ChanceCoats123
|
|
April 03, 2012, 12:16:22 PM |
|
I have big problem now, after install AMD 12.3 for windows, all looks ok but in run_p2pool.exe (0.10.3) shares are still 0, efficiency . What is the problem? Driver? Thanks in advance Panda Mouse. Everytime you close and reopen p2pool.exe, the share count resets. That doesn't mean you have 0 shares in the chain, just 0 shares logged with that running version of p2pool. Once you get shares, your efficiency will be calculated again.
|
|
|
|
Ente
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2126
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 03, 2012, 12:17:17 PM |
|
I have big problem now, after install AMD 12.3 for windows, all looks ok but in run_p2pool.exe (0.10.3) shares are still 0, efficiency . What do you mean with "still"? Did you restart p2pool after upgrading? How long did p2pool run since then? Does it report a local hashrate from your miners? Do your miners report any problems? Ente
|
|
|
|
Panda Mouse
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
Gliding...
|
|
April 03, 2012, 12:32:00 PM |
|
I have big problem now, after install AMD 12.3 for windows, all looks ok but in run_p2pool.exe (0.10.3) shares are still 0, efficiency . What is the problem? Driver? Thanks in advance Panda Mouse. Everytime you close and reopen p2pool.exe, the share count resets. That doesn't mean you have 0 shares in the chain, just 0 shares logged with that running version of p2pool. Once you get shares, your efficiency will be calculated again. I reinstalled p2pool.exe, this is the reason. Thank you, and you Ente. Now everything seems to be ok? Is it? Panda Mouse.
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
April 03, 2012, 12:36:25 PM |
|
How long has it been running? Your estimated time per share is 1.4 minutes so you should have ~40 shares per hour. If p2pool has been running 3 to 5 minutes that looks about right. If p2pool has been running an hour well that isn't right.
|
|
|
|
Panda Mouse
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
Gliding...
|
|
April 03, 2012, 12:45:51 PM |
|
How long has it been running? Your estimated time per share is 1.4 minutes so you should have ~40 shares per hour. If p2pool has been running 3 to 5 minutes that looks about right. If p2pool has been running an hour well that isn't right. Now I have full power, and shares:4 is from 13min (14:32:00 - shares:3), now (14:45:00 - shares:4)
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
April 03, 2012, 12:55:34 PM Last edit: April 03, 2012, 01:34:42 PM by DeathAndTaxes |
|
Yeah as indicated above, p2pool local counter isn't saved between restarts. If you don't have a static address set (w/ -a param) your payment address may change after a restart too.
Still payments are hardcoded into share chain itself. Even if p2pool is deleted from your computer you will still continue to get paid for earned shares until they become old enough they fall off the end of the sharechain.
I guess an user friendly improvement to p2pool would be to check sharechain for personal shares and show that even after restart.
i.e. [code LOCAL (since reset) 2 shares (1 orphaned) Total Shares in sharechain: 10,820, Your Shares in ShareChain: 1,320, your share x%.
|
|
|
|
Panda Mouse
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
Gliding...
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:00:18 PM |
|
Yeah as indicated above share count resets in p2pool node when you restart it. If you don't have a static address set (w/ -a param) your payment address may change also.
Still payments are hardcoded into sharechain. Even if p2pool is deleted from your computer you will still continue to get paid for earned shares (until they become so old they fall off the end of the sharechain).
I reinstalled p2pool, with folders :-( I have static address, I use -a param. Now is like bellow: Is it ok?
|
|
|
|
Ente
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2126
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:09:56 PM |
|
Looks good to me! Your local-dead-on-arrival rose, to a more realistic level of 10%. I was about to ask how it comes your local-dead was less than 2% on your first screenshot!
Incoming connections as well, so you probably have a static IP?
Ente
|
|
|
|
Panda Mouse
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
Gliding...
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:33:34 PM |
|
Looks good to me! Your local-dead-on-arrival rose, to a more realistic level of 10%. I was about to ask how it comes your local-dead was less than 2% on your first screenshot!
Incoming connections as well, so you probably have a static IP?
Ente
Yes I have static IP and use username/3000+1 Now is better: Panda Mouse.
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:37:23 PM |
|
Looks good to me! Your local-dead-on-arrival rose, to a more realistic level of 10%. Local DOA shouldn't be 10%. I have ~2% to 3%. In cgminer be sure to use: threads per GPU = 1, queue = 1, and lower your intensity by 1 compared to conventional pools.
|
|
|
|
Ente
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2126
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:44:47 PM |
|
Thanks for reminding me. I still run on poclbm. I did tests with cgminer already, numbers do look better there. I didnt switch over completely yet, though.
Ente
|
|
|
|
Panda Mouse
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
Gliding...
|
|
April 03, 2012, 01:50:48 PM |
|
Looks good to me! Your local-dead-on-arrival rose, to a more realistic level of 10%. Local DOA shouldn't be 10%. I have ~2% to 3%. In cgminer be sure to use: threads per GPU = 1, queue = 1, and lower your intensity by 1 compared to conventional pools. My DOA is ~1.5%, --queue 1 is default (I have it) but with -g there is more interesting. When I set it to 1 (from 2) ther my card drop to 675MH/s (from 697MH/s). It is 3.2% Is there a hidden profit? Panda Mouse.
|
|
|
|
Shadow383
|
|
April 03, 2012, 02:39:40 PM |
|
Are we just having terrible luck at the moment or is something wrong with my setup - I'm mining on the ~270Gh/s fork and have had no payments at all thus far today. Switched most of my own mining power over to PPS, but I've still got ~700Mh/s pointed at p2pool and have been paid a whole 0.11btc over the last 48 hours ¬_¬
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
April 03, 2012, 02:43:32 PM |
|
http://p2pool.info shows a list of all found blocks. you only get paid when a block is found. Block When Generation Tx Round Duration vs. Expected(?) 174118 4 hours ago 11bc5c96e0e82a3f7cfa93f068f50f 1d1h37m 404.9% 173988 1 day ag0 765e7af6d1bc878aa9c55d238e8625 6h45m 102.9%
We have had really bad luck for the past two blocks. You should have received a payment from block 174118 though roughly 4 hours ago.
|
|
|
|
twmz
|
|
April 03, 2012, 02:50:20 PM |
|
http://p2pool.info shows a list of all found blocks. you only get paid when a block is found. Block When Generation Tx Round Duration vs. Expected(?) 174118 4 hours ago 11bc5c96e0e82a3f7cfa93f068f50f 1d1h37m 404.9% 173988 1 day ag0 765e7af6d1bc878aa9c55d238e8625 6h45m 102.9%
We have had really bad luck for the past two blocks. You should have received a payment from block 174118 though roughly 4 hours ago. 174118 wasn't a real p2pool block. It was an "unupgraded fork of p2pool" block. None of the current p2pool miners (i.e. probably no one actually following this thread) got a payment in it. It has been removed from p2pool.info, but you won't see that unless you refresh the page (the auto refresh doesn't expect blocks to be removed, only added).
|
Was I helpful? 1 TwmzX1wBxNF2qtAJRhdKmi2WyLZ5VHRs WoT, GPGBitrated user: ewal.
|
|
|
kjj
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1026
|
|
April 03, 2012, 03:52:45 PM |
|
Finally got it after 31 hours. I was starting to get worried.
|
17Np17BSrpnHCZ2pgtiMNnhjnsWJ2TMqq8 I routinely ignore posters with paid advertising in their sigs. You should too.
|
|
|
bitpop
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1060
|
|
April 03, 2012, 03:55:21 PM |
|
Just got a payment
|
|
|
|
Panda Mouse
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
Gliding...
|
|
April 04, 2012, 07:01:37 AM |
|
What is going on, why does not include a block 174234?
Panda Mouse.
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4606
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
April 04, 2012, 07:35:38 AM |
|
What is going on, why does not include a block 174234?
Panda Mouse.
Because whoever created the block, does not have the BIP update in their bitcoind thus they built an invalid block and thus when the fork was resolved as expected, the P2Pool block 174234 went bye bye. To see the forks that keep happening, look here: http://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocksAlso note that on that page where it says "DeepBit" it isn't always correct.
|
|
|
|
Panda Mouse
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
Gliding...
|
|
April 04, 2012, 08:03:21 AM |
|
What is going on, why does not include a block 174234?
Panda Mouse.
Because whoever created the block, does not have the BIP update in their bitcoind thus they built an invalid block and thus when the fork was resolved as expected, the P2Pool block 174234 went bye bye. To see the forks that keep happening, look here: http://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocksAlso note that on that page where it says "DeepBit" it isn't always correct. Thank you kano, as I think it's not our (p2pool) bad BIP fault?
|
|
|
|
|