bitHopper: Python Pool Hopper Proxy

[Clipse]

json reset again lol

fucking lovely, ill just have to use the regex stats for now assuming those are correct.

small request to you clipse: can you put a little bit more attention when it resets to see if it's a 0 or a sub 100 value ? (a predictable value), can be circumvented ignoring a reset when in that range

edit: I actually don't  monitor this pool anymore, but when did, I've seen that strange resets too

It resets to 0 and counts onwards then eventually corrects to the actual round shares, then it resets again(atleast it happened twice like this today on the JSON)

[Clipse]

Ive wondered about the following error whenever I switch to bitclockers.

Code:

[00:33:00] LP triggered from server bitclockers
[00:33:00] Error in json decoding, Probably not a real LP response

Is this normal at all?

[pbj sammich]

So I've been out of the loop for most of the week with work issues, and I come here and there's like 30+ new pages 

Anyway just git pull and am running

Still a little confused on the slice scheduler - is it on by default now or do I need to do something different to slice?


edit: alot of work done this week geez, really appreciate it c00w et al

[Clipse]

So I've been out of the loop for most of the week with work issues, and I come here and there's like 30+ new pages 

Anyway just git pull and am running

Still a little confused on the slice scheduler - is it on by default now or do I need to do something different to slice?


edit: alot of work done this week geez, really appreciate it c00w et al

Default is normal slicescheduler, you can pass the cmd --scheduler OldDefaultScheduler or just doublecheck the spelling by launching hopper with --listschedulers

[MaGNeT]

I don't understand the "penalty" option in the user.cfg

What does it do?  Can I use it for other pools than Slush? What would be the effect of a higer or a lower value?

[hawks5999]

I don't understand the "penalty" option in the user.cfg

What does it do?  Can I use it for other pools than Slush? What would be the effect of a higer or a lower value?

higher penalties make the pool less likely to be chosen all other things being equal.

for example, if two pools are at 20%, the one with lower penalty will be chosen.

[msb8r]

I fixed some DB problems and LP looks fixed. So I tagged v0.1.1. If you're running a version which is moderately newish this is probably what you want to use.

I think you introduced a new one, though.

Whenever BH writes to database, no further submitted shares are updated, or if they are they're not showing up on the webpage.

Example starting with no database.
Before first "writing to database" user shares are updated for pool 1. As soon as the message shows up, user shares stay static.
Switching to pool 2, the same behaviour is evident. User shares for pool 2 updates up till the point that changes are written to the database, and then stay static.

Stales are still updating though, and as far as I can tell it has no impact on performance.

[MaGNeT]

I don't understand the "penalty" option in the user.cfg

What does it do?  Can I use it for other pools than Slush? What would be the effect of a higer or a lower value?

higher penalties make the pool less likely to be chosen all other things being equal.

for example, if two pools are at 20%, the one with lower penalty will be chosen.

Thanks I'll play around with it tomorrow.
It's 1:32 AM over here... Bye!

[djex]

I fixed some DB problems and LP looks fixed. So I tagged v0.1.1. If you're running a version which is moderately newish this is probably what you want to use.

I think you introduced a new one, though.

Whenever BH writes to database, no further submitted shares are updated, or if they are they're not showing up on the webpage.

Example starting with no database.
Before first "writing to database" user shares are updated for pool 1. As soon as the message shows up, user shares stay static.
Switching to pool 2, the same behaviour is evident. User shares for pool 2 updates up till the point that changes are written to the database, and then stay static.

Stales are still updating though, and as far as I can tell it has no impact on performance.

I can confirm this.

[owowo]

just downloaded. somehow the shares count at the statspage is getting stuck, stales are ok. I stopped, bitHopper and deleted stats.db but it's stuck again... I'm on ubuntu.

[Clipse]

Anyone figured out a way to get these 2 pools supported yet? I know Ed said he got btcmp working but still testing it, any update?

http://www.btcmp.com/

https://pool.itzod.ru/

[gtrrkicw]

I fixed some DB problems and LP looks fixed. So I tagged v0.1.1. If you're running a version which is moderately newish this is probably what you want to use.

I think you introduced a new one, though.

Whenever BH writes to database, no further submitted shares are updated, or if they are they're not showing up on the webpage.

Example starting with no database.
Before first "writing to database" user shares are updated for pool 1. As soon as the message shows up, user shares stay static.
Switching to pool 2, the same behaviour is evident. User shares for pool 2 updates up till the point that changes are written to the database, and then stay static.

Stales are still updating though, and as far as I can tell it has no impact on performance.

I can confirm this.

I thought it was just me... I'm seeing this too

[joulesbeef]

Code:

1:29:36] slush: 4817926
1:29:36] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:36] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:36] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:37] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:37] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:38] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:38] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:38] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:39] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:39] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:39] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:40] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:40] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:40] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:41] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:41] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:41] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:42] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:42] btcpool24: 977187
1:29:42] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:43] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)

is the newest version supposed to do this sooo much?

[muyoso]

Code:

1:29:36] slush: 4817926
1:29:36] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:36] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:36] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:37] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:37] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:38] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:38] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:38] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:39] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:39] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:39] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:40] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:40] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:40] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:41] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:41] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:41] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:42] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:42] btcpool24: 977187
1:29:42] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)
1:29:43] RPC request [getwork] submitted to DigBTC.net (DigBIT)

is the newest version supposed to do this sooo much?

I think that is the reason Bitclockers kills bithopper.  Too many getworks.  Switched to CherryPicker yesterday to test it out and OMFG:



Worked flawlessly.  Just need to figure out what Cherrypicker is doing differently and emulate it.  Also, I am getting .2% stales with Cherrypicker and never got below 4% stales with bithopper. . . . . .

Edit:  In fact, I am getting DRASTICALLY less stales on every pool.  Like by a factor of 10. 

[joulesbeef]

also just got my first payment with rfc pool.

their last block was invalid? how does that exactly happen? shouldnt those shares be added to the next block? in calc prop?

and bitclockers seems to be screwing with me more than ever today.

I think that is the reason Bitclockers kills bithopper.  Too many getworks.  Switched to CherryPicker yesterday to test it out and OMFG:

the massive getworks is new.

and those rejects are comparable to bithopper most of the time. but yeah we should see what is the difference between how cherry picker does bitclocker

the only thing i can see is they use a slightly different api addy..

going to try it... see if it helps

theirs http://bitclockers.com/api.json
ours api_address: https://bitclockers.com/api
and no https

hmmm

[Clipse]

also just got my first payment with rfc pool.

their last block was invalid? how does that exactly happen? shouldnt those shares be added to the next block? in calc prop?

and bitclockers seems to be screwing with me more than ever today.

I think that is the reason Bitclockers kills bithopper.  Too many getworks.  Switched to CherryPicker yesterday to test it out and OMFG:

the massive getworks is new.

and those rejects are comparable to bithopper most of the time. but yeah we should see what is the difference between how cherry picker does bitclocker

the only thing i can see is they use a slightly different api addy..

going to try it... see if it helps

theirs http://bitclockers.com/api.json
ours api_address: https://bitclockers.com/api
and no https

hmmm

I think for bitclockers we should just throttle the getworks , sure we could lose 1-2% efficiency or get a few more idle miner instances but atleast we would flood their pool with massive getworks, for some reason it seems my hopper loves to pull much more getworks than submits and only seems to happen with bitclockers.

The server timeouts isnt api/json related either, I even used my own custom json host that only pulled updates 1nc every 5mins and bitclockers still died. Its somewhere between bithopper and the way bithopper managed getworks that is stuffing with bitclockers and none of the other pools. Weird.

[ahitman]

Feature request: Is it possible to have the current shares graph put red dots when the hopper was mining at that pool? That way you can have a history of when in the pool share count your hopper was mining at a particular pool.

[macboy80]

Feature request: Is it possible to have the current shares graph put red dots when the hopper was mining at that pool? That way you can have a history of when in the pool share count your hopper was mining at a particular pool.

I second that. Maybe green dots, or the color of the active miner. I was trying to get some dynamic colors into the graph code, but I can't figure out how to test for role or mining or not mining inside of the buildTable function. I have a couple ideas, but can't code them because I have no prior experience with what I think is javascript.

Help! djex?

[c00w]

db issues should be fixed. Can someone get me a debuglog of the getwork spamming? My test machine is working but it basically has no hashing power. And doesn't show that error.

EDIT: If the storing user shares in DB error isn't fixed. Please tell me. Please.

[joulesbeef]

ahh yeah i guess i could have done that.. I shut down and restarted when no one else seemed to be complaining but a bud of mine and me.. so far it looks ok.. but if it happens again,, I'll restart with debugging