORMAL until the new algorithm in 0.6.5? |
|
|
|
Question about the picking algorithm. In the case below, it would seem that unitedminers would be the most efficient, but instead it chooses btcserv. Curious as to why: * 15unitedminers
* Pool update done
Type: PROP
Hash rate: 1.722 GH/s
Round shares: 305245
0.37583496908961384
* 17btcserv
* Pool update done
Type: PROP
Hash rate: 21.231 GH/s
Round shares: 748654
0.9217852968887803
* 20Bloodys
* Pool update done
Type: PROP
Hash rate: 2.84 GH/s
Round shares: 1853551
2.2821971950106397
* 21BtcMonkey
* Pool update done
Type: PROP
Hash rate: 2.066 GH/s
Round shares: 3908522
4.812394126213617
* 22BTCPool24
* Pool update done
Type: PROP
Hash rate: 27.789 GH/s
Round shares: 3678697
4.529420541810857
* 23BTCWorld
* Pool update done
Type: PROP
Hash rate: 4.35 GH/s
Round shares: 2296943
2.8281265914449207
* 24DigBtc
* Socket timeout
* Read timed out
* Update error or pool considered invalid (lagging or down)
* 25NinjaCoin
* Socket timeout
* Read timed out
* Update error or pool considered invalid (lagging or down)
* 26ABCPool
* Pool update done
Type: PPS
Hash rate: 80.3 GH/s
1.012453300124533
* Most efficient pool is: 17btcserv
0.9217852968887803
* Cherry Picking!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm trying to keep up with each of the pools and their status. This is what I have right now. Is this how others have their pools configured? Are there others I could/should add or disable?
0arsbitcoin Backup
1bitclockers Disabled - may work with 0.6.5
2bitcoinlc Disabled - may work with 0.6.5
3bithasher Ok
4eclipsemc Ok
5eligius Backup
6mainframe Ok
7mineco Ok
8mtred Ok
9nofee 502 error (temporarily down?)
10ozco Ok
11polmine Disabled - may work with 0.6.5
12rfcpool Disabled - pool shutdown
13slush Ok
14triple Ok
15unitedminers Ok, but recent site/connection problems
16BitcoinPool Disabled - may work with 0.6.5
17btcserv Ok - required new cfg (8/15)
18poolmunity Disabled
19bitp Disabled
20Bloodys Ok
21BtcMonkey Ok
22BTCPool24 Ok
23BTCWorld Ok
24DigBtc Ok
25NinjaCoin Ok
26ABCPool Backup
|
|
|
|
|
When it says that X needs to be running, try running it as sudo. It should get over that problem
|
|
|
|
Anyone else seeing a lot of upstream RPC errors for workers and problems connecting to the API? |
|
|
|
Thanks for your effort!
I've installed on a 64 bit Windows 7 System with Catalyst 11.7 & AMD APP 2.5 installed. I have 3 * 6970 cards installed. However, when I execute with 'python atitweak -l', it only list the first card.
Could you help extend it to show all the cards in Windows?
Were you able to get it working? I tried on my dual 6950 system and it seems to work just fine: C:\Python27>python.exe c:\Python27\scripts\adl3\atitweak -l
0. AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series (\\.\DISPLAY4)
engine clock range is 125 - 900MHz
memory clock range is 75 - 1325MHz
core voltage range is 0.9 - 1.175VDC
performance level 0: engine clock 250MHz, memory clock 150MHz, core voltage
0.9VDC
performance level 1: engine clock 500MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1VDC
performance level 2: engine clock 900MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1.175VDC
fan speed range: 0 - 100%, 800 - 6000 RPM
1. ()
engine clock range is 125 - 900MHz
memory clock range is 75 - 1325MHz
core voltage range is 0.9 - 1.175VDC
performance level 0: engine clock 250MHz, memory clock 150MHz, core voltage
0.9VDC
performance level 1: engine clock 500MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1VDC
performance level 2: engine clock 900MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1.175VDC
fan speed range: 0 - 100%, 800 - 6000 RPM |
|
|
|
I have 12 new 1x riser cables that I won't be using. I am offering them for .75 BTC each shipped via First Class Mail from California (~3 days to most places in the US). Pics are below. Length is about 19cm or 7.5 inches.  |
|
|
|
Yes I have tried --adapter=all option. It returns only the first card. If I manually set parameter and specify device (-A 1, -A 2...), it returns nothings. C:\Python27\Scripts>python atitweak -e 900 --adapter=all
Setting performance level 0 on adapter 0: engine clock 900MHz
Setting performance level 1 on adapter 0: engine clock 900MHz
Setting performance level 2 on adapter 0: engine clock 900MHz
C:\Python27\Scripts>python atitweak -e 900 -A 1
C:\Python27\Scripts>python atitweak -e 900 -A 2
C:\Python27\Scripts>python atitweak -e 915 -A 0
Setting performance level 0 on adapter 0: engine clock 915MHz
Setting performance level 1 on adapter 0: engine clock 915MHz
Setting performance level 2 on adapter 0: engine clock 915MHz
C:\Python27\Scripts> I installed Python 2.7.2 (32-bit) and cloned atitweak from the git repository. This is what I get: C:\Python27>python.exe c:\Python27\scripts\adl3\atitweak -l
0. AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series (\\.\DISPLAY1)
engine clock range is 125 - 950MHz
memory clock range is 75 - 1350MHz
core voltage range is 0.9 - 1.1VDC
performance level 0: engine clock 250MHz, memory clock 150MHz, core voltage
0.9VDC
performance level 1: engine clock 500MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1VDC
performance level 2: engine clock 865MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1.1VDC
fan speed range: 0 - 100%, 800 - 6000 RPM
1. (╘?x☻♠)
engine clock range is 125 - 950MHz
memory clock range is 75 - 1350MHz
core voltage range is 0.9 - 1.1VDC
performance level 0: engine clock 250MHz, memory clock 150MHz, core voltage
0.9VDC
performance level 1: engine clock 500MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1VDC
performance level 2: engine clock 865MHz, memory clock 1250MHz, core voltage
1.1VDC
fan speed range: 0 - 100%, 800 - 6000 RPM What is odd is that it is reporting the same information for both GPUs. The BIOS engine clock range for the 5850 is up to 1000MHz, yet it reports it as 950. Not sure what is going on, but Windows version seems a bit buggy. I was able to do C:\Python27>python.exe c:\Python27\scripts\adl3\atitweak -e 910 -P 2
Setting performance level 2 on adapter 0: engine clock 910MHz successfully on a single GPU system. I'll try it on a system with 2 x 6950's tomorrow and see if it works. |
|
|
|
Thanks for your effort!
I've installed on a 64 bit Windows 7 System with Catalyst 11.7 & AMD APP 2.5 installed. I have 3 * 6970 cards installed. However, when I execute with 'python atitweak -l', it only list the first card.
Could you help extend it to show all the cards in Windows?
I haven't tried atitweak under Windows, but have you tried it with the --adapter=all switch to see if it will show all of them? Also, have you tried setting clocks or fan speed for your other two GPUs? Curious if it works even if they don't show up in the list. |
|
|
|
Great, thanks. I had a feeling it was about right, but always helps to get a second opinion. Now if someone has an idea how to increase the BTC/day rate 5-10%, then I'll really be happy Pool hop. All you need to do is sacrifice your dignity. what's the dignity in NOT pool hopping? are you looking to maximize your performance or not? was it undignified to bring your 1.9 GH/s online? was it undignified to use a GPU when others were CPUs? was it undignified to switch to Namecoins when they were profitable? was it undignified to switch back when they were unprofitable? was it undignified to use phatk when it got better performance? was it undignified to use the modified phatk when it got even better performance? was it undignified when you chose a fee-free pool? will it be undignified when FPGA puts all GPU miners out of business? pool hopping is not some secret thing that only a few people can do. There are at least 2 methods (a proxy and modified client) that are freely available to everyone in this very sub-forum. There is another client that caries a cost of .1 BTC which is nothing for any GPU miner. You don't consider it an indignity that you use a graphics card that was assembled by people making less per day than the value of your 1 BTC? Yet, using software developed by volunteers to make that graphics card more efficient is somehow an indignity. You are confused my friend. If you want a 5-10% increase, the answer is plain and simple. If not, then be satisfied with your diminishing returns. EDIT: Mining Bitcoins for my medical mission to Vietnam. Donations welcome 1DwJ4YsvEmzjJh5zPHw32RAEr8WpZKApMZ looking at this quote I'd say you owe it to the people in Vietnam to maximize your returns from BitCoin. So you are also confused. You won't "steal" from a bunch of other 1st World Computer hobbyists (because if you aren't hopping you are just a hobbyist) to fund your medical mission to Vietnam? In your situation, I'd say you are selling your soul by NOT hopping. Yikes. Who duked in your cereal this morning? Even if it is going towards a good cause, there is a distinct difference between optimizing your mining tools/hardware, and gaming the system to get credit for mining you didn't earn at the cost of another person. I don't believe a scheming Robin Hood approach to redistribution is the right way to go about things. So I am ok earning a bit less to be respectful to others. |
|
|
|
Sounds a bit low. The last 24 hours I've only made 0.93 BTC, but it's been averaging 1.10 BTC at this difficulty level for my 1800MH/s.
What pool are you using? Are you pool hopping? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
