Bitcoin Forum
October 01, 2016, 04:53:47 AM *
News: Due to DDoS attacks, there may be periodic downtime.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Pooled/Remote Mining - Open Source - Updated 2010-12-24  (Read 55210 times)
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 09, 2010, 03:44:44 AM
 #121

On Fedora (what I have) it's "openssl-devel", and yes I have it.

Fedora used to configure openssl so ecdsa is not included:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=319901

Possibly they still do.
Once a transaction has 6 confirmations, it is extremely unlikely that an attacker without at least 50% of the network's computation power would be able to reverse it.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1475297627
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475297627

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475297627
Reply with quote  #2

1475297627
Report to moderator
inertia
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 34



View Profile WWW
December 09, 2010, 04:52:39 PM
 #122

For the CUDA miner arguments, I can see what -gpu=X values might be as well as -aggression=X, and perhaps -gputhreads=X is obvious.  But what would go in -gpugrid=X?

You should try my Minecraft server.
FairUser
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261


View Profile WWW
December 11, 2010, 06:34:18 AM
 #123

This is a cross thread posting.  Sorry in advance.

The amount of bitcoin's being reported since the update from about a week or so ago seems to be cut in half.  This was brought up before and it was quickly disregarded.  So now I'm asking the other people that are running clients that are contributing to the pool to look at their numbers and see if it's off for you too.

Here we go. 
Here's the numbers being reported @ the time of writing this.
Server Status : 96 clients, 203464 khash/s
Address <removed> will receive 8.10162 BTC if this block is solved

I have a total of eight remote mining instances running. 
8733+9600+8733+9600+8966+9600+7833+12366 = 75,431 khash/s between my two boxes which is CPU's and GPU's combined.

75,431 khashes (my systems) / 203,464 (server khash/s) = 0.3707338890417961
0.3707338890417961 * 100 = %37.07338890417961

That's about %37.07 (0.3707.. * 100) of the total khash/s that the server is reporting.

Now we show what %37.07 of 50 bitcoins should be.
For every 1% of a block (50 bitcoins) is 0.5 bitcoins.
50(bitcoins/block) / 100(%) = 0.5 (bitcoins/block)
0.5 * 37.07% = 18.535 bitcoins

WHY AM I ONLY GETTING "8.10162 BTC if this block is solved"?  I should be getting 18.535, which is about what I saw before the update a week ago.  I know there has been talk about distribution methods, but I don't care what you call it when the math is wrong and the amount paid out and is far less than what it should be.  If been contributing to the pool non-stop since it started. I even crashed the server a few times because by throwing about 64 CPU's and 3 GPU's at it, but now I'm back to 6 CPU's and 3 GPU's.
It was very obvious when this happened because the amount of BTC I would receive was at least cut in half.

Here's a some tables for others to quickly look up about what range they should be getting back. 
To get a percentage use this equation: (your khash/s) divided by (server khash/s) then multiply it by 100.

CPU USERS LOOK HERE
BITCOINS PER PERCENTAGE (%.05 increments) BETWEEN 0.01% and 1.00%
50 * 0.01% = 0.005 bitcoins
50 * 0.05% = 0.025 bitcoins
50 * 0.10% = 0.050 bitcoins
50 * 0.15% = 0.075 bitcoins
50 * 0.20% = 0.100 bitcoins
50 * 0.25% = 0.125 bitcoins
50 * 0.30% = 0.150 bitcoins
50 * 0.35% = 0.175 bitcoins
50 * 0.40% = 0.200 bitcoins
50 * 0.45% = 0.225 bitcoins
50 * 0.50% = 0.250 bitcoins
50 * 0.55% = 0.275 bitcoins
50 * 0.60% = 0.300 bitcoins
50 * 0.65% = 0.325 bitcoins
50 * 0.70% = 0.350 bitcoins
50 * 0.75% = 0.375 bitcoins
50 * 0.80% = 0.400 bitcoins
50 * 0.85% = 0.425 bitcoins
50 * 0.90% = 0.450 bitcoins
50 * 0.95% = 0.475 bitcoins
50 * 1.00% = 0.500 bitcoins

GPU USER'S LOOK HERE
BITCOINS PER PERCENTAGE (%5 increments) BETWEEN 1% and 100%
-------------------------------------------
50 * 1% = 0.5 bitcoins
50 * 5% = 2.5 bitcoins
50 * 10% = 5 bitcoins
50 * 15% = 7.5 bitcoins
50 * 20% = 10 bitcoins
50 * 25% = 12.5 bitcoins
50 * 30% = 15 bitcoins
50 * 35% = 17.5 bitcoins
50 * 40% = 20 bitcoins
50 * 45% = 22.5 bitcoins
50 * 50% = 25 bitcoins
50 * 55% = 27.5 bitcoins
50 * 60% = 30 bitcoins
50 * 65% = 32.5 bitcoins
50 * 70% = 35 bitcoins
50 * 75% = 37.5 bitcoins
50 * 80% = 40 bitcoins
50 * 85% = 42.5 bitcoins
50 * 90% = 45 bitcoins
50 * 95% = 47.5 bitcoins
50 * 100% = 50 bitcoins


IS ANYONE ELSE SEEING THIS, OR HAVING I COMPLETELY LOST MY MIND?
BitLex
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


View Profile WWW
December 11, 2010, 07:40:43 AM
 #124

Quote
WHY AM I ONLY GETTING "8.10162 BTC if this block is solved"?  I should be getting 18.535,
because! 

seriously, it's already been said in the other thread,
besides that, it's all in the readme-file, shame on you  Wink

theres 2 options for the distribution-type of coins,
server-admin chooses either 'contributed' or 'connected'.

'..."connected" will distribute coins only to those clients that were connected when the block being solved was created....'
while
'..."contributed" will accrue all hashes sent to the server for a given address since the last generated block...'

the pool currently runs in "contributed"-mode, the longer you'r online, the closer you'll get to your 18.535btc.

doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 11, 2010, 01:44:55 PM
 #125

The amount of bitcoin's being reported since the update from about a week or so ago seems to be cut in half.  This was brought up before and it was quickly disregarded.  So now I'm asking the other people that are running clients that are contributing to the pool to look at their numbers and see if it's off for you too.

A new block was generated by the pool today. The total amounts distributed in the recently generated block can be seen here: http://blockexplorer.com/b/97017
puddinpop
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 103


View Profile
December 11, 2010, 09:38:38 PM
 #126

The first post has been updated with a new release.

The server will now send the contribution type to the clients, and the clients will display it upon connecting to the server.  The server will also save timing stats to a text file periodically so that we can narrow down what the bottlenecks are.  If you are running a server, please post your timing stats after the server has been up for a while.

The clients are now multi-threaded, so you won't have to load the CPU client multiple times if you have more than 1 CPU core.  There is also an OpenCL client included.

kwukduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1548


View Profile
December 11, 2010, 10:23:09 PM
 #127

The OpenCL client seems to run but it reports back 0 khash/s

i tried changing -gpu- value, didn't change anything


this is what it tells me:

Code:
Client will start 1 miner threads
Attempting to connect to 173.255.205.10:8335
Connected to 173.255.205.10:8335
1 OpenCL platforms found
OpenCL finding best kernel configuration
1 OpenCL GPU devices found on platform 0
Setting OpenCL device to first device found
Create context rval=0
Create command queue rval=0
Creating program with source
Building program
Got message 2 from server.
Server version 1.2.1
Build program rval=-11
build STATUS:■   
build LOG:C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(19): warning: type

          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f1=0xFF000000;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(20): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f2=0x00FF0000;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(21): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f3=0x0000FF00;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(22): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f4=0x000000FF;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(23): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f5=0xFFFFFFFF;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(74): warning: unrecognized
          #pragma
      #pragma unroll 1
              ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(269): error: write to < 32
          bits via pointer not allowed unless cl_khr_byte_addressable_store is
          enabled
                metahash[(myid*loops)+it]=((uchar *)&A)[0];
                ^

1 error detected in the compilation of "C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCL
CADE.tmp.cl".
Dcl_khr_icd=1 -Dcl_amd_fp64=1 -Dcl_kh
Create kernel rval=-46
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,16)
Finding best configuration step end (16,16) 5ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,32)
Finding best configuration step end (16,32) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,64)
Finding best configuration step end (16,64) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Got message 4 from server.
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,128)
Finding best configuration step end (Address 1MVUHYbcuuR5Dx6D9A6BzxsE9wtHqJRChx
not found in block being solved
16,128) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,256)
Finding best configuration step end (16,256) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,16)
Finding best configuration step end (32,16) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,32)
Finding best configuration step end (32,32) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,64)
Finding best configuration step end (32,64) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,128)
Finding best configuration step end (32,128) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,256)
Finding best configuration step end (32,256) 3ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,16)
Finding best configuration step end (64,16) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,32)
Finding best configuration step end (64,32) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,64)
Finding best configuration step end (64,64) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,128)
Finding best configuration step end (64,128) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,256)
Finding best configuration step end (64,256) 3ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,16)
Finding best configuration step end (128,16) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,32)
Finding best configuration step end (128,32) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,64)
Finding best configuration step end (128,64) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,128)
Finding best configuration step end (128,128) 3ms  prev best=9223372036854775807

Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,256)
Finding best configuration step end (128,256) 4ms  prev best=9223372036854775807

Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,16)
Got message 10 from server.
Server Status : 113 clients, 208372 khash/s
1 blocks generated since 2010-12-09 23:03:20 UTC
Server reports my khash/s as 0


14b8PdeWLqK3yi3PrNHMmCvSmvDEKEBh3E
puddinpop
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 103


View Profile
December 11, 2010, 11:31:27 PM
 #128

The OpenCL client seems to run but it reports back 0 khash/s

i tried changing -gpu- value, didn't change anything


this is what it tells me:

Code:
Client will start 1 miner threads
Attempting to connect to 173.255.205.10:8335
Connected to 173.255.205.10:8335
1 OpenCL platforms found
OpenCL finding best kernel configuration
1 OpenCL GPU devices found on platform 0
Setting OpenCL device to first device found
Create context rval=0
Create command queue rval=0
Creating program with source
Building program
Got message 2 from server.
Server version 1.2.1
Build program rval=-11
build STATUS:■  
build LOG:C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(19): warning: type

          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f1=0xFF000000;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(20): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f2=0x00FF0000;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(21): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f3=0x0000FF00;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(22): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f4=0x000000FF;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(23): warning: type
          qualifier specified more than once
  __constant const uint f5=0xFFFFFFFF;
             ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(74): warning: unrecognized
          #pragma
      #pragma unroll 1
              ^

C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLCADE.tmp.cl(269): error: write to < 32
          bits via pointer not allowed unless cl_khr_byte_addressable_store is
          enabled
                metahash[(myid*loops)+it]=((uchar *)&A)[0];
                ^

1 error detected in the compilation of "C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCL
CADE.tmp.cl".
Dcl_khr_icd=1 -Dcl_amd_fp64=1 -Dcl_kh
Create kernel rval=-46
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,16)
Finding best configuration step end (16,16) 5ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,32)
Finding best configuration step end (16,32) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,64)
Finding best configuration step end (16,64) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Got message 4 from server.
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,128)
Finding best configuration step end (Address 1MVUHYbcuuR5Dx6D9A6BzxsE9wtHqJRChx
not found in block being solved
16,128) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,256)
Finding best configuration step end (16,256) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,16)
Finding best configuration step end (32,16) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,32)
Finding best configuration step end (32,32) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,64)
Finding best configuration step end (32,64) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,128)
Finding best configuration step end (32,128) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (32,256)
Finding best configuration step end (32,256) 3ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,16)
Finding best configuration step end (64,16) 1ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,32)
Finding best configuration step end (64,32) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,64)
Finding best configuration step end (64,64) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,128)
Finding best configuration step end (64,128) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (64,256)
Finding best configuration step end (64,256) 3ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,16)
Finding best configuration step end (128,16) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,32)
Finding best configuration step end (128,32) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,64)
Finding best configuration step end (128,64) 2ms  prev best=9223372036854775807
Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,128)
Finding best configuration step end (128,128) 3ms  prev best=9223372036854775807

Done allocating OpenCL resources for (128,256)
Finding best configuration step end (128,256) 4ms  prev best=9223372036854775807

Done allocating OpenCL resources for (16,16)
Got message 10 from server.
Server Status : 113 clients, 208372 khash/s
1 blocks generated since 2010-12-09 23:03:20 UTC
Server reports my khash/s as 0


Try to add this at the top of the cl file.
Code:
#pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_byte_addressable_store : enable

There actually was another issue with the clients that I just fixed and reuploaded.  If you downloaded the source or binaries before this post, download them again and add the line to the cl file.

jgarzik
Legendary
*
qt
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 01:22:46 AM
 #129

What is the remote protocol, so that other miners may participate?

Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
kwukduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1548


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 01:49:25 AM
 #130

I added the line to the remotebitcoinmineropencl.cl file

Code:
build LOG:C:\Users\Administrator\AppData\Local\Temp\OCLD5E9.tmp.cl(20): error: can't
enable
          all OpenCL extensions or unrecognized OpenCL extension
  #pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_khr_byte_addressable_store : enable
                                                           ^


the rest of the log is the same, still resulting in 0 khash/s

14b8PdeWLqK3yi3PrNHMmCvSmvDEKEBh3E
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 02:03:22 AM
 #131

The server will now send the contribution type to the clients, and the clients will display it upon connecting to the server.  The server will also save timing stats to a text file periodically so that we can narrow down what the bottlenecks are.  If you are running a server, please post your timing stats after the server has been up for a while.

I'll update the server I run today and post some stats when it's been running for a while.
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 02:29:23 AM
 #132

The first post has been updated with a new release.

cmake-bitcoinr/CMakeLists.txt seems to be missing a line for remoteminerthreadcpu.cpp. There's a link error unless I add this.
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 02:36:15 AM
 #133

In the debug.log I get lines like this a lot (tens of thousands of lines) from some IP addresses:

Code:
Client x.x.x.x sent metahash for block we don't know about!

What causes this? Note that this is with the 20101206 release.
puddinpop
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 103


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 02:49:22 AM
 #134

What is the remote protocol, so that other miners may participate?
A few bytes of header info and a json object.  The source is the best resource to look at if you need specific info.

The first post has been updated with a new release.

cmake-bitcoinr/CMakeLists.txt seems to be missing a line for remoteminerthreadcpu.cpp. There's a link error unless I add this.

Yeah, and the GPU sources need remoteminerclientgpu.cpp changed to remoteminerthreadgpu.cpp.

In the debug.log I get lines like this a lot (tens of thousands of lines) from some IP addresses:

Code:
Client x.x.x.x sent metahash for block we don't know about!

What causes this? Note that this is with the 20101206 release.

The clients I posted before my last post had a bug that would cause that, so if someone is using those clients you'll see that.  It could also happen if you just restarted the server, and clients are still hashing blocks from before the restart.  It should go away after a few minutes.

doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 03:16:04 AM
 #135

Is it possible that the new server code uses more CPU? Prior to the update I was averaging 60%, now it's 95%. It's hard to tell if it's because of more clients suddenly joining or the update (about 10 new clients joined). Maybe they're OpenCL clients and the server is just busier. It'd be great if the server could have stats about number of OpenCL, Cuda and CPU clients are connected.
Azetab
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 19


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 03:24:05 AM
 #136

is the OpenCL or CUDA client better for a nVIDIA GPU?
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 12:26:05 PM
 #137

Something odd happened with the server. I noticed it was using 0 CPU as if no clients were connected. I connected a miner and I just got this repeated:

Code:
Requesting a new block 1292156535151
Requesting a new block 1292156540258
Requesting a new block 1292156545364

So it was constantly 'requesting a new block'. Any thoughts on what might cause this? I restarted the server and the miner connected and worked fine.
BitLex
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


View Profile WWW
December 12, 2010, 02:18:32 PM
 #138

nice that there seems to be an OpenCL miner available now,
sad though, that it doesnt work (for me on Nvidia at least).
Code:
...snip...
<program source>:140:3: error: call to 'rotate' is ambiguous
                sharound(E,F,G,H,A,B,C,D,R(36),0x650A7354);
                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<program source>:47:123: note: instantiated from:
#define sharound(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,x,K) {t1=h+(rotateright(e,6)^rotateright(e,11)^
rotateright(e,25))+(g^(e&(f^g)))+K+x; t2=(rotateright(a,2)^rotateright(a,13)^rot
ateright(a,22))+((a&b)|(c&(a|b))); d+=t1; h=t1+t2;}

                                          ^
<program source>:45:30: note: instantiated from:
#define rotateright(x,bits) (rotate(x,32-bits))
                             ^~~~~~
<built-in>:2967:24: note: candidate function
ulong __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(ulong, ulong);
                       ^
<built-in>:2966:23: note: candidate function
long __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(long, long);
                      ^
<built-in>:2965:23: note: candidate function
uint __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(uint, uint);
                      ^
<built-in>:2964:22: note: candidate function
int __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(int, int);
                     ^
<built-in>:2963:25: note: candidate function
ushort __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(ushort, ushort);
                        ^
<built-in>:2962:24: note: candidate function
short __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(short, short);
                       ^
<built-in>:2961:24: note: candidate function
uchar __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(uchar, uchar);
                       ^
<built-in>:2960:23: note: candidate function
char __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(char, char);
                      ^
<program source>:141:3: error: call to 'rotate' is ambiguous
                sharound(D,E,F,G,H,A,B,C,R(37),0x766A0ABB);
                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<program source>:47:46: note: instantiated from:
#define sharound(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,x,K) {t1=h+(rotateright(e,6)^rotateright(e,11)^
rotateright(e,25))+(g^(e&(f^g)))+K+x; t2=(rotateright(a,2)^rotateright(a,13)^rot
ateright(a,22))+((a&b)|(c&(a|b))); d+=t1; h=t1+t2;}
                                             ^
<program source>:45:30: note: instantiated from:
#define rotateright(x,bits) (rotate(x,32-bits))
                             ^~~~~~
<built-in>:2967:24: note: candidate function
ulong __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(ulong, ulong);
                       ^
<built-in>:2966:23: note: candidate function
long __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(long, long);
                      ^
<built-in>:2965:23: note: candidate function
uint __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(uint, uint);
                      ^
<built-in>:2964:22: note: candidate function
int __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(int, int);
                     ^
<built-in>:2963:25: note: candidate function
ushort __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(ushort, ushort);
                        ^
<built-in>:2962:24: note: candidate function
short __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(short, short);
                       ^
<built-in>:2961:24: note: candidate function
uchar __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(uchar, uchar);
                       ^
<built-in>:2960:23: note: candidate function
char __OVERLOADABLE__ rotate(char, char);
                      ^
<program source>:141:3: error: call to 'rotate' is ambiguous
                sharound(D,E,F,G,H,A,B,C,R(37),0x766A0ABB);

...snip...


the CUDA client doesnt show its best hashes anymore,
loads the GPU a bit more (50%->65%) what makes it a bit faster hashing (gtx260: 18M->25M),
but it also loads the CPU more than before (50%->75%).

adv
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169


View Profile
December 12, 2010, 10:25:45 PM
 #139

When i try build only remote miner, i write in CMakeLists.txt:
Quote
OPTION(BITCOIN_ENABLE_CUDA "Enable CUDA miner" OFF)
OPTION(BITCOIN_ENABLE_OPENCL "Enable OpenCL miner" OFF)
OPTION(BITCOIN_ENABLE_REMOTE_SERVER "Enable remote miner server" OFF)
OPTION(BITCOIN_BUILD_GUI "Build GUI (bitcoin)" OFF)
OPTION(BITCOIN_BUILD_DAEMON "Build Daemon (bitcoind)" OFF)
OPTION(BITCOIN_BUILD_REMOTE_MINER "Build remote miner (bitcoinr)" ON)
And get error:
Quote
make
[ 11%] Building CXX object cmake-bitcoinr/CMakeFiles/bitcoinr.dir/__/src/remoteminermain.cpp.o
In file included from /home/adv/bitcoin-remote-20101211-src/src/remote/remotebitcoinheaders.h:35,
                 from /home/adv/bitcoin-remote-20101211-src/src/remoteminermain.cpp:19:
/home/adv/bitcoin-remote-20101211-src/src/remote/../serialize.h: In function ‘void Unserialize_impl(Stream&, std::vector<T, A>&, int, int, const boost::true_type&)’:
/home/adv/bitcoin-remote-20101211-src/src/remote/../serialize.h:475: error: there are no arguments to ‘min’ that depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of ‘min’ must be available
/home/adv/bitcoin-remote-20101211-src/src/remote/../serialize.h:475: note: (if you use ‘-fpermissive’, G++ will accept your code, but allowing the use of an undeclared name is deprecated)
/home/adv/bitcoin-remote-20101211-src/src/remote/../serialize.h: In function ‘void Unserialize(Stream&, std::map<K, T, Pred, A>&, int, int)’:
/home/adv/bitcoin-remote-20101211-src/src/remote/../serialize.h:588: error: ‘pair’ was not declared in this scope
..... and many cutted....

What i do wrong?

Sources from bitcoin-remote-20101211-src.zip
uname -a: Linux home 2.6.32-5-686 #1 SMP Thu Nov 25 18:43:34 UTC 2010 i686 GNU/Linux
g++ --version: g++ (Debian 4.4.5-8) 4.4.5

U may thank me here: 14Js1ng1SvYBPgUJnjNAEPYH4d6SHF79UF
doublec
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
December 13, 2010, 12:32:38 AM
 #140

The server got stuck in an idle state again. It was using 0% CPU and not processing requests. I'm building in debug mode now and I'll attach with a debugger if it happens again.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!