[ANN][The Original Multipool - Scrypt/SHA256/Scrypt-N/X11] multipool.us

[jaywaka2713]

Still can't test Multiport as my rig is getting fixed by those Geek Squad idiots. Won't replace my cards under warranty unless they "stress test". Oh well, I'll wait. My laptop doesn't run CGMiner.

[ranlo]

Still can't test Multiport as my rig is getting fixed by those Geek Squad idiots. Won't replace my cards under warranty unless they "stress test". Oh well, I'll wait. My laptop doesn't run CGMiner.

lol, "stress test" is their form of mining. "Let me run this for a week to ensure it's working properly..."

[jaywaka2713]

Still can't test Multiport as my rig is getting fixed by those Geek Squad idiots. Won't replace my cards under warranty unless they "stress test". Oh well, I'll wait. My laptop doesn't run CGMiner.

lol, "stress test" is their form of mining. "Let me run this for a week to ensure it's working properly..."

LOL. They actually said if it fails, they'll ship the cards back to the manufacturer for new ones! Can't complain. I plan on building a new rig that uses a GD65 motherboard for 7 GPUs.

[Zalfrin]

multiport has been flaky the last few minutes. It acts like it is switching coins (dropping out for a minute), but no switch is occuring.

2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Lost 28 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:06:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:06:39] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!
2013-06-11 20:08:16: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:08:15] Stratum from pool 0 requested work restart
2013-06-11 20:09:05: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:09:04] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Lost 37 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:13:19: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:13:19] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!

[ranlo]

multiport has been flaky the last few minutes. It acts like it is switching coins (dropping out for a minute), but no switch is occuring.

2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Lost 28 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:06:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:06:39] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!
2013-06-11 20:08:16: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:08:15] Stratum from pool 0 requested work restart
2013-06-11 20:09:05: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:09:04] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Lost 37 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:13:19: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:13:19] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!

Just checked mine and it had switched over like normal...

[rqdxrocket]

multiport has been flaky the last few minutes. It acts like it is switching coins (dropping out for a minute), but no switch is occuring.

2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Lost 28 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:06:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:06:39] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!
2013-06-11 20:08:16: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:08:15] Stratum from pool 0 requested work restart
2013-06-11 20:09:05: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:09:04] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Lost 37 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:13:19: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:13:19] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!

I have been experiencing the exact same thing this week on multiple machines at various times.  It seems to happen most when switching from one coin to the next but I haven't gotten an answer yet as to why this might be happening

[flound1129]

multiport has been flaky the last few minutes. It acts like it is switching coins (dropping out for a minute), but no switch is occuring.

2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:05:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:05:39] Lost 28 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:06:40: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:06:39] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!
2013-06-11 20:08:16: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:08:15] Stratum from pool 0 requested work restart
2013-06-11 20:09:05: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:09:04] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted
2013-06-11 20:12:21: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:12:19] Lost 37 shares due to stratum disconnect on pool 0
2013-06-11 20:13:19: Listener for "multi": [2013-06-11 20:13:19] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://multipool.in:7777 not responding!

It was actually DGC that had issues, for some reason the client stopped responding.  I had to restart the client and the pool.

[flound1129]

Payouts are happening right now for the last couple hours worth of blocks..  some of the queries I was running were not so nice on the db so I had to disable a few jobs.

Estimates are currently disabled.

[flound1129]

So twitter requires an authentication token to pull publicly available tweets now.  Fucking 5 days after I start pulling the site news from Twitter.  What the fuck.

[flound1129]

Estimates and payouts are re-enabled.

[juhakall]

From the third line of cgminer README (https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/README): "Do not use on multiple block chains at the same time!". This notice was added in version 2.0.6.

I've seen complaints of random crashes and shares not being submitted here. The reason could simply be that cgminer is not designed to work this way.

[gnomicide]

From the third line of cgminer README (https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/README): "Do not use on multiple block chains at the same time!". This notice was added in version 2.0.6.

I've seen complaints of random crashes and shares not being submitted here. The reason could simply be that cgminer is not designed to work this way.

We'd need some clarification what specifically that warning is about. Technically this isn't using cgminer on multiple block chains at the same time...

[ranlo]

From the third line of cgminer README (https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/README): "Do not use on multiple block chains at the same time!". This notice was added in version 2.0.6.

I've seen complaints of random crashes and shares not being submitted here. The reason could simply be that cgminer is not designed to work this way.

We'd need some clarification what specifically that warning is about. Technically this isn't using cgminer on multiple block chains at the same time...

I am almost positive what they mean is don't try to run the same CGMiner to mine two chains using separate video cards at once (ex. video card 0 using one chain, video card 1 using another).

I've had 0 issues so far with multipool, aside from the random lock-ups that floud has been aware of and has taken care of (that, at least I think, are unrelated to mining at all).

[flound1129]

I just enabled vardiff on the DGC pool.  Going to see how it goes overnight, and possibly revert in the morning.  Right now efficiency is hovering around 90-95% but the number of orphans hasn't increased as far as I can tell.

Calculation for last N will still be based on diff 32, for now.

[flound1129]

From the third line of cgminer README (https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/README): "Do not use on multiple block chains at the same time!". This notice was added in version 2.0.6.

I've seen complaints of random crashes and shares not being submitted here. The reason could simply be that cgminer is not designed to work this way.

We'd need some clarification what specifically that warning is about. Technically this isn't using cgminer on multiple block chains at the same time...

I am almost positive what they mean is don't try to run the same CGMiner to mine two chains using separate video cards at once (ex. video card 0 using one chain, video card 1 using another).

I've had 0 issues so far with multipool, aside from the random lock-ups that floud has been aware of and has taken care of (that, at least I think, are unrelated to mining at all).

Most of the issues the pool has had so far have involved over taxing the DB.  I have not personally had any issues with cgminer at all and I haven't heard reports of any (other than a possible issue with 3.1.x that was observed happening across multiple pools.)

[ranlo]

I just enabled vardiff on the DGC pool.  Going to see how it goes overnight, and possibly revert in the morning.  Right now efficiency is hovering around 90-95% but the number of orphans hasn't increased as far as I can tell.

Calculation for last N will still be based on diff 32, for now.

Does this mean if someone's is set at 64 they are only getting half the shares?

[juhakall]

From the third line of cgminer README (https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/blob/master/README): "Do not use on multiple block chains at the same time!". This notice was added in version 2.0.6.

I've seen complaints of random crashes and shares not being submitted here. The reason could simply be that cgminer is not designed to work this way.

We'd need some clarification what specifically that warning is about. Technically this isn't using cgminer on multiple block chains at the same time...

Here's what ckolivas had to say about it on IRC: "cgminer keeps a database of blocks so changing chains means the database is wrong". I have no idea what consequences that would have. Maybe I misread the problems people were having with cgminer here. I was considering a similar chain-hopping method myself, but decided to go with restarting cgminer instead, because of the multiple chains warning.

[jaywaka2713]

I just enabled vardiff on the DGC pool.  Going to see how it goes overnight, and possibly revert in the morning.  Right now efficiency is hovering around 90-95% but the number of orphans hasn't increased as far as I can tell.

Calculation for last N will still be based on diff 32, for now.

Does this mean if someone's is set at 64 they are only getting half the shares?

If we set higher difficulty, do we get higher payout per share?

[gnomicide]

I just enabled vardiff on the DGC pool.  Going to see how it goes overnight, and possibly revert in the morning.  Right now efficiency is hovering around 90-95% but the number of orphans hasn't increased as far as I can tell.

Calculation for last N will still be based on diff 32, for now.

Does this mean if someone's is set at 64 they are only getting half the shares?

If we set higher difficulty, do we get higher payout per share?

Yes, share value is based off its difficulty. Take twice as long/difficult to process it = twice as much value.

~~~

My 2x machines using cgminer 3.2.0 had the same disconnect issue as above yesterday, so I switched them back to 3.1.0. No problems for ~12hrs and counting. I wonder why more people aren't on this pool...

[flound1129]

I just enabled vardiff on the DGC pool.  Going to see how it goes overnight, and possibly revert in the morning.  Right now efficiency is hovering around 90-95% but the number of orphans hasn't increased as far as I can tell.

Calculation for last N will still be based on diff 32, for now.

Does this mean if someone's is set at 64 they are only getting half the shares?

Yes but the payments code takes difficulty into account.