compile error. Where am I noobing it...?
unsigned int nBiTwinSeq = 0;
for (; nBiTwinSeq < * nChainLength; nBiTwinSeq++)
{
....
prime.cpp: In member function 'bool CSieveOfEratosthenes::Weave()':
prime.cpp:532:27: error: invalid type argument of unary '*' (have 'unsigned int')
?? What do you think that asterisk is doing? -- edit I assume that "never mind" means you saw it after taking a short break.  |
|
|
|
If you are running the original binary released by Sunny, then you have very little chance of finding a block in less than 15 seconds IMO
What does that mean? |
|
|
|
With your report, Entz, I probably need to run this test again. Perhaps I did not give it enough time to get off of zero pps before I lost patience. I'm using OS X.
...
Still have the problem that I must run a discrete instance per core rather than just letting primecoind spin off threads.
This problem is resolved with the code released earlier today. |
|
|
|
So what is considered to me a decent primespersec?
Sounds like a personal question. More seriously, the statement has been made several times that pps is not a very useful metric. Folks with quite low numbers have reported getting blocks while those with what would seem to be fast rigs are still fishing in what appears to be an empty hole. |
|
|
|
With your report, Entz, I probably need to run this test again. Perhaps I did not give it enough time to get off of zero pps before I lost patience. I'm using OS X.
...
Still have the problem that I must run a discrete instance per core rather than just letting primecoind spin off threads.
|
|
|
|
Whats wrong, I used the command "setgenerate true -1" and i only have 1-5 primepersec? Using AMD 965BE
Some people, including me - search this thread or my post history, have reported that running more than a single thread crashes their pps number. |
|
|
|
|
I'm using OS X.
With this new code and also the changes I made in makefile.osx:
#CFLAGS = -mmacosx-version-min=10.5 -arch i386 -O3
CFLAGS = -mmacosx-version-min=10.7 -O3 /
-arch x86_64 -funroll-loops -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer
I'm seeing between two and three times higher primemeter numbers than before.
Still have the problem that I must run a discrete instance per core rather than just letting primecoind spin off threads.
|
|
|
|
Bummer. Over ten minutes now running with the new, much faster, primecoind and I *still* haven't found a block.  Is this the source code patch SunnyKing pushed? You have to compile it yourself is that correct? Yes. And I'm also in the context of a post I made on the previous page where I pointed out a, possible, improvement in the build flags in makefile.osx. -- edit Just from eyeball watching the logs, with the new build flags and the build changes I'm seeing about two to three fold higher "primemeter" numbers across all running threads / instances. |
|
|
|
This might have already been answered (I thought I saw a reference here or on reddit)
My transaction on DigitialOcean VPS is currently in the category of "orphan". The other transactions (other machines) are all in the category of "immature". Have I lost those coins?
I tried dumping the privkey and importing it back to "home" wallet, but that didn't seem to work.
Google is your friend. Research with keywords: bitcoin orphan |
|
|
|
Bummer. Over ten minutes now running with the new, much faster, primecoind and I *still* haven't found a block. |
|
|
|
For Linux users:
Is there any way to get the QT (and miner) running without running X? I would like to restart this thing through ssh.
No. Then don't use QT. Use primecoind directly. |
|
|
|
For OS X miners: Still seems I still have to run discrete instances per core, however, after grabbing the update and *also* changing the makefile.osx to: #CFLAGS = -mmacosx-version-min=10.5 -arch i386 -O3
CFLAGS = -mmacosx-version-min=10.7 -O3 /
-arch x86_64 -funroll-loops -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer I'm getting substantially higher 'benchmark' numbers: 2013-07-10 17:31:58 primemeter 118780 prime/h 834911 test/h
2013-07-10 17:33:00 primemeter 145659 prime/h 963936 test/h
2013-07-10 17:34:02 primemeter 134060 prime/h 946472 test/h
2013-07-10 17:35:05 primemeter 233814 prime/h 1670377 test/h
2013-07-10 17:37:06 primemeter 256114 prime/h 1989032 test/h
2013-07-10 17:38:08 primemeter 215987 prime/h 1574243 test/hThat's from a single primecoind instance log. YMMV. -- edit Of course, you can't build for / run 64bit (x86_64) unless your hardware and OS version supports 64bit. |
|
|
|
Anytime I use more than one thread my pps goes down.
Yep, I was absolutely seeing this. (On OS X.) Any time using more than one thread I was seeing a pps of 0-3. More often 0 or 1 than 2 or 3. Running a single thread I've seen upwards of 35. So, I'm now running a separate instance of primecoind for each core and I'm seeing 'reasonable' pps reported from each instance. 2013-07-10 16:34:27 primemeter 129136 prime/h 966899 test/h
2013-07-10 16:35:31 primemeter 124329 prime/h 970444 test/h
2013-07-10 16:36:36 primemeter 135273 prime/h 1089035 test/h
2013-07-10 16:37:40 primemeter 108500 prime/h 848492 test/h
2013-07-10 16:38:44 primemeter 114016 prime/h 900447 test/h
2013-07-10 16:39:49 primemeter 119136 prime/h 932809 test/h
2013-07-10 16:41:49 primemeter 123106 prime/h 1013342 test/h
2013-07-10 16:42:50 primemeter 128928 prime/h 1064533 test/h-- edit Relevant to several of the posts on the last two or three pages: btw, I'm merely reporting this because it is trivial and it irritated the hell out of me last night. (In fact, last night I reached the conclusion that this is a pile of shit and not worth my incremental electricity cost.) However, if I had done something massively non-trivial, like reprogrammed and reflashed some of the FPGA's sitting around here and started getting a block a minute, no, I would probably not just be tossing that out to the community as a freebie. |
|
|
|
For some reason I cannot connect to any stratum servers? Getwork works fine but not stratum. Do I need to install a stratum server?
For some pools a patch needs to be applied. Search this thread. Personally, I'm just using a proxy. |
|
|
|
I think some assumptions are being made by my use of the word "exclusive" in my OP. I certainly am not implying that I want to be the only seller here
No, you are not implying it. You are flat out stating it. And you restated it in your most recent post. If you don't understand the definition of "exclusive", look it up. |
|
|
|
On the other hand, if it goes back up to $200 or higher, we'll be doing a happy dance.
Oh? Even those who paid for their mining gear with BTC when it was ~ $6 - $17 exchange rate? -- edit The moral of that story is: If you're betting long term on higher BTC to fiat exchange rate valuations then every BTC you spend, or neglect to buy now, is an opportunity cost. |
|
|
|
No one can predict the exchange rate for BTC.
Which is irrelevant to this calculation since the item in question is priced in BTC. For all the BTC spent on these now, you will have half that amount of BTC in one year than you do now. All subject to long term rate of increase in difficulty. Which is relevant. And which no no can, accurately, predict.  |
|
|
|
Merely FYI. I like this calculator: http://www.coinish.com/calc/#With the new cost of 1btc per unit, looks to me like the profit at twelve months will be between -$35 and -$60 USD. (It all depends on your difficulty rate of increase assumption.) IOWs, you might make back about half of what you paid with twelve months of 100% efficiency mining. If you start mining on it *today*. |
|
|
|
I have a question, if I buy this Block Erupter in the Netherlands, with power rates of 0.32$, when will it break even?
I like this calculator: http://www.coinish.com/calc/#With the new cost of 1btc per unit, looks to me like your profit at twelve months will be between -$35 and -$60 USD. (It all depends on your difficulty rate of increase assumption.) IOWs, you might make back about half of what you paid with twelve months of 100% efficiency mining. If you start mining on it *today*. |
|
|
|
... and do a greater good to Bitcoin.
Not their job / responsibility. Never set your price point such that you sell out faster than you can produce / procure. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
