ocminer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1240
|
 |
July 21, 2016, 09:42:51 PM |
|
IMHO "full" stratum is really not needed as entropy with the 64bit headers is more than enough, I see decent efficiency on https://sia.suprnova.cc (>99%) with my current implementation. It's not bitcoin, it's a more modern header and hashing algo, so why reinvent the wheel. We already see this high of an efficiency with getwork, as that's all your "stratum implementation" is... Why don't you keep your getwork then ? 
|
suprnova pools - reliable mining pools - #suprnova on freenet https://www.suprnova.cc - FOLLOW us @ Twitter ! twitter.com/SuprnovaPools
|
|
|
xurious
|
 |
July 21, 2016, 09:45:31 PM |
|
IMHO "full" stratum is really not needed as entropy with the 64bit headers is more than enough, I see decent efficiency on https://sia.suprnova.cc (>99%) with my current implementation. It's not bitcoin, it's a more modern header and hashing algo, so why reinvent the wheel. We already see this high of an efficiency with getwork, as that's all your "stratum implementation" is... Why don't you keep your getwork then ?  Why would we get rid of it? We will continue to support stratum and getwork
|
SiaMining.com -- First PPS SiaMining Pool! 3%, VarDiff, Stratum Support
|
|
|
ocminer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1240
|
 |
July 21, 2016, 10:01:06 PM |
|
IMHO "full" stratum is really not needed as entropy with the 64bit headers is more than enough, I see decent efficiency on https://sia.suprnova.cc (>99%) with my current implementation. It's not bitcoin, it's a more modern header and hashing algo, so why reinvent the wheel. We already see this high of an efficiency with getwork, as that's all your "stratum implementation" is... Why don't you keep your getwork then ?  Why would we get rid of it? We will continue to support stratum and getwork "We" ? The borg ?  Good luck mate 
|
suprnova pools - reliable mining pools - #suprnova on freenet https://www.suprnova.cc - FOLLOW us @ Twitter ! twitter.com/SuprnovaPools
|
|
|
xurious
|
 |
July 21, 2016, 10:05:15 PM |
|
IMHO "full" stratum is really not needed as entropy with the 64bit headers is more than enough, I see decent efficiency on https://sia.suprnova.cc (>99%) with my current implementation. It's not bitcoin, it's a more modern header and hashing algo, so why reinvent the wheel. We already see this high of an efficiency with getwork, as that's all your "stratum implementation" is... Why don't you keep your getwork then ?  Why would we get rid of it? We will continue to support stratum and getwork "We" ? The borg ?  Good luck mate  If you wish to discuss this further, there are better places for it.
|
SiaMining.com -- First PPS SiaMining Pool! 3%, VarDiff, Stratum Support
|
|
|
martinski
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 8
Merit: 0
|
 |
July 21, 2016, 11:33:50 PM |
|
@Claymore hi, which SIA pools do you support with v5.1 beta2 ?
|
|
|
|
blg42598
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 02:27:40 AM |
|
Anyone know why my GPU fails? https://www.dropbox.com/s/j56tq3nfcl5e3tm/1469138775_log.txt?dl=016:37:30:813 9c8 em hbt: 0, fm hbt: 47, 16:37:30:813 9c8 watchdog - thread 0, hb time 44766 16:37:30:829 9c8 watchdog - thread 1, hb time 67031 16:37:30:829 9c8 WATCHDOG: GPU 0 hangs in OpenCL call, exit 16:37:30:829 9c8 watchdog - thread 2, hb time 281 16:37:30:829 9c8 watchdog - thread 3, hb time 125 16:37:30:829 9c8 watchdog - thread 4, hb time 203 16:37:30:829 9c8 watchdog - thread 5, hb time 31 16:37:30:844 9c8 watchdog - thread 6, hb time 31 16:37:30:844 9c8 watchdog - thread 7, hb time 203 16:37:32:435 9c8 Restarting OK, exit... Windows 10 4x RX 480
|
|
|
|
hasher87
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 06:06:14 AM |
|
I've been searching through this post on how to run claymore on miningrigrentals, but somehow i couldn't find any of the post that is helpful. this is the code that i've used EthDcrMiner64.exe -epool ap-01.miningrigrentals.com:3333 -ewal hasher87.30677 -epsw x -eworker rig1 -allpools 1 and below is what i got GPU #0 recognized as Radeon RX 480 GPU #1 recognized as Radeon RX 480 POOL/SOLO version GPU #0: set -etha as 0 (ETH algo for fast cards) GPU #1: set -etha as 0 (ETH algo for fast cards) ETH: Stratum - connecting to 'ap-01.miningrigrentals.com' <128.199.138.106> port 3333 ETH: Stratum - Connected (ap-01.miningrigrentals.com:3333) No pool specified for Decred! Ethereum-only mining mode is enabled ETHEREUM-ONLY MINING MODE ENABLED (-mode 1) ETH: eth-proxy stratum mode "-allpools" option is set, default pools can be used for devfee, check "Readme" file for details. Watchdog enabled Remote management is enabled on port 3333
ETH: Job timeout, disconnect, retry in 20 sec... appreciate if someone has the solutions to it 
|
|
|
|
adaseb
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1733
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 09:01:48 AM |
|
Anyone in Ubuntu get this error
WARNING: Linking two modules of different data layouts! WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil64-pc-unknown-amdopencl' WARNING: Linking two modules of different data layouts! WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil64-pc-unknown-amdopencl' WARNING: Linking two modules of different data layouts! WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil64-pc-unknown-amdopencl' WARNING: Linking two modules of different data layouts! WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil64-pc-unknown-amdopencl' WARNING: Linking two modules of different data layouts! WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil64-pc-unknown-amdopencl' WARNING: Linking two modules of different data layouts! WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil64-pc-unknown-amdopencl'
|
|
|
|
CoRpO
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 09:14:15 AM |
|
I've been searching through this post on how to run claymore on miningrigrentals, but somehow i couldn't find any of the post that is helpful. this is the code that i've used EthDcrMiner64.exe -epool ap-01.miningrigrentals.com:3333 -ewal hasher87.30677 -epsw x -eworker rig1 -allpools 1 and below is what i got GPU #0 recognized as Radeon RX 480 GPU #1 recognized as Radeon RX 480 POOL/SOLO version GPU #0: set -etha as 0 (ETH algo for fast cards) GPU #1: set -etha as 0 (ETH algo for fast cards) ETH: Stratum - connecting to 'ap-01.miningrigrentals.com' <128.199.138.106> port 3333 ETH: Stratum - Connected (ap-01.miningrigrentals.com:3333) No pool specified for Decred! Ethereum-only mining mode is enabled ETHEREUM-ONLY MINING MODE ENABLED (-mode 1) ETH: eth-proxy stratum mode "-allpools" option is set, default pools can be used for devfee, check "Readme" file for details. Watchdog enabled Remote management is enabled on port 3333
ETH: Job timeout, disconnect, retry in 20 sec... appreciate if someone has the solutions to it  try to change -esm value with 1, 2 or 3. -esm Ethereum Stratum mode. 0 - eth-proxy mode (for example, dwarpool.com), 1 - qtminer mode (for example, ethpool.org), 2 - miner-proxy mode (for example, coinotron.com), 3 - nicehash mode. 0 is default. and add -mode 1 to disable decred dual mining as you seem not to use it.
|
|
|
|
tolazy
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 09:16:55 AM |
|
doesnt seem to help for me. still loading
|
|
|
|
jamiec79
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 10:00:16 AM |
|
Hi,
I'm looking for some advice please
I have 6 x r9 390's msi, running at about 190mh/s (reported is 193).
For whatever reason when using ethermine the reported hashrate is correct 193mhs, the current effective hashrate varies from 160mhs to 210mhs, and the reported average never seems to go much higher than 180-183mhs.
Can someone tell me why there is such a variance between reported, average and actual hashrate? I can understand a few Mhs difference due to connection to pool, but I'm losing around 10mhs?
I've pinged the ethermine servers and reaponse time is good, I've tried all drivers from 15.12 to current. I'm using cdm v5.1 beta 2. But I've tried using the previous versions without a great deal of difference.
Core clock -1130 Mem clock - 1375 Undervolted -9
I can post the config file or provide a copy of my log? If that would be helpful
I get very few rejected or invalid shares, so it's not that I've overclocked too hard and GPU temperatures are all running around 65 degrees Celsius?
Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. I love th cdm miner, but the hashrate instability is a concern.
|
|
|
|
thevictimofuktyranny
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1004
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 10:05:26 AM |
|
Hi,
I'm looking for some advice please
I have 6 x r9 390's msi, running at about 190mh/s (reported is 193).
For whatever reason when using ethermine the reported hashrate is correct 193mhs, the current effective hashrate varies from 160mhs to 210mhs, and the reported average never seems to go much higher than 180-183mhs.
Can someone tell me why there is such a variance between reported, average and actual hashrate? I can understand a few Mhs difference due to connection to pool, but I'm losing around 10mhs?
I've pinged the ethermine servers and reaponse time is good, I've tried all drivers from 15.12 to current. I'm using cdm v5.1 beta 2. But I've tried using the previous versions without a great deal of difference.
Core clock -1130 Mem clock - 1375 Undervolted -9
I can post the config file or provide a copy of my log? If that would be helpful
I get very few rejected or invalid shares, so it's not that I've overclocked too hard and GPU temperatures are all running around 65 degrees Celsius?
Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. I love th cdm miner, but the hashrate instability is a concern.
No idea myself, I just spent 2 days messing around with overclocking myself. Yes, it was a real hoot to do! But, you can use Dwarfpool for testing - it has the best statistical breakdown of shares accepted on a hourly basis.
|
|
|
|
jamiec79
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 11:39:08 AM |
|
Thank you for providing a response.
I'll try switching to dwarfpool to see if that shows up any anomalies in submitted shares.
Does anyone else have a similar issue and found a way to resolve this?
Thank you in advance :-)
|
|
|
|
fittsy
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 02:34:29 PM |
|
I've been searching through this post on how to run claymore on miningrigrentals, but somehow i couldn't find any of the post that is helpful.
this is the code that i've used
Use a different miner? I know qtminer works with MRR. It probably isn't a good idea to be giving up 2-4% of your rented mining time to pay the Claymore devfee anyway. Your renters probably won't appreciate that and it could affect your stats.
|
|
|
|
fittsy
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 02:39:09 PM |
|
Thank you for providing a response.
I'll try switching to dwarfpool to see if that shows up any anomalies in submitted shares.
Does anyone else have a similar issue and found a way to resolve this?
Thank you in advance :-)
From the FAQ in post #1: ---------- - Why pool shows less hashrate than miner? On my test rigs I use miner with default settings and on pool I see about 4-5% less than miner shows (my hashrate is about 800MH/s if I turn on all rigs). Miner shows "raw" hashrate, 2% is devfee in dual mode, other 2-3% can be related to the connection quality, current pool status/luck or/and may be something else. Also, from my calculations miner loses about 0.5-1% because it cannot drop current GPU round when it gets new job, it is related to "-ethi" value, so I made it 8 by default instead of 16. But if on pool you see 10% less than miner shows all the time - something is wrong with pool, your connection to internet or your hashrate is low and you did not wait enough time to see average hashrate for 24 hours. Usually I use "ethpool" pool for tests. ---------- Like @thevictimofuktyranny the difference in hashrate bothered me enough I quit mining at ethermine I switched to dwarfpool and coinotron.
|
|
|
|
ps_jb
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 02:52:51 PM |
|
Hi,
I'm looking for some advice please
I have 6 x r9 390's msi, running at about 190mh/s (reported is 193).
For whatever reason when using ethermine the reported hashrate is correct 193mhs, the current effective hashrate varies from 160mhs to 210mhs, and the reported average never seems to go much higher than 180-183mhs.
Can someone tell me why there is such a variance between reported, average and actual hashrate? I can understand a few Mhs difference due to connection to pool, but I'm losing around 10mhs?
I've pinged the ethermine servers and reaponse time is good, I've tried all drivers from 15.12 to current. I'm using cdm v5.1 beta 2. But I've tried using the previous versions without a great deal of difference.
Core clock -1130 Mem clock - 1375 Undervolted -9
I can post the config file or provide a copy of my log? If that would be helpful
I get very few rejected or invalid shares, so it's not that I've overclocked too hard and GPU temperatures are all running around 65 degrees Celsius?
Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. I love th cdm miner, but the hashrate instability is a concern.
Please put your stats in this topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1550780.0
|
|
|
|
Bakery
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 55
Merit: 0
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 03:05:42 PM |
|
with remote manager, the applied settings from config.txt should apply automatically? no miner restart or anything needed? Somehow this function doesnt work for me, just says in miner window that config.txt has been applied but nothing changes.
|
|
|
|
tolazy
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 04:22:35 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
dddrgonzooo
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 58
Merit: 0
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 05:55:11 PM |
|
I'm having trouble with one of my rigs. I keep getting "server: bind failed with error: 98, next attempt in 10sec..."
Any ideas on what's going on?
|
|
|
|
BenSF
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
|
 |
July 22, 2016, 07:23:45 PM |
|
with remote manager, the applied settings from config.txt should apply automatically? no miner restart or anything needed? Somehow this function doesnt work for me, just says in miner window that config.txt has been applied but nothing changes.
If you send a new config file using the remote manager I believe you need to restart miner to apply the new config settings.
|
|
|
|
|