Rassah
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
|
|
November 29, 2012, 04:31:40 PM |
|
With the block halving, my profit is gone, and I had to shut down my miner. I still have Bitcoin-qt and P2Pool running, thinking having a full node available will help other P2Pool users somewhat (have about 24 incoming connections). Someone let me know if I'm wrong about this?
|
|
|
|
sharky112065
|
|
November 29, 2012, 04:44:28 PM Last edit: November 29, 2012, 04:56:55 PM by sharky112065 |
|
forrestv: Much better latest git master after 6.5 hours. Version: 9.1-5-gb016b6b Node uptime: 0.415 days Peers: 10 out, 24 in Shares: 89 total (5 orphaned, 3 dead) Efficiency: 121.9% Still got 27 Get Fails in that 6.5 hours, but no Rem Fails. 2.9% Rejects which is also much better. Edit: htop at start showed 485M RES and 636M VIRT htop after 6.5 hours 622M RES and 775M VIRT Watching for 5 minutes I never saw CPU go over 56% Most of the time it is 20 or lower. Still need to figure out why we get so many Get Fails. I know it is not hardware. I have a really fast server (lots of RAM, 8 CPU cores, and 16TB free space on Hardware Raid 6 ) and a fast Internet connection. I got 2 Get Fails on solo with bitcoind in 24 hours for comparison.
|
Donations welcome: 12KaKtrK52iQjPdtsJq7fJ7smC32tXWbWr
|
|
|
AV
|
|
November 29, 2012, 10:17:50 PM |
|
I have two subnets. Each subnet running bitcoind, but wallet.dat used in both cases is the same. Also in each subnet running p2pool. Can I setup two subnets are the same address for the award? Are there problems?
|
|
|
|
K1773R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008
/dev/null
|
|
November 29, 2012, 10:21:15 PM |
|
I have two subnets. Each subnet running bitcoind, but wallet.dat used in both cases is the same. Also in each subnet running p2pool. Can I setup two subnets are the same address for the award? Are there problems?
no this is fine
|
[GPG Public Key]BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1 K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM A K1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: N K1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: L Ki773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: E K1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: b K1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
|
|
|
|
BR0KK
|
|
November 29, 2012, 11:35:54 PM |
|
Stale rate is still pretty dam high Version: 9.1
Pool rate: 335GH/s [b](23% stale) [/b]Share difficulty: 522
Node uptime: 1.640 days Peers: 6 out, 2 in
Local rate: 3.81GH/s (5.9% DOA) Expected time to share: 0.163 hours
Shares: 216 total (39 orphaned, 13 dead) Efficiency: 98.28%
|
|
|
|
Prattler
|
|
November 30, 2012, 12:25:36 AM |
|
P2Pool release 9.2 tag: 9.2 hash: b016b6b522286e4675b82b9c4206784937977f3e
Changes: * Fixed some really inefficient checks
This has been confirmed (more or less) to help reduce your stale rate.
Before the switch DoA was at 1.5%. After the switch it climbed up to 5.2%. The latest fix brought it down to 2.5%. CPU usage still seems high and p2pool is using 1.4 GB RAM, so hopefully there is still place for improvement Comparing p2pool block receive times and blockchain.info times shows that 250 kB blocks are now distributed in 0-2 seconds. This is amazing!
|
|
|
|
Aseras
|
|
November 30, 2012, 12:59:40 AM |
|
9.2 is giving me a 100% orphan rate Last 10 shares in a row are orphans.. rolling back.
|
|
|
|
mdude77
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
|
|
November 30, 2012, 01:12:57 AM |
|
I grabbed the latest git this morning that includes the efficiency patch, that is the big change in 9.2. After about 14 hours, I'm still looking at 24% stale rate. However, cgminer is now reporting about 3% rejects, where before it was 10% - 20%. So I think the stale rate is because of my conn problems.
M
|
I mine at Kano's Pool because it pays the best and is completely transparent! Come join me!
|
|
|
BitCoiner2012
|
|
November 30, 2012, 01:29:36 AM |
|
Was using 9.0 fine and suddenly on reboot was spammed with this message and it closes instantly when using: https://i.imgur.com/W4We3.pngNow I downloaded 9.2 just in case, but it connects quickly, but never do my miners seem to connect.. not even on the host machine. Anyone..?
|
BTC Long.
|
|
|
Aseras
|
|
November 30, 2012, 03:51:11 AM |
|
9.2 is giving me a 100% orphan rate Last 10 shares in a row are orphans.. rolling back.
Double verified 100% orphan on 9.2. 20 more shares instant orphan. 9.1 and 9.0 are both fine though...?
|
|
|
|
Aseras
|
|
November 30, 2012, 03:53:06 AM |
|
Was using 9.0 fine and suddenly on reboot was spammed with this message and it closes instantly when using: https://i.imgur.com/W4We3.pngNow I downloaded 9.2 just in case, but it connects quickly, but never do my miners seem to connect.. not even on the host machine. Anyone..? Firewall? Looks like its blocked somehow.
|
|
|
|
iongchun
Member
Offline
Activity: 75
Merit: 10
|
|
November 30, 2012, 05:24:11 AM |
|
Stale rate is still pretty dam high Version: 9.1
Pool rate: 335GH/s [b](23% stale) [/b]Share difficulty: 522
Node uptime: 1.640 days Peers: 6 out, 2 in
Local rate: 3.81GH/s (5.9% DOA) Expected time to share: 0.163 hours
Shares: 216 total (39 orphaned, 13 dead) Efficiency: 98.28% Your efficiency is high enough But you should try version 9.2, the DOA rate is much lower for me.
|
Bitcoin: 1NFMpJUW7sTKmnVKj12MxhPvCvzAKQ5gUV Namecoin: N5Tnt3JyMeizsoAFAZDr7CSxjzDtPSisK8 Mining with P2Pool. Graph. Blocks.
|
|
|
PatMan
|
|
November 30, 2012, 11:38:09 AM |
|
After 12 hours on v9.2 my stale rate has gone up to 36% - whereas on the previous v9.1-9 it was steady at a lower (but still high) 18-22%. Connections seem quicker, but those damn "punishing share for stale" and "tx" messages are constantly thrown at me. Might go back to the previous build.......
|
|
|
|
K1773R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008
/dev/null
|
|
November 30, 2012, 12:25:41 PM |
|
After 12 hours on v9.2 my stale rate has gone up to 36% - whereas on the previous v9.1-9 it was steady at a lower (but still high) 18-22%. Connections seem quicker, but those damn "punishing share for stale" and "tx" messages are constantly thrown at me. Might go back to the previous build.......
0% stale for me
|
[GPG Public Key]BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1 K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM A K1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: N K1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: L Ki773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: E K1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: b K1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
|
|
|
rav3n_pl
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1361
Merit: 1003
Don`t panic! Organize!
|
|
November 30, 2012, 12:56:02 PM |
|
After 12 hours on v9.2 my stale rate has gone up to 36% - whereas on the previous v9.1-9 it was steady at a lower (but still high) 18-22%. Connections seem quicker, but those damn "punishing share for stale" and "tx" messages are constantly thrown at me. Might go back to the previous build.......
There few parameters you should look at: 1. Local rate: xxx H/s (yy% DOA) DOA there should be very low (max few %). If it is high possible miner config is bad or node GBT/lag is very high and you are mining old share. 2. Shares: xxx total (yyy orphaned, zzz dead) Efficiency: qqq% yyy depends on mostly LUCK, some on config. Orphaned share means that someone found share at same time as you, and yet another share was put on his share not yours. zzz depends on node and bit on luck. Dead share means that it is another share already after that one you was mining. So if your node is lagging and not fetching/passing shares fast enough you will get more dead shares.
|
|
|
|
tiker
|
|
November 30, 2012, 01:34:41 PM |
|
I'm rebuilding my p2pool node due to a hardware failure. Running the latest version as of 15 minutes ago from the GIT and I get the following: 2012-11-30 08:31:23.335637 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2012-11-30 08:31:23.336126 > Failure: twisted.python.failure.DefaultException: sharereply result: too long 2012-11-30 08:31:23.336928 Requesting parent share b68a0d0b from 173.11.125.162:9333 2012-11-30 08:31:25.159341 > in download_shares: 2012-11-30 08:31:25.159967 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2012-11-30 08:31:25.160453 > Failure: twisted.python.failure.DefaultException: sharereply result: too long 2012-11-30 08:31:25.161314 Requesting parent share b68a0d0b from 83.161.255.174:9333 2012-11-30 08:31:28.133602 > in download_shares: 2012-11-30 08:31:28.134254 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2012-11-30 08:31:28.134743 > Failure: twisted.python.failure.DefaultException: sharereply result: too long 2012-11-30 08:31:28.135574 Requesting parent share b68a0d0b from 173.11.125.162:9333 2012-11-30 08:31:28.166702 P2Pool: 0 shares in chain (0 verified/4565 total) Peers: 6 (0 incoming) 2012-11-30 08:31:28.167326 Local: 0H/s in last 0.0 seconds Local dead on arrival: ??? Expected time to share: ??? 2012-11-30 08:31:30.027398 > in download_shares: 2012-11-30 08:31:30.028164 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2012-11-30 08:31:30.028618 > Failure: twisted.python.failure.DefaultException: sharereply result: too long 2012-11-30 08:31:30.029446 Requesting parent share b68a0d0b from 173.11.125.162:9333 2012-11-30 08:31:31.816948 > in download_shares: 2012-11-30 08:31:31.817605 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2012-11-30 08:31:31.818093 > Failure: twisted.python.failure.DefaultException: sharereply result: too long 2012-11-30 08:31:31.818912 Requesting parent share b68a0d0b from 83.161.255.174:9333 2012-11-30 08:31:34.376080 > in download_shares: 2012-11-30 08:31:34.376732 > Traceback (most recent call last): 2012-11-30 08:31:34.377251 > Failure: twisted.python.failure.DefaultException: sharereply result: too long 2012-11-30 08:31:34.378040 Requesting parent share b68a0d0b from 75.12.89.18:9333
Not sure if it's worth worrying about or not but posting just in case.
|
|
|
|
PatMan
|
|
November 30, 2012, 01:39:07 PM |
|
After 12 hours on v9.2 my stale rate has gone up to 36% - whereas on the previous v9.1-9 it was steady at a lower (but still high) 18-22%. Connections seem quicker, but those damn "punishing share for stale" and "tx" messages are constantly thrown at me. Might go back to the previous build.......
There few parameters you should look at: 1. Local rate: xxx H/s (yy% DOA) DOA there should be very low (max few %). If it is high possible miner config is bad or node GBT/lag is very high and you are mining old share. 2. Shares: xxx total (yyy orphaned, zzz dead) Efficiency: qqq% yyy depends on mostly LUCK, some on config. Orphaned share means that someone found share at same time as you, and yet another share was put on his share not yours. zzz depends on node and bit on luck. Dead share means that it is another share already after that one you was mining. So if your node is lagging and not fetching/passing shares fast enough you will get more dead shares. Hi rav3n, My local DOA rate on p2pool is 1.8% which is pretty normal for me. I just done a few tweaks on my rig and rebooted, but before that I was over 36% stales and about 75% efficiency - where as before all this malarkey I was at a constant 98-110%+. Ki77er, how do you manage to get a 0% stale rate when the pool stale rate is over 20%? Teach me Obe Wan.....
|
|
|
|
K1773R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008
/dev/null
|
|
November 30, 2012, 01:41:32 PM |
|
After 12 hours on v9.2 my stale rate has gone up to 36% - whereas on the previous v9.1-9 it was steady at a lower (but still high) 18-22%. Connections seem quicker, but those damn "punishing share for stale" and "tx" messages are constantly thrown at me. Might go back to the previous build.......
There few parameters you should look at: 1. Local rate: xxx H/s (yy% DOA) DOA there should be very low (max few %). If it is high possible miner config is bad or node GBT/lag is very high and you are mining old share. 2. Shares: xxx total (yyy orphaned, zzz dead) Efficiency: qqq% yyy depends on mostly LUCK, some on config. Orphaned share means that someone found share at same time as you, and yet another share was put on his share not yours. zzz depends on node and bit on luck. Dead share means that it is another share already after that one you was mining. So if your node is lagging and not fetching/passing shares fast enough you will get more dead shares. Hi rav3n, My local DOA rate on p2pool is 1.8% which is pretty normal for me. I just done a few tweaks on my rig and rebooted, but before that I was over 36% stales and about 75% efficiency - where as before all this malarkey I was at a constant 98-110%+. Ki77er, how do you manage to get a 0% stale rate when the pool stale rate is over 20%? Teach me Obe Wan..... i cant tell you why, i can just guess.
|
[GPG Public Key]BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1 K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM A K1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: N K1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: L Ki773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: E K1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: b K1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
|
|
|
AV
|
|
November 30, 2012, 01:42:32 PM |
|
How to setup --submit-stale parameter in cgminer ? Submit or no submit ? K1773RThanks.
|
|
|
|
|