Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 06:27:28 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 ... 376 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]  (Read 775073 times)
hahahafr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 241



View Profile
September 18, 2012, 08:22:21 AM
 #1701

Could someone create a new worker, test it if it works on their side, then give me the user/pass of the worker?
So I can see if the problem comes from the server or from me.

1480876048
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480876048

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480876048
Reply with quote  #2

1480876048
Report to moderator
1480876048
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480876048

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480876048
Reply with quote  #2

1480876048
Report to moderator
1480876048
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480876048

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480876048
Reply with quote  #2

1480876048
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480876048
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480876048

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480876048
Reply with quote  #2

1480876048
Report to moderator
lenny_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 953



View Profile
September 18, 2012, 09:32:58 AM
 #1702

DrHaribo, what's your plans about implementing Stratum protocol?

I was going to implement getblocktemplate. I don't see the point in also having Stratum. But if some miners support one and some the other, maybe I will need to support both on the server. Same with the client (after adding support for backup pools) if some pools use getblocktemplate while others use stratum.

It's always fun to have two standards for the same thing. Cheesy

Good to hear that you are working to improve server software and you will implement at least on of them  Smiley Can you please explain a little bit differences between getblocktemplate and Stratum?
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 18, 2012, 09:47:41 AM
 #1703

DrHaribo, what's your plans about implementing Stratum protocol?

I was going to implement getblocktemplate. I don't see the point in also having Stratum. But if some miners support one and some the other, maybe I will need to support both on the server. Same with the client (after adding support for backup pools) if some pools use getblocktemplate while others use stratum.

It's always fun to have two standards for the same thing. Cheesy

Good to hear that you are working to improve server software and you will implement at least on of them  Smiley Can you please explain a little bit differences between getblocktemplate and Stratum?
In getblocktemplate, pretty much all the pool does is count shares - the miner must handle all the txn decisions, txn orphans, block changes (and orphans as well) i.e. pretty much implement a large portion of the txn handling that the pool (or bitcoind) does for you.
As a result of this, your bitcoin network connection will also affect your mining.
At the moment a pool's job is to ensure that it has enough connectivity and performance to handle the miners.
With getblocktemplate, it becomes the miner's problem.
(which is also why I've said that any implementation of getblocktemplate in a miner should also put a fee paid to the miner in the coinbase txn)

Stratum, on the other hand, restricts you to interacting with the pools in a similar manner to how you do already, but you have a somewhat unlimited amount of work per getwork from the pool.
You produce the coinbase transaction also thus you can change the coinbase and thus roll a 'secondary-nonce' and not have to roll the time.
Also, the rolling is of course unlimited since the coinbase field in the coinbase transaction can contain anything you like.
Thus it supports larger hashing power.
The aim is not to hash forever and never talk to the pool, but rather provide each miner work that they can use for a period of time independent of their hashing power.

As I keep saying in other threads, this is all caused by the fact that the block header nonce is only 32bits - the good old MSDOS problem where the design was too small - and to fix it properly requires a hard fork to increase it's size (that the bitcoin devs are afraid to do)

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
thph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 333



View Profile
September 18, 2012, 12:21:07 PM
 #1704

11 blocks today - and counting .....
hahahafr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 241



View Profile
September 18, 2012, 01:28:34 PM
 #1705

20h left before 3xxxxxx difficulty...

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 18, 2012, 01:48:01 PM
 #1706

20h left before 3xxxxxx difficulty...
No.
You have at least another difficulty change (~2 weeks) to wait for that ...
This time it will only be around 2.62Million

Edit: Yeah mistake 2.9 not 2.6 Tongue
I multiplied by the old difficulty - lulz

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
cmg5461
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 374



View Profile
September 18, 2012, 02:06:31 PM
 #1707

20h left before 3xxxxxx difficulty...

Next Difficulty
in 188 blocks
2,913,501

give or take

If I've helped: 1CmguJhwW4sbtSMFsyaafikJ8jhYS61quz

Sold: 5850 to lepenguin. Quick, easy and trustworthy.
WhitePhantom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 349



View Profile
September 18, 2012, 05:12:01 PM
 #1708

11 blocks today - and counting .....
Yeah, it's nice when we hit a good stretch of luck.  I'm feeling sick over my own performance, though.  I haven't generated a block in six days!  If it all averages out, maybe I'll generate 3-4 blocks for the pool in a day...Hoping!
Shermo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 268



View Profile
September 18, 2012, 09:05:41 PM
 #1709

16 blocks, about 3 hours left... potentially could beat the previous record of 18 blocks in a day Smiley
WhitePhantom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 349



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 07:41:04 AM
 #1710

Strange.  I just decided to glance at my MiniRigs before going to bed and I found that they had not been mining for 3/4 of a shift.  The BitMinter client showed errors about having run out of work.  I normally have about 800-1200 work units queued, but it was only showing 200-ish.  After I closed BitMinter and relaunched it, they started mining as usual.

This has never happened before.  Doc, do you suppose a change in version 1.3 could be the culprit, or is it more likely an inexplicable fluke?
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 08:58:34 AM
 #1711

Strange.  I just decided to glance at my MiniRigs before going to bed and I found that they had not been mining for 3/4 of a shift.  The BitMinter client showed errors about having run out of work.  I normally have about 800-1200 work units queued, but it was only showing 200-ish.  After I closed BitMinter and relaunched it, they started mining as usual.

This has never happened before.  Doc, do you suppose a change in version 1.3 could be the culprit, or is it more likely an inexplicable fluke?

With 200 work units queued they were mining, right? If there was a network problem for a while they should pick right up again after connectivity returns.

At the time they were idling, did you also get network errors, like messages about connections timing out?

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 10:31:18 AM
 #1712

At height 199506 amazingrando hit bitcoin block no. 988 for BitMinter.

Quick competition: 5 BTC prize for the miner who creates the pool's 1000th block. Stale/orphan status ignored.

EDIT: Block no. 1000 compo thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110579.0

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
WhitePhantom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 349



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 08:00:50 PM
 #1713

Strange.  I just decided to glance at my MiniRigs before going to bed and I found that they had not been mining for 3/4 of a shift.  The BitMinter client showed errors about having run out of work.  I normally have about 800-1200 work units queued, but it was only showing 200-ish.  After I closed BitMinter and relaunched it, they started mining as usual.

This has never happened before.  Doc, do you suppose a change in version 1.3 could be the culprit, or is it more likely an inexplicable fluke?

With 200 work units queued they were mining, right? If there was a network problem for a while they should pick right up again after connectivity returns.

At the time they were idling, did you also get network errors, like messages about connections timing out?

The work units were fluctuating and I briefly saw the number 1.50 (GH/s I assume, didn't notice) before I closed BitMinter.  All the miners were started, but I didn't see anything but zeros next to them.  I guess at least one must have been running, but I had already closed it before I realized that I should have looked more closely.

The only errors that were visible were the ones about running out of work.  I wish I'd spent a minute looking into it more, but I went into fix-it ASAP mode before thinking.

The host computer was running three of my friend's Singles on a second instance of BitMinter under a different Windows user and that instance was running fine when I restarted mine.  Still, there appears to have been some sort of glitch that affected both instances.  I checked my friend's BitMinter account and he had a 30% reduction of shares in the same shift.  That's not as dramatic as the 75% reduction I experienced, but it's something.

I'm still not sure what this suggests, though.  Perhaps a network issue that one instance recovered from more gracefully than the other?  I'll be sure to take better notes of what's going on if it happens again.
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 08:11:06 PM
 #1714

I'm still not sure what this suggests, though.  Perhaps a network issue that one instance recovered from more gracefully than the other?  I'll be sure to take better notes of what's going on if it happens again.

Yes, indeed it sounds like there was a network problem and afterwards your friend's instance was alright but yours didn't recover properly.

I'd be very interested in more info to be better able to hunt down any bugs that may be causing this. If you or someone else experiences this again, try if you can to get me a cut'n'paste of the log, a description of how the miner is behaving and anything you know about what lead up to it.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
hahahafr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 241



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 11:16:33 PM
 #1715

It's confirmed that ckolivas is (only?) gonna implement the Stratum protocol in CGMiner soon:
Quote
Anyway unfortunately for some (one?), I'm not dead and was not going to abandon cgminer, but family comes first. Things are still bad there but I'm finding my feet again.

I'll look at the stratum protocol at some stage soon.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=28402.msg1205331#msg1205331

AfricanHunter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 157


View Profile
September 21, 2012, 07:28:13 AM
 #1716

Great Pool. Can you explain what is the difference between the current beta vs prod?

Also was wondering why my shift scores were down and then saw we picked up a 282GH/s worker. Nice hash power. Gonna be nuts when people start hitting with multiple 1ths rigs!

Thinking about doing business with johnniewalkerhttps://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=72227?
First read this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=131841.0

Also, Join the National Rifle Association to protect 2nd Amendment Rights http://membership.nrahq.org/default.asp?campaignid=XR020022
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
September 21, 2012, 07:30:50 AM
 #1717

Great Pool. Can you explain what is the difference between the current beta vs prod?

Thank you, glad you like it. Smiley

Version 1.3.0 of the client was just released and there is no new beta yet. If you try to load the beta right now it will just be the normal 1.3.0 version.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
loshia
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372


View Profile
September 22, 2012, 09:06:47 AM
 #1718

Doc,
I am aware of the recent pool hardware issues which did cause a delay in software development. As you said before Roll-ntime was ready to go but there were some issues with different clients. Is it possible to enable it only for "good miners or per account/login" so we can test  it? I am using cgminer and i can PM my username if you need it

10X

Please help the Led Boy aka Bicknellski to make us a nice Christmas led tree and pay WASP membership fee here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=643999.msg7191563#msg7191563
And remember Bicknellski is not collecting money from community;D
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
September 22, 2012, 11:08:20 AM
 #1719

I am aware of the recent pool hardware issues which did cause a delay in software development.

Yep, but I have been working on it. I have made some improvements but I wasn't able to reproduce the slow response we sometimes saw, even when spamming my test server with requests. So I'm not sure if the issue is still there.

I have the new version up for testing on port 9000. Anyone running a setup with backup pools please help test this by putting http://mint.bitminter.com:9000 as first pool and keeping the regular 8332 on second place. In case there is a problem with the test version or I shut it down, your miner will move over to the regular one.

If running on port 9000 your hashrate in livestats will drop, but you can see on the workers page of the website that you are still getting accepted proofs of work and will be paid for the work. Just load that page, wait 10 seconds, then refresh. Numbers will have updated.

So if you have a working setup with backup pools please help test this. I'd like to have some confidence that it's stable before setting it up on port 8332.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
jamesg
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330


AKA: gigavps


View Profile
September 22, 2012, 11:27:45 AM
 #1720

So if you have a working setup with backup pools please help test this. I'd like to have some confidence that it's stable before setting it up on port 8332.

Hi DrHaribo,

I'm running 52Gh to port 9000 with cgminer 2.5.0. The efficiency is hovering around 1400%5000%.   Grin

Best,
gigavps
Pages: « 1 ... 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 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 ... 376 »
  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!