OLD: BFGMiner 3.10.0: modular ASIC+FPGA, GBT+Strtm, RPC, Mac/Lnx/W64, AntU1, DRB

[Luke-Jr]

I would like it to be replaced by the old "accepted shares per minute", a good measure of miners performance.

Accepted shares per minute is absolutely useless information... it tells nothing about performance.

[cafminer1]

I would like it to be replaced by the old "accepted shares per minute", a good measure of miners performance.

Accepted shares per minute is absolutely useless information... it tells nothing about performance.

Oh yes?!? My ignorance then... but how come that?

Is there something I should study or read about this? I thought it was what I should look after for each miner...

[bigbeninlondon]

Here's a question.  I have two Block Erupter Sapphires amidst 7 antminer u2+ and 3 nanofury.  I just noticed when I restarted that the two BEs have the same stats as far as their shares, but the percentage at the end was different.  Here's a screenshot:




Is there something I'm missing?  Why are they different?

[Luke-Jr]

I would like it to be replaced by the old "accepted shares per minute", a good measure of miners performance.

Accepted shares per minute is absolutely useless information... it tells nothing about performance.

Oh yes?!? My ignorance then... but how come that?

Is there something I should study or read about this? I thought it was what I should look after for each miner...

Shares often have different targets/weights.

[cafminer1]

I would like it to be replaced by the old "accepted shares per minute", a good measure of miners performance.

Accepted shares per minute is absolutely useless information... it tells nothing about performance.

Oh yes?!? My ignorance then... but how come that?

Is there something I should study or read about this? I thought it was what I should look after for each miner...

Shares often have different targets/weights.

Ah yes... That s right no doubt. I m alleviated.

But I was meaning something like shares/minute*diff or even "shares"/minute and we calculate diff. Main target here would be to have some usual number to see and check at any moment. I guess you ve elaborated that a lot more and sure, we have there "I:  143uBTC/hr" Maybe  I should just get used to that 143u... Is this the (new, better) way?

PS and BTW: about that doubt of me of sometimes BFGMiner showing, at [M] menu, erupter data (serial# and description) and sometimes not... Any recomendations? Solutions? Just live with that?

Thanks again Luke-Jr and congrats.

[BRADLEYPLOOF]

Here's a question.  I have two Block Erupter Sapphires amidst 7 antminer u2+ and 3 nanofury.  I just noticed when I restarted that the two BEs have the same stats as far as their shares, but the percentage at the end was different.  Here's a screenshot:




Is there something I'm missing?  Why are they different?

Because the block erupters run at 333 mh/s you'll have very little chance of getting a diff 16 share.  Try running those on their own instance with a pool the will do diff 1.  Otherwise you'll have to sit around for a while before they add up...As for the Hardware Errors percentage, it's probably because one is running warmer than the other...generally heat has a very detrimental effect on performance.

[bigbeninlondon]

Here's a question.  I have two Block Erupter Sapphires amidst 7 antminer u2+ and 3 nanofury.  I just noticed when I restarted that the two BEs have the same stats as far as their shares, but the percentage at the end was different.  Here's a screenshot:




Is there something I'm missing?  Why are they different?

Because the block erupters run at 333 mh/s you'll have very little chance of getting a diff 16 share.  Try running those on their own instance with a pool the will do diff 1.  Otherwise you'll have to sit around for a while before they add up...As for the Hardware Errors percentage, it's probably because one is running warmer than the other...generally heat has a very detrimental effect on performance.

I'm not worried about the hardware error itself, I usually get one or two near the beginning, but it stabilizes over time.  I just noticed that the shares are 2, with one HW error on both miners, but the % of hardware errors is different.  How are the percentages calculated if two miners with the same accepted and hardware error have different percentages?

[cafminer1]

I'm not worried about the hardware error itself, I usually get one or two near the beginning, but it stabilizes over time.  I just noticed that the shares are 2, with one HW error on both miners, but the % of hardware errors is different.  How are the percentages calculated if two miners with the same accepted and hardware error have different percentages?

I guess hardware errors HW % are calculated among all usefull results (diff 1 up) so they may be compared to different totals for different erupters. If they were related to accepted shares, 1 versus 2 would be 33 or 50%...

Your numbers must be saying something like:
1  = 1.8% of 56, 2 of which above 16
1  = 2.4% of 42, 2 of which above 16

[Beulemann]

my hahsra image with bfgminer only shows me the following messages all the time:

Apr 10 10:15:40 bfgminer[28211]: Stratum authorisation success for pool 0
Apr 10 10:15:40 bfgminer[28211]: Closing socket for stratum pool 0
Apr 10 10:15:40 bfgminer[28211]: Stratum connection to pool 0 interrupted

anyone an idea?

another problem is the missing ssh-logindata to the hashra-pi-image

[Taugeran]

luke,

received your OneStringMiner dev stack yet from @benturas?

[Luke-Jr]

luke,

received your OneStringMiner dev stack yet from @benturas?

Yes, we're working on it.

[Taugeran]

luke,

received your OneStringMiner dev stack yet from @benturas?

Yes, we're working on it.

 

[ManeBjorn]

I am so looking forward to support for them.
The three I have now run great at about 32 gh/s each with no overclock but I so miss MultiMiner that it drives me nuts.
Once per day cgminer drops them.
They are fun units.

luke,

received your OneStringMiner dev stack yet from @benturas?

Yes, we're working on it.

[Taugeran]

I am so looking forward to support for them.
The three I have now run great at about 32 gh/s each with no overclock but I so miss MultiMiner that it drives me nuts.
Once per day cgminer drops them.
They are fun units.

luke,

received your OneStringMiner dev stack yet from @benturas?

Yes, we're working on it.

idk if it will be work noting but ive noticed cgminer seems to segfault when the jobid field is exhausted, instead of rolling back to the beginning of the 32bit number. idk if its the version im running so :/ with a grain of salt i suppose


as well cant wait to have all my hardware condensed into 1 screen. running cg and bfg on the same BBB and setting up permissions was a pita.

id start bfg with my usbs and some k16s. then fire up cg which would try and grab my usbs and fu** em up when i only wanted it to get the OSM. 

some fiddling with cg's udev rules did the trick.

[hurricandave]

   I just happened to walk in and sit down to my computer and the bfgminer display was rolling up but said "reinitializing AMU 0" and went thru the list of all my devices... Any guess as to what would cause that?

[rupy]

Can you underclock bfl singles with bfgminer somehow?

So I guess that's a no!

[ManeBjorn]

Hi Luke,
Have you made any headway with the OneString miners.  I am so tired of once to twice a day cgminer stopping mining.  I really want to get them on BFG and MultiMiner.

Not rushing you though. 

Thanks again.

[Taugeran]

Hi Luke,
Have you made any headway with the OneString miners.  I am so tired of once to twice a day cgminer stopping mining.  I really want to get them on BFG and MultiMiner.

Not rushing you though. 

Thanks again.

Watching

[justworks]

Hello, if anyone could help me figure this out it would be great!

I have BFGminer on my wr703n (openWRT) running a few antminers.

The thing is, if I run the command from an ssh session everything is ok, but if I put the same command into the luci startup so it would run automatically on each boot BFGminer eats 100% of the routers CPU and becomes unstable after a few hours, hardware errors and GH/s drop.

The command is:

bfgminer -S antminer:all -o mypool -u myusername -p x --set-device antminer:clock=x0981

So again, through a ssh session, the CPU usage is 0 to 1%, as a startup command its 99 to 100%. And I am using the identical command.

What am I missing here..?


The main point of the wr703n miner was so my computer does not have to be on, but I am not there yet

[Luke-Jr]

Hello, if anyone could help me figure this out it would be great!

I have BFGminer on my wr703n (openWRT) running a few antminers.

The thing is, if I run the command from an ssh session everything is ok, but if I put the same command into the luci startup so it would run automatically on each boot BFGminer eats 100% of the routers CPU and becomes unstable after a few hours, hardware errors and GH/s drop.

The command is:

bfgminer -S antminer:all -o mypool -u myusername -p x --set-device antminer:clock=x0981

So again, through a ssh session, the CPU usage is 0 to 1%, as a startup command its 99 to 100%.


The main point of the wr703n miner was so my computer does not have to be on, but I am not there yet

Try --syslog ? Or -T and pipe output to /dev/null