Just happened to another one of my rigs My main pool shows as disabled, mining on my 1st backup pool, while the other rigs mine happily on my main pool So second time today with 2 different rigs cgminer version 2.4.0 - Started: [2012-05-03 10:31:14]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):312.0 (avg):302.1 Mh/s | Q:4804 A:2429 R:149 HW:0 E:51% U:4.0/m
TQ: 1 ST: 3 SS: 50 DW: 1276 NB: 77 LW: 5384 GF: 26 RF: 26
Connected to http://pool.ABCPool.co:8332 with LP as user XXXXXX
Block: 000004aaff274ef6bfc969765f953f1a... Started: [20:33:38]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
GPU 0: 73.0C 2391RPM | 311.8/302.1Mh/s | A:2429 R:149 HW:0 U: 4.00/m I: 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0: Disabled Alive Priority 0: http://pool.bonuspool.co.cc:80 User:XXXX
1: Enabled Alive Priority 1: http://pool.ABCPool.co:8332 User:XXX
2: Enabled Alive Priority 2: http://pit.deepbit.net:8332 User:XXXX
3: Enabled Alive Priority 3: http://mine2.btcguild.com:8332 User:XXXXX
Current pool management strategy: Failover
[A]dd pool [R]emove pool [D]isable pool [E]nable pool
[C]hange management strategy [S]witch pool [I]nformation
Or press any other key to continue
Any idea what's causing this CKolivas ? |
|
|
|
Problem with version 2.4.0 that has been reported by one other than me.
If cgminer switches to your configured backup pool, it will not switch back on its own. At least for 2 of us.
FYI
I experienced that on 1 of 7 mining rigs All have the same setup, all were running 2.4.0. So not sure what the trigger was for this to happen All WinXp 12.4 58XX series |
|
|
|
We're not there yet I'm guessing, even with the new version of CGMiner cgminer version 2.4.0 - Started: [2012-05-03 10:31:14]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):314.4 (avg):296.8 Mh/s | Q:573 A:285 R:18 HW:0 E:50% U:3.7/m
TQ: 2 ST: 9 SS: 5 DW: 158 NB: 9 LW: 731 GF: 7 RF: 6
Connected to http://pool.bonuspool.co.cc:80 with LP as user DutchBrat
Block: 00000a50b14e181ee2eddb662905d6da... Started: [11:40:04]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
GPU 0: 73.0C 2436RPM | 312.3/296.8Mh/s | A:285 R:18 HW:0 U: 3.73/m I: 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-05-03 11:45:07] Accepted cd1d2d67.dbb1ffa3 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:45:10] Accepted aecd4b84.ee3321f3 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:45:14] Accepted 5ac588ed.f944086e GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:45:39] Accepted 4ba3b78c.43439465 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:45:46] Accepted 033d897c.54c84c35 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:46:16] Pool 0 communication failure, caching submissions
[2012-05-03 11:46:37] Pool 0 communication resumed, submitting work
[2012-05-03 11:46:37] Rejected bc157d83.3ba10608 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:46:53] Rejected dcc02b84.454b2080 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:46:59] Rejected 5396d980.319d0554 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:47:06] Rejected b659cd6f.299f9fcd GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:47:26] Accepted 17cc28c1.95018954 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-05-03 11:47:32] Accepted 708e48de.01d0c49c GPU 0 pool 0
 |
|
|
|
|
Let me know if there's anything I can test or otherwise......
I have most older version of CGMiner, so I can revert miners back to test, although I would prefer to use a version with API-support enabled
Have you talked to CKolivas about this CGMiner issue ? He might be able to help figure out what it is that's making the connections go ballistic
Good Luck !
Brat
|
|
|
|
And I bought 2 more tickets, so I will actually win this sucker  |
|
|
|
I agree with DA & also pledge to donate 3% of any winnings to bitlotto for site development etc, if we could get this established as a voluntary but accepted good community practice here then maybe we'll help fund it without harming it's powerful 99% edge
Pledging a 3% donation as well ! +1 |
|
|
|
663 tickets have now been sold. What are you going to do with your BFL single?
Put flowers in it, will make for a whacky vase ! |
|
|
|
Ive noticed the double LP, seems to be yet another side effect and need to figure it out.
You are correct, its definitely part of the trouble.
Few things from your results is a bit strange, your DW is muuuuuch higher than my connection results but this isnt such a huge deal, your efficiency though is alot lower than my results, seems I have more than just the rejects to resolve, heh.
DW got a lot higher since CGMiner 2.3.5. according to Ckolivas that is because of the change in LP handling protocol As for efficiency, I've always experienced efficiency between 40% - 70% so I doubt that it has got anything to do with your pool I actually had a much higher efficiency on 2.3.5. than I have now on 2.3.6. (it went back to my 'normal' levels in the latest upgrade) Brat |
|
|
|
makes you look like an immature whining fool ...
Maybe to the uninitiated. Stick around for a while and you'll see, but please refrain from discouraging my daily entertainment. Thank you  Kano & Luke-JR are like Statler & Waldorf (2 grumpy old men from the Muppet show).... I think they would get along very well IRL |
|
|
|
Screenshot of the double LongPoll message I was talking about: cgminer version 2.3.6 - Started: [2012-04-29 03:23:42]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):312.3 (avg):309.6 Mh/s | Q:15770 A:7858 R:239 HW:0 E:50% U:4.2/m
TQ: 3 ST: 6 SS: 0 DW: 3304 NB: 235 LW: 16948 GF: 19 RF: 57
Connected to http://pool.bonuspool.co.cc:80 with LP as user
Block: 00000a82c3147859c0f9cda0103b3c67... Started: [10:23:13]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
GPU 0: 73.5C 2289RPM | 312.3/309.6Mh/s | A:7858 R:239 HW:0 U: 4.22/m I: 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-04-30 10:21:56] Accepted c8e21e26.357feee4 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:22:19] Accepted 924d798d.32ff22f9 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:22:19] Accepted afbfc8dd.e693fe6c GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:22:32] Accepted a62050fe.d5b5e67b GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:22:49] Accepted 4a22e5eb.111480f5 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:22:56] Accepted 6f59a564.e2d30fdb GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:23:13] LONGPOLL from pool 2 detected new block
[2012-04-30 10:23:13] LONGPOLL from pool 0 requested work restart
[2012-04-30 10:23:15] LONGPOLL from pool 0 requested work restart
[2012-04-30 10:23:35] Accepted 44382921.4f9cfe16 GPU 0 pool 2
[2012-04-30 10:23:37] Accepted a39dffe6.6f329b60 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:23:46] Accepted 9c6e6dab.5f0bceb2 GPU 0 pool 0
[2012-04-30 10:23:54] Accepted 2524bb02.76824f91 GPU 0 pool 0
they are only 2 secs apart this time, if they are further apart there's a chance a share is delivered and that one most of the time is a reject Received the BTC from last week, thanks ! |
|
|
|
Bought 5 tickets  |
|
|
|
LOL, the pool has already been down for me for the last 1 1/2 hours now, thought you were already working on it! Anyway, I always get 2 "LongPoll requests new work from pool 0" messages after a new block is found.... never just 1 So I get: LongPoll on pool 2 found new block on network LongPoll requests new work from pool 0 Rejected xxxxx.xxxxx at pool 0 LongPoll requests new work from pool 0 No matter if there's 20 seconds between blocks found or 1 hr, always 2 Don't know if anyone else with a high reject rate cam confirm this ? From all other pools I only get one. Going to bed now, will post some screen shots for you tomorrow Brat |
|
|
|
|
Clipse:
What I am wondering is: Why are there always 2
"LongPoll from pool 0 requested work restart"
messages from your pool after a new block was found
On all other pools there is only 1 "LP requested work restart" message
They sometimes do not come close enough, so I might deliver a share in between and that one always duly gets rejected....
Any idea ?
p.s. I hope your friend is doing better !
|
|
|
|
|
Some encouraging mining news:
I have been running the new CGMiner version (2.3.5) since this morning and where I normally run between 3.5% - 4.5% rejects I have been experiencing a reject rate of below 1.5% for the last 7 hours (so sample is still small)
Accepted: 13.452
Rejected: 221
Shortly before I wrote this the pool went down for a couple of minutes, resulting in 60 rejects over my 11 GPUs, hence the above 1.5% reject rate
The change in the new CGMiner version has got to do with LongPolls
It now uses the LP from whichever pool sends out one first
I added a pool as my backup pool that does merged mining, so I get LPs on NMC as well, as a result what I see in CGMiner now is:
Long Poll from pool 2 detected new block (upon which my old work gets discarded) followed by:
Long Poll from pool 0 requested work restart
Long Poll from pool 0 requested work restart
and then 0 to 1 reject
I do have a very high Discard (34%) rate now, but according to the CGMiner thread that is because of the change in the way LPs are handled
I would recommend whoever had issues on this pool before to change to the latest version of CGMiner.... it seems to be working very well for me
Don't forget to include a merge mining pool as one of your backup pools
Finally some good news for you Clipse ! Hope your friend is ok !!!!
|
|
|
|
Hi Guys
Friend was in huge accident yesterday so was away from home unable to make those payments, I just woke up and will be doing that now.
Sorry about that.
Sorry about still not making the payments, a few minutes after the last message the ER phoned and I rushed back to the hospital and still at the hospital atm. Im just waiting for things to stabilise here until I head back home, worst case I will have to make the outstanding plus current payment tomorrow(Sunday) , Im really sorry about this delay, its terrible timing of things that happened. You take care of your friend ! Those are the important things in life !!! |
|
|
|
That's what the earlier issue was at BTCGuild.... miners with very low latency had problems... According to Ckolivas it had to do with the Java backend of PoolservJ.... the only solution he suggested was to include --net-delay, but that didn't help any I have no clue though how much the 'íntroduced' delay is with --net-delay Weird thing is it runs so well for a few hours but the longer the pool is up, the bigger the issues get.... for some users.... As I said before... I don't like it, but even with 5% stales I'm still getting way more than at most pools.... and then there's always the upside of lower rejects |
|
|
|
I'm on 20ms.... Maybe I'm too fast |
|
|
|
Now at 4.49% and rising..... lol But might I add.... still making more than with any other pool, so no complaints |
|
|
|
|
It has been a really good day !!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
