-ck (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 1632
Ruu \o/
|
 |
August 15, 2012, 06:20:59 AM |
|
Honestly I dunno wtf is wrong with your setup. The opencl library is required and unless you fix the way it's installed on your machine, then you have to compile it yourself.
I don't know, I used to have the driver and SDK 2.5 installed separately, but I don't remember how I did it. That's how I had originally gotten my phatk kernel that stopped working after cgminer 2.6. Now I just have the 12.1 driver installed and whichever SDK that comes with (2.6 I assume). Any attempts to install the SDK separately are met with segfaults. If you're on linux, it really is very little effort to build it yourself. Don't be afraid. Long term you're much better off. |
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
Krak
|
|
August 15, 2012, 06:22:07 AM |
|
If you're on linux, it really is very little effort to build it yourself. Don't be afraid. Long term you're much better off.
Build what part? The driver, cgminer or...? |
BTC: 1KrakenLFEFg33A4f6xpwgv3UUoxrLPuGn
|
|
|
-ck (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 1632
Ruu \o/
|
|
August 15, 2012, 06:23:34 AM |
|
If you're on linux, it really is very little effort to build it yourself. Don't be afraid. Long term you're much better off.
Build what part? The driver, cgminer or...? cgminer You can only be getting that error if you're downloading something that needs a library that isn't on your machine when you build it, so I assume you're download my x86_64 built binary. |
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
|
|
|
|
Krak
|
|
August 15, 2012, 06:49:11 AM |
|
cgminer
You can only be getting that error if you're downloading something that needs a library that isn't on your machine when you build it, so I assume you're download my x86_64 built binary.
Doesn't help; I can't get it to mine because it's compiling without OpenCL support. |
BTC: 1KrakenLFEFg33A4f6xpwgv3UUoxrLPuGn
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4480
Merit: 1800
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
August 15, 2012, 07:49:36 AM |
|
cgminer
You can only be getting that error if you're downloading something that needs a library that isn't on your machine when you build it, so I assume you're download my x86_64 built binary.
Doesn't help; I can't get it to mine because it's compiling without OpenCL support. Oh well ... |
|
|
|
|
stoppots
|
|
August 15, 2012, 07:39:22 PM
Last edit: August 15, 2012, 08:10:12 PM by stoppots |
|
When using the load balance feature between 2 pools, I always have more accepted shares on pool 0 than pool 1. If I switch the pools on my .conf file I get the same result. Pool 0 always has a considerably higher amount of accepted shares than pool 1.
I have a cgminer instance running 2 gpu's of which I can see each gpu is working both pools and the gpu's are both identical as well as the same settings. They both run within 1MH/s of each other. One gpu runs about 4c higher than the other and the hotter one usually always has a slightly higher U value than th other.
On a separate box I run just a single gpu and I get the same result from it in that pool 0 always has a higher amount of shares. Currently I just run one .conf will pools listed one way and on the other .conf I am listing the pools opposite the first. Any idea how I may be able to get a better balance. Also at wat cost is my decision to run the load balance feature possibly negating the efficiency versus just using the failover feature? I should also say my decision to use the load balance is an attempt to lower variance I may see from a single pool.
Thanks for your time
EDIT: Is there a better alternative to the load balancing option to distributing work between 2 pools in attempt to avoid variance of a single pool?
May be a little quick to confirm wat I stated about
"On a separate box I run just a single gpu and I get the same result from it in that pool 0 always has a higher amount of shares."
Have different results on very small sample sizes once I reversed the pools on that miner. Going to check with the pool and see if they are running difficulty 1 shares or something different. I guess this could cause issue with the load balance feature.
|
|
|
|
|
Testit
Member
Offline
Activity: 65
Merit: 10
|
|
August 15, 2012, 07:43:17 PM |
|
New version - 2.6.5, 15th August 2012 seems to work great on win7 x64  thanks allot for all your great work  Regards Testit |
|
|
|
|
os2sam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3578
Merit: 1090
Think for yourself
|
|
August 15, 2012, 08:17:37 PM |
|
When using the load balance feature between 2 pools, I always have more accepted shares on pool 0 than pool 1. If I switch the pools on my .conf file I get the same result. Pool 0 always has a considerably higher amount of accepted shares than pool 1.
I have noticed a similar behavior too, but with me pool 3 gets almost all of the shares and pools 0, 1 and 2 get starved. Sam |
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
|
|
|
|
Askit2
|
|
August 15, 2012, 09:38:55 PM |
|
I only noticed the difference with rollNtime. The result was cgMiner ran through the full roll of the work on the rollNtime work before trying a different work from a different pool.
As far as correcting the shares possibly switch every N minutes will work for you. I would set it to maybe every 1 minute then the pool gets work from both for 1 minute switces and repeats. There will likely be some variation because of luck and because of new blocks whatever pool is being used at the time of the most new blocks would likely be a little slow.
Have run 2.6.4 since its release only changing to 2.6.5 last night and I have to say with Win7 64bit and 1 BFL single I have had 0 issues. Failover setting not load balance. The software works great for me!
|
|
|
|
|
stoppots
|
|
August 15, 2012, 09:41:02 PM |
|
Both pools are difficulty 1 shares
|
|
|
|
|
-ck (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 1632
Ruu \o/
|
|
August 15, 2012, 09:45:36 PM |
|
When using the load balance feature between 2 pools, I always have more accepted shares on pool 0 than pool 1. If I switch the pools on my .conf file I get the same result. Pool 0 always has a considerably higher amount of accepted shares than pool 1.
I have noticed a similar behavior too, but with me pool 3 gets almost all of the shares and pools 0, 1 and 2 get starved. Sam This is simply that one pool has rolltime and the others do not. It's such an efficient option that it's really a waste of resources to not use it on the one pool since the others have not moved out of the dark ages. But I guess I could add more black magic to cope with that.... |
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
|
|
|
ThiagoCMC
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1000
฿itcoin: Currency of Resistance!
|
|
August 15, 2012, 10:06:32 PM |
|
Sorry if this is a dump question but, is it possible to undervolt my 7970 under Linux?!
I mean, I set it up but I don't see any wattage drop at my kill-a-watt... :-/
I'm using Ubuntu 12.04 64 bits, Catalyst 12.6 and CGMiner 2.6.5 binary...
Thanks!
Thiago
|
|
|
|
|
-ck (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 1632
Ruu \o/
|
|
August 15, 2012, 10:09:33 PM |
|
Sorry if this is a dump question but, is it possible to undervolt my 7970 under Linux?!
No |
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
|
|
|
TheHarbinger
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Why is it so damn hot in here?
|
|
August 15, 2012, 11:38:35 PM |
|
On the 2.6.5 binary; Seeing the same bug we had a while back again...  (Well, may not be the same bug, but it's acting the same) Intensity pegs to -10 when set to dynamic on a GPU with a display on it. Windows 7 x64, Catalyst 12.6, SDK 2.6, Two 5870s no crossfire. Let me know if you need a debug dump or anything else. |
12Um6jfDE7q6crm1s6tSksMvda8s1hZ3Vj
|
|
|
-ck (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 1632
Ruu \o/
|
|
August 15, 2012, 11:40:54 PM |
|
On the 2.6.5 binary; Seeing the same bug we had a while back again... (Well, may not be the same bug, but it's acting the same) Intensity pegs to -10 when set to dynamic on a GPU with a display on it. Windows 7 x64, Catalyst 12.6, SDK 2.6, Two 5870s no crossfire. Let me know if you need a debug dump or anything else. Hmm I think we had the discussion before, but are you sure the dynamic is set to the correct device? |
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
|
|
|
TheHarbinger
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Why is it so damn hot in here?
|
|
August 15, 2012, 11:48:06 PM
Last edit: August 16, 2012, 05:21:00 AM by TheHarbinger |
|
On the 2.6.5 binary; Seeing the same bug we had a while back again... (Well, may not be the same bug, but it's acting the same) Intensity pegs to -10 when set to dynamic on a GPU with a display on it. Windows 7 x64, Catalyst 12.6, SDK 2.6, Two 5870s no crossfire. Let me know if you need a debug dump or anything else. Hmm I think we had the discussion before, but are you sure the dynamic is set to the correct device? Yeah, we had this discussion before, I'll be damned if I can find it again though. Worst search function ever. The per device settings should be okay, I just moved my config file to the newer version and didn't touch anything else. Let me try it with a clean config, be right back. Edit: Seems to be working as expected with no config file. Now I have to find out what is borked up in my old config file.  At least I didn't go "OMG, I'm geeting less Mh/s with new version, you broke something!!!11!!" Edit#2: Okay, I spoke to soon, after running a few minutes, the display GPU pegs down to -10 still. It doesn't happen right after starting. Edit#3: Okay, further "testing" shows that it it happening when my display GPU is set to dynamic, and the other GPU is set to a fixed intensity. Also seeing a massive jump in CPU usage when it happens, using 50% CPU, one whole core when it goes to -10 I. Going to let it run for a bit with both GPUs set to dynamic and see if it happens. Edit#4: After running with both GPUs set to dynamic, now the GPU with no monitor connected has pegged to -10 I. Going to have to use the older version I have for the time being. :/ |
12Um6jfDE7q6crm1s6tSksMvda8s1hZ3Vj
|
|
|
os2sam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3578
Merit: 1090
Think for yourself
|
|
August 16, 2012, 01:50:16 AM |
|
When using the load balance feature between 2 pools, I always have more accepted shares on pool 0 than pool 1. If I switch the pools on my .conf file I get the same result. Pool 0 always has a considerably higher amount of accepted shares than pool 1.
I have noticed a similar behavior too, but with me pool 3 gets almost all of the shares and pools 0, 1 and 2 get starved. Sam This is simply that one pool has rolltime and the others do not. It's such an efficient option that it's really a waste of resources to not use it on the one pool since the others have not moved out of the dark ages. But I guess I could add more black magic to cope with that.... I'm not worried about it, especially with the explanation's of the probable cause. Thanks, Sam |
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
|
|
|
|
niooron
|
|
August 16, 2012, 05:01:16 AM |
|
CGMINER crashes when using Switch User on Windows. This is the only miner that does this, all other miners continue happily mining in the background.
When the crash happens, the mining kernel continues to run on the gpus but no shares are submitted, and the cgminer interface just hangs and doesnt respond.
I tried all versions back to 2.0.4, they all crash when switching user.
My machine:
Windows 7 x64
Catalyst 12.6, APP 2.7
Radeon 7950 and 5850
|
|
|
|
|
rav3n_pl
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1361
Merit: 1003
Don`t panic! Organize!
|
|
August 16, 2012, 06:28:19 AM |
|
On the 2.6.5 binary; Seeing the same bug we had a while back again... (Well, may not be the same bug, but it's acting the same) Intensity pegs to -10 when set to dynamic on a GPU with a display on it. Hmm I think we had the discussion before, but are you sure the dynamic is set to the correct device? Have only one GPU 6770, same thing there. On LTC mining I have I=11, I change it to dynamic, it jumps to 9 for a second or two then falls to -10 and stays there. |
|
|
|
|
punin
|
|
August 16, 2012, 10:14:58 AM
Last edit: August 16, 2012, 10:28:40 AM by punin |
|
I have found a bug that is reproducible. It seems cgminer always declares 1 ztex board dead after a while (1h or so). Interestingly enough this does not happen on my other rigs that are x86 based, and have also GPU's connected to them. Very weird indeed. Reproducible also in BFGMiner.
Also, if 1 board is declared dead and is kept connected to the computer, no more boards will be decalred dead. If I disconnect the dead board, soon another one will get sick and dead.
System setup:
CGMiner 2.6.4 running on Raspberry Pi
14-18 ztex 1.15x
|
|
|
|
|
