Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 02:01:54 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 »
  Print  
Author Topic: DiabloMiner GPU Miner  (Read 802960 times)
kaosbit
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25


View Profile
July 11, 2011, 05:11:44 PM
 #861

You can post completely arbitrary data, and it will still respond with a JSON-RPC response. Or you can post nothing. It is clearly not JSON-RPC.
Probably a case of "be strict in what you send, but generous in what you receive". And good practice too for some piece of pool software, considering there are so many ways to interpret the LP spec.

Like my work? Donate to: 168SpEzJXnb9onTgdyxZ97yzRSTrp9BKHh
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480773714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480773714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480773714
Reply with quote  #2

1480773714
Report to moderator
ancow
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373


View Profile WWW
July 11, 2011, 06:34:09 PM
 #862

I just got this log, but it is the first time out of ~5 runs that this happened. I suspect that it is because deepbit kept timing out and one of the executions was null when the LP response came in.

Code:
[11.07.11 20:22:54] Started                                                  
[11.07.11 20:22:54] Connecting to: http://pit.deepbit.net:8332/, http://swepool.net:8337/
[11.07.11 20:22:55] Using Apple OpenCL 1.0 (Dec 23 2010 17:30:26)            
[11.07.11 20:22:55] Added GeForce 9400 (#1) (2 CU, local work size of 128)  
[11.07.11 20:22:56] DEBUG: swepool.net: Enabling long poll support          
[11.07.11 20:22:56] DEBUG: swepool.net: Enabling roll ntime support          
[11.07.11 20:23:24] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out
[11.07.11 20:23:38] DEBUG: swepool.net: Long poll returned                  
Exception in thread "DiabloMiner LongPollAsync for swepool.net" java.lang.NullPointerException
        at com.diablominer.DiabloMiner.DiabloMiner.forceUpdate(DiabloMiner.java:536)
        at com.diablominer.DiabloMiner.DiabloMiner$NetworkState$LongPollAsync.run(DiabloMiner.java:919)
        at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
[11.07.11 20:23:55] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out
[11.07.11 20:24:27] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out
[11.07.11 20:24:58] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out

EDIT:
It just happened again, same situation, similar log.

BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
Druas
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 78


View Profile
July 11, 2011, 06:36:15 PM
 #863

Update: Multiple pool support, use commas
So is this the backup pool option? If the information is the same do we still have to retype it? What about port number and all the settings? I guess my question is if all we want is to enter a new backup pool (sometimes I even have same username and password) is that the only thing we have to put a comma for? I know this is kind of a dumb question, but I think in order to test it I would have to have my primary pool go down to see if secondary kicks in, which I am not in control of and not fond of having happen. Also, if primary goes down and it switches to secondary will it just keep going on secondary even if primary comes back? If secondary goes down will it try primary again?

-u username -p password -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332 -v 2 -w 128 -f1
or
-u username1, username2 -p password1, password2 -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332, 8332 -v 2, 2 -w 128, 128 -f 1, 1
ancow
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373


View Profile WWW
July 11, 2011, 06:43:26 PM
 #864

-u username -p password -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332 -v 2 -w 128 -f1
or
-u username1, username2 -p password1, password2 -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332, 8332 -v 2, 2 -w 128, 128 -f 1, 1
Only commas, no spaces after the commas since the command line would interpret everything after those as a new parameter.

BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
Druas
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 78


View Profile
July 11, 2011, 08:55:03 PM
 #865

-u username -p password -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332 -v 2 -w 128 -f1
or
-u username1, username2 -p password1, password2 -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332, 8332 -v 2, 2 -w 128, 128 -f 1, 1
Only commas, no spaces after the commas since the command line would interpret everything after those as a new parameter.
Ok yeah, but do I have to retype everything? What does a proper line look like with a backup pool?
ancow
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373


View Profile WWW
July 11, 2011, 09:06:21 PM
 #866

-u username -p password -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332 -v 2 -w 128 -f1
or
-u username1, username2 -p password1, password2 -o us.btcguild.com, pit.deepbit.net -r 8332, 8332 -v 2, 2 -w 128, 128 -f 1, 1
Only commas, no spaces after the commas since the command line would interpret everything after those as a new parameter.
Ok yeah, but do I have to retype everything? What does a proper line look like with a backup pool?
Pretty much the same way, just remove all the spaces after the commas:
Code:
-u username1,username2 -p password1,password2 -o us.btcguild.com,pit.deepbit.net -r 8332,8332 -v 2 -w 128 -f 1
Note that only parameters related to pool connection accept commas; -v, -w and -f don't.

BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
DareC
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 83


View Profile
July 11, 2011, 09:30:21 PM
 #867

It seems to be using both pools I put in, roughly equally. I was expecting it to be failover (or is btcmine just failing a lot?)
Druas
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 78


View Profile
July 11, 2011, 09:39:29 PM
 #868

It seems to be using both pools I put in, roughly equally. I was expecting it to be failover (or is btcmine just failing a lot?)
I would prefer failover also.
DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 01:44:03 AM
 #869

I just got this log, but it is the first time out of ~5 runs that this happened. I suspect that it is because deepbit kept timing out and one of the executions was null when the LP response came in.

Code:
[11.07.11 20:22:54] Started                                                  
[11.07.11 20:22:54] Connecting to: http://pit.deepbit.net:8332/, http://swepool.net:8337/
[11.07.11 20:22:55] Using Apple OpenCL 1.0 (Dec 23 2010 17:30:26)            
[11.07.11 20:22:55] Added GeForce 9400 (#1) (2 CU, local work size of 128)  
[11.07.11 20:22:56] DEBUG: swepool.net: Enabling long poll support          
[11.07.11 20:22:56] DEBUG: swepool.net: Enabling roll ntime support          
[11.07.11 20:23:24] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out
[11.07.11 20:23:38] DEBUG: swepool.net: Long poll returned                  
Exception in thread "DiabloMiner LongPollAsync for swepool.net" java.lang.NullPointerException
        at com.diablominer.DiabloMiner.DiabloMiner.forceUpdate(DiabloMiner.java:536)
        at com.diablominer.DiabloMiner.DiabloMiner$NetworkState$LongPollAsync.run(DiabloMiner.java:919)
        at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
[11.07.11 20:23:55] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out
[11.07.11 20:24:27] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out
[11.07.11 20:24:58] ERROR: Cannot connect to pit.deepbit.net: connect timed out

EDIT:
It just happened again, same situation, similar log.

Update: Fixed race condition

DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 02:11:25 AM
 #870

Pretty much the same way, just remove all the spaces after the commas:
Code:
-u username1,username2 -p password1,password2 -o us.btcguild.com,pit.deepbit.net -r 8332,8332 -v 2 -w 128 -f 1
Note that only parameters related to pool connection accept commas; -v, -w and -f don't.

This.

DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 02:13:21 AM
 #871

It seems to be using both pools I put in, roughly equally. I was expecting it to be failover (or is btcmine just failing a lot?)

I would prefer failover also.

It makes more sense to load balance to prevent a pool going down from slowing mining.

It also makes it harder for deepbit lol50% situations.

ned123
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 05:33:23 AM
 #872

It does make sense to load balance but for people with large hashing power.
For me for example it would decrease earnings, considering I don't have much hashing power (less than 400Mhps). If I split that, short rounds (less than 1-2 min) would be empty for me to often (been there seen that). And we surely need some sort of load balance/failover with all those DDoSes these days.

Maybe you could implement a switch of some sort, so people could test what is better for them?

Or... I simply switch to two smaller pools Smiley ...
c00w
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 06:14:00 AM
 #873

Hello,

It appears that you use post instead of get when doing Long Polling. That is contradictory to the unofficial spec and really annoying when trying to debug software LP failures.

See https://deepbit.net/longpolling.php

-C00w

1HEmzeuVEKxBQkEenysV1yM8oAddQ4o2TX
DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 06:36:07 AM
 #874

Hello,

It appears that you use post instead of get when doing Long Polling. That is contradictory to the unofficial spec and really annoying when trying to debug software LP failures.

See https://deepbit.net/longpolling.php

-C00w

You missed the entire discussion on this. The spec is incorrect if it requires GETs for a JSON-RPC request.

c00w
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 06:46:49 AM
 #875

Is there somewhere which actually standardizes long polling? Or an alternate spec I missed?

1HEmzeuVEKxBQkEenysV1yM8oAddQ4o2TX
DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 07:07:01 AM
 #876

Is there somewhere which actually standardizes long polling? Or an alternate spec I missed?

Other than Tycho's writeup on it, nope. Its just a bad hack.

c00w
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 06:47:53 PM
 #877

Hi,

So just to be clear you are the only miner which actually does gets instead of posts on purpose.

I already fixed my code to deal with your special case but If you truly believe thats the correct way to do it can you please write it down somewhere? If you made a post which is something along the lines of How LP works and how I believe it should work it would make it a lot easier to develop.

1HEmzeuVEKxBQkEenysV1yM8oAddQ4o2TX
kripz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182



View Profile
July 13, 2011, 01:48:39 AM
 #878

Is said discussion recorded somewhere? I couldnt find it.

 Merged mining, free SMS notifications, PayPal payout and much more.
http://btcstats.net/sig/JZCODg2
ancow
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373


View Profile WWW
July 13, 2011, 01:58:42 AM
 #879

Is said discussion recorded somewhere? I couldnt find it.
Try looking 2-3 pages up...

BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
July 13, 2011, 12:43:46 PM
 #880

Hi,

So just to be clear you are the only miner which actually does gets instead of posts on purpose.

I already fixed my code to deal with your special case but If you truly believe thats the correct way to do it can you please write it down somewhere? If you made a post which is something along the lines of How LP works and how I believe it should work it would make it a lot easier to develop.


Other way around. I never use GET and always POST. The HTTP spec is clear on this, if you have no message body in the request its a GET, if you have no message body in the response its a PUT, if you have both its a POST. JSON-RPC does the actual request mechanism in the JSON in the request, thus it is always a POST.

There is no reason to believe LP should be a GET (even though apparently poclbm and pheonix send GETs with empty message bodies expecting a JSON-RPC response, and pools actually allow this against both the HTTP and JSON-RPC specs), so it seems to be quite clear.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 »
  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!