Bitcoin Forum
September 25, 2017, 10:48:22 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 [286] 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 ... 838 »
  Print  
Author Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.10.0  (Read 5487271 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
Phraust
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 206


Mostly Harmless...


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2012, 09:16:38 PM
 #5701

Hey, just compiled 2.4.2 for OSX, here:
http://bitcoin.phraust.com/CGMINER_2.4.2.zip

Using:
./configure CFLAGS="-O2" --enable-bitforce --enable-icarus --enable-ztex

Just in case anyone needs it.
1506379702
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379702

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379702
Reply with quote  #2

1506379702
Report to moderator
1506379702
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379702

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379702
Reply with quote  #2

1506379702
Report to moderator
1506379702
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379702

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379702
Reply with quote  #2

1506379702
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1506379702
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379702

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379702
Reply with quote  #2

1506379702
Report to moderator
1506379702
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379702

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379702
Reply with quote  #2

1506379702
Report to moderator
1506379702
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379702

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379702
Reply with quote  #2

1506379702
Report to moderator
mdude77
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1428



View Profile
June 05, 2012, 12:11:52 AM
 #5702

Making a windows based GUI front end to monitor (and control) my miners is on my list of things to do.  That would help the windows guys (yes, we still exist, and aren't likely going anywhere anytime soon).

M

Many web stats display/monitors are available.  Nice charts and all.  So I'd not waste time on this.
My take on this is that charts are nice to look at but they don't make money. Your miner does.

If you interested in something that would actively control your miner process, you might take a look at my akbash.
It can be set to monitor many miner, Windows and GPU hardware statistics.  When triggers (hash rates, hw errors, process handle count or working set, GPU H/W temp, utilization, faulty fans etc) are met, miner (or OS) is restarted, email notifications are sent.  Most importantly, driver crashes and werfault conditions are detected.


I'm not looking for charts, or a web interface.  Frankly, I detest web interfaces.  I like GUIs and databases.

Thanks for the info though. Smiley

M

████████
████████
████
████





████
████
████████
████████
     ▄▄████████▄▄
   ▄██████████████▄
 ▄██████████████████▄
██████▀▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀▀█
██████     █████     █
██████     █████     █             ▄▄▄
██████     ▀▀▀▀▀     █        ███  ███
 ▀████                  ▄▄▄   ███  ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄  ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄  ▄▄
   ▀██     ▄▄▄▄▄      ▄█████▄ ███  ███ ███  ███ ████████████▄
     ▀     █████      ███▄▄██ ███  ███ ███  ███ ███ ▀███ ▀███
           ▀▀███      ███▄▄▄  ███▄ ███ ███▄████ ███  ███  ███
               ▀       ▀████▀  ▀██ ███ ▀███▀███ ███  ███  ███
                   ▀█
████████
████████
████
████





████
████
████████
████████
█  ████▀  █
█  ██▀▄█  █
█  ▀▄███  █
█  ████▀  █
██▀▄█
▀▄███
████▀
██▀▄█

▀▄███

█  ████▀  █

█  ██▀▄█  █

█  ▀▄███  █

█  █████  █
|
█  ████▀  █
█  ██▀▄█  █
█  ▀▄███  █
█  ████▀  █
██▀▄█
▀▄███
████▀
██▀▄█

▀▄███

█  ████▀  █

█  ██▀▄█  █

█  ▀▄███  █

█  █████  █
P_Shep
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2012, 12:16:15 AM
 #5703

I think I might have found what's been causing my high stales, though not specifically...
It seems with load-balance I get very a poor stale rate, which seems to get worse the more pools involved. with 3 pools I get around 1.5% stale, with 5 it's up to 3-4%. When it's fail-over-only I'm looking at < 0.5%
Trouble is, the CGminer reported stats are not the same as the pools report. it seems the pools (some more than others) often report a share as valid to cgminer, then decide in it's own stats that it's stale.

I have a 10Mb debug log file taken over 1.5hrs if it'll be useful to diagnose anything.  
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2012, 12:31:06 AM
 #5704

I think I might have found what's been causing my high stales, though not specifically...
It seems with load-balance I get very a poor stale rate, which seems to get worse the more pools involved. with 3 pools I get around 1.5% stale, with 5 it's up to 3-4%. When it's fail-over-only I'm looking at < 0.5%
Trouble is, the CGminer reported stats are not the same as the pools report. it seems the pools (some more than others) often report a share as valid to cgminer, then decide in it's own stats that it's stale.

I have a 10Mb debug log file taken over 1.5hrs if it'll be useful to diagnose anything.  
As each pool has a different idea about when the block changes, if I choose the first pool's block change to discard all work from all pools then there can be quite a long period across block changes where cgminer throws out lots of work because it will continue to consider it from the old block. I had to relax the stale testing for load balance to prevent this work from being thrown out. On the other hand it's almost certainly what's leading to higher stales at every longpoll/block change. People generally get scared when they see a huge dip in hashrate across longpoll and start blaming cgminer for not keeping the devices busy. It probably makes more sense to throw out the work and accept the dip in hashrate so I can do that next version, but no matter what I choose, someone will complain  Roll Eyes

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
P_Shep
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2012, 12:38:04 AM
 #5705

As each pool has a different idea about when the block changes, if I choose the first pool's block change to discard all work from all pools then there can be quite a long period across block changes where cgminer throws out lots of work because it will continue to consider it from the old block. I had to relax the stale testing for load balance to prevent this work from being thrown out. On the other hand it's almost certainly what's leading to higher stales at every longpoll/block change. People generally get scared when they see a huge dip in hashrate across longpoll and start blaming cgminer for not keeping the devices busy. It probably makes more sense to throw out the work and accept the dip in hashrate so I can do that next version, but no matter what I choose, someone will complain  Roll Eyes

I was wondering if something like this was the case. Looking at the log that seemed to me what was happening, but I was having difficulty translating what was going on... (for one, the specific pool/device the message is about is rarely referenced in the logs!).

If there's not much you can do, there's not much you can do! I'll just stick to fail-over then Smiley

I'd say taking the dip in hashrate would be better option though. I prefer not to start work than throw away work done...
1. You won't waste power calculated hashes you know will be stale.
2. You don't get stales appearing in the stats.
wogaut
Donator
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 448



View Profile
June 05, 2012, 01:19:12 AM
 #5706

I think I might have found what's been causing my high stales, though not specifically...
It seems with load-balance I get very a poor stale rate, which seems to get worse the more pools involved. with 3 pools I get around 1.5% stale, with 5 it's up to 3-4%. When it's fail-over-only I'm looking at < 0.5%
Trouble is, the CGminer reported stats are not the same as the pools report. it seems the pools (some more than others) often report a share as valid to cgminer, then decide in it's own stats that it's stale.

I have a 10Mb debug log file taken over 1.5hrs if it'll be useful to diagnose anything.  

Would that possibly explain the dips every now and then my hashrate as reported by the pool (i.e. Eclipse) takes (really short and then it comes up again) while my cgminer seems to be working at a constant rate?


-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2012, 01:24:32 AM
 #5707

I think I might have found what's been causing my high stales, though not specifically...
It seems with load-balance I get very a poor stale rate, which seems to get worse the more pools involved. with 3 pools I get around 1.5% stale, with 5 it's up to 3-4%. When it's fail-over-only I'm looking at < 0.5%
Trouble is, the CGminer reported stats are not the same as the pools report. it seems the pools (some more than others) often report a share as valid to cgminer, then decide in it's own stats that it's stale.

I have a 10Mb debug log file taken over 1.5hrs if it'll be useful to diagnose anything.  

Would that possibly explain the dips every now and then my hashrate as reported by the pool (i.e. Eclipse) takes (really short and then it comes up again) while my cgminer seems to be working at a constant rate?


No. Hash rate reported by your pool is your hashrate*luck for that period and can and will fluctuate wildly.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
TheOtherGuy
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 71



View Profile
June 05, 2012, 01:35:22 AM
 #5708

You can use "--rotate" and get similar results to "--load-balance". The miner works on one pool for the time you specify and then rotates to the next.

1NDoRoTapFZNiUhzTPyFdKib66QLJfmcuR
P_Shep
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2012, 01:38:45 AM
 #5709

You can use "--rotate" and get similar results to "--load-balance". The miner works on one pool for the time you specify and then rotates to the next.

Yeah, I was thinking about that.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2012, 01:39:37 AM
 #5710

You can use "--rotate" and get similar results to "--load-balance". The miner works on one pool for the time you specify and then rotates to the next.

Yeah, I was thinking about that.
That's a good idea as rotate is much more robust since it has a firm concept about which pool is the primary.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
iopq
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
June 05, 2012, 01:40:46 AM
 #5711

I think I might have found what's been causing my high stales, though not specifically...
It seems with load-balance I get very a poor stale rate, which seems to get worse the more pools involved. with 3 pools I get around 1.5% stale, with 5 it's up to 3-4%. When it's fail-over-only I'm looking at < 0.5%
Trouble is, the CGminer reported stats are not the same as the pools report. it seems the pools (some more than others) often report a share as valid to cgminer, then decide in it's own stats that it's stale.

I have a 10Mb debug log file taken over 1.5hrs if it'll be useful to diagnose anything.  
As each pool has a different idea about when the block changes, if I choose the first pool's block change to discard all work from all pools then there can be quite a long period across block changes where cgminer throws out lots of work because it will continue to consider it from the old block. I had to relax the stale testing for load balance to prevent this work from being thrown out. On the other hand it's almost certainly what's leading to higher stales at every longpoll/block change. People generally get scared when they see a huge dip in hashrate across longpoll and start blaming cgminer for not keeping the devices busy. It probably makes more sense to throw out the work and accept the dip in hashrate so I can do that next version, but no matter what I choose, someone will complain  Roll Eyes
you don't want to break p2pool + other pool combinations because p2pool is unique in how it does most things
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2012, 01:43:06 AM
 #5712

As each pool has a different idea about when the block changes, if I choose the first pool's block change to discard all work from all pools then there can be quite a long period across block changes where cgminer throws out lots of work because it will continue to consider it from the old block. I had to relax the stale testing for load balance to prevent this work from being thrown out. On the other hand it's almost certainly what's leading to higher stales at every longpoll/block change. People generally get scared when they see a huge dip in hashrate across longpoll and start blaming cgminer for not keeping the devices busy. It probably makes more sense to throw out the work and accept the dip in hashrate so I can do that next version, but no matter what I choose, someone will complain  Roll Eyes
you don't want to break p2pool + other pool combinations because p2pool is unique in how it does most things
This really doesn't have much to do with p2pool as p2pool is impossible to use as anything other than the primary pool, or a backup pool in pure failover-only mode. Using p2pool in load balance with it as anything other than the primary would be a mess for shares going to p2pool.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
ZodiacDragon84
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


The king and the pawn go in the same box @ endgame


View Profile
June 05, 2012, 04:00:16 AM
 #5713

I cannot seem to get (--real-quiet) to run. Is there a way to make it run from the config file?

Kindest Regards

Looking for a quick easy mining solution? Check out
www.bitminter.com

See my trader rep at Bitcoinfeedback.com
!
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
June 05, 2012, 11:11:12 AM
 #5714

As each pool has a different idea about when the block changes, if I choose the first pool's block change to discard all work from all pools then there can be quite a long period across block changes where cgminer throws out lots of work because it will continue to consider it from the old block. I had to relax the stale testing for load balance to prevent this work from being thrown out. On the other hand it's almost certainly what's leading to higher stales at every longpoll/block change. People generally get scared when they see a huge dip in hashrate across longpoll and start blaming cgminer for not keeping the devices busy. It probably makes more sense to throw out the work and accept the dip in hashrate so I can do that next version, but no matter what I choose, someone will complain  Roll Eyes

I was wondering if something like this was the case. Looking at the log that seemed to me what was happening, but I was having difficulty translating what was going on... (for one, the specific pool/device the message is about is rarely referenced in the logs!).

If there's not much you can do, there's not much you can do! I'll just stick to fail-over then Smiley

I'd say taking the dip in hashrate would be better option though. I prefer not to start work than throw away work done...
1. You won't waste power calculated hashes you know will be stale.
2. You don't get stales appearing in the stats.

Absolute genius !

And now each 10 minutes / new block found my GPUs will go to no load / very low temps and then to high load / very high temps in a timeframe of 1 minute.

This hot -> cold -> hot cycle is not good for the fans or for the GPU itself. Same with FPGAs if you have that junk.

Brilliant, I tell you !

check_status
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


Web Dev, Db Admin, Computer Technician


View Profile
June 06, 2012, 05:00:56 AM
 #5715

Just installed 2.4.2 and received a strange message:

Code:
No login credentials for pool 0 http://p2pool:9332 -u bitcoinaddress -u <-imadummy

Edit: My mistake, I typoed the script to run.  Embarrassed

For Bitcoin to be a true global currency the value of BTC needs always to rise.
If BTC became the global currency & money supply = 100 Trillion then ⊅1.00 BTC = $4,761,904.76.
P2Pool Server List | How To's and Guides Mega List |  1EndfedSryGUZK9sPrdvxHntYzv2EBexGA
JBDive
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
June 06, 2012, 06:35:42 AM
 #5716

Boy aVast sure doesn't like this update. Have not had it complain about my current version but it doesn't even want me to download this one saying it's Malware. Reported as False like that will make a difference.
ZodiacDragon84
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


The king and the pawn go in the same box @ endgame


View Profile
June 06, 2012, 09:41:19 AM
 #5717

Boy aVast sure doesn't like this update. Have not had it complain about my current version but it doesn't even want me to download this one saying it's Malware. Reported as False like that will make a difference.

Same here. I reported as a false positive, and I am trying to get it on my excluded list, when I can can figure out where its at!

Looking for a quick easy mining solution? Check out
www.bitminter.com

See my trader rep at Bitcoinfeedback.com
!
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
June 06, 2012, 01:00:03 PM
 #5718

Heh.. avast seems to be going apeshit with Bitcoin related stuff lately.  They flagged OzCoin and apparently my pool as well (though I think it's since been corrected) ... WTH is up over there at Avast, are they just stupid?

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
Aseras
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658


View Profile
June 06, 2012, 01:50:34 PM
 #5719

they have probably found code and traced web connections from trojans that are using cgminer and your pools and are flagging anything that appears to match.
JBDive
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
June 06, 2012, 02:04:10 PM
 #5720

Problem with aVast, even though I still prefer it, is the same thing that's wrong with all the other AV vendors, they toss the kitchen sink into it. By that I mean somebody like PCMag will do a review with a nice table saying what each AV product does with nice little check marks then management sees these charts and comes back at the Devs and says "why isn't our product also scanning for XYZ"? With each new tool added into the product it gets slower, more intrusive and overall less popular, look at McAfee, the number one product for years yet like Norton most educated users stay far away from both now.

With aVast I love how it scans webpages for rogue code so much better than others but it's becoming a challenge to stick with them. I am still on version 4.8 as it's lighter than the new releases PLUS allows for URL blocking which is great for those ad banners. I'm a bit ticked at it blocking downloading of CGMiner yet it's log does not show any event concerning that block. Having to disable scanning just to download is a total fail on their part.

ok sorry for the thread steal, back to CGMiner.
Pages: « 1 ... 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 [286] 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 ... 838 »
  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!