Bitcoin Forum
August 18, 2018, 09:06:31 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 [150] 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 ... 847 »
  Print  
Author Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.1  (Read 5761150 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.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 02:11:09 AM
 #2981

As much as I'm not a fan of merged mining, I have to say that's (17.3s) wrong. You get to submit a share not long after it's found by the device. Usually the device is out for 1-2 seconds at most depending on card speed, intensity and number of threads. The most work you will lose is one chunk of work submitted to the GPU during the block change that is done needlessly before the GPU can respond again. At most it will amount to say 1 second of work with average settings per block change. That's a change from 1 second with regular mining to 3 seconds with merged mining over an average 10 minutes.

HOWEVER this is all assuming one longpoll only per block change, and poolserverj with merged mining support can do some amazing shit. I've seen up to 10 longpolls...

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
1534626391
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534626391

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534626391
Reply with quote  #2

1534626391
Report to moderator
1534626391
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534626391

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534626391
Reply with quote  #2

1534626391
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1534626391
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534626391

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534626391
Reply with quote  #2

1534626391
Report to moderator
1534626391
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534626391

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534626391
Reply with quote  #2

1534626391
Report to moderator
1534626391
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534626391

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534626391
Reply with quote  #2

1534626391
Report to moderator
gnar1ta$
Donator
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 02:16:59 AM
 #2982

How about I just run a day with merged mining and a day without and compare U? Does U take into account discarded work due to new block - which is LP request?

Losing hundreds of Bitcoins with the best scammers in the business - BFL, Avalon, KNC, HashFast.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 02:19:18 AM
 #2983

How about I just run a day with merged mining and a day without and compare U? Does U take into account discarded work due to new block - which is LP request?
Yes, but this assumes luck doesn't change over 24 hours... and it most definitely does so it will be nigh on impossible to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt. Luck of even the biggest pool can be down 40% over 24 hours, and that's over 3 THash of miners.

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

Activity: 52
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 02:20:36 AM
 #2984


Dutch, buddy, can you tell me your cgminer Utility? Preferably a list of values for each miner.
Perhaps the best thing you can do is use an older (unaware of merged-mining and not dropping all work on LPs) release of cgminer or find yourself a pool not doing merged mining.

An quicker and easier test would be to simply disable LP. It'll cause a 2% or so increase in stales but it will provide a big boost to efficiency.
jake262144
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 100


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 02:28:31 AM
 #2985

Another way to look at it is the hypothetical miner above processes 34 shares.  If your analysis was right it would have 1 stale out of 34 even when not merged mining and thus could never have a stale rate of <3%.

I stand corrected. Not thinking straight. Guess it's beddy-bye time after all (check my local time DAT) Smiley
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 02:38:45 AM
 #2986

Another way to look at it is the hypothetical miner above processes 34 shares.  If your analysis was right it would have 1 stale out of 34 even when not merged mining and thus could never have a stale rate of <3%.
And this is probably the best way to see how much "extra" merged mining is costing you.

In your status line:
SS is Stale Shares discarded (detected and not submitted so don't count as rejects)

This will show you shares that might have otherwise been valid if you were not mining merged. cgminer does not submit them so your stale rate actually will not go up as DeathAndTaxes suggested unless you enable the --submit-stale option. (I don't suggest you do).

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

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1005


Gerald Davis


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 02:54:20 AM
 #2987

This will show you shares that might have otherwise been valid if you were not mining merged. cgminer does not submit them so your stale rate actually will not go up as DeathAndTaxes suggested unless you enable the --submit-stale option. (I don't suggest you do).

Any reason why?

Also background on why I recommend enabling "--submit-stale" for those who may not know is for the following scenario:
1) your find a BTC share
2) the pool detects a change in NMC block and issues an LP
3) if you discard the work you discard a valid BTC share
4) if you submit it you gain a valid share.

now if the LP is because BTC block is invalid then yes you are submitting a stale share but you don't lose anything.  Instead of a SS locally you get a R but it doesn't negatively affect how many valid shares.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 02:55:55 AM
 #2988

4) if you submit it you gain a valid share.
This. It won't be considered valid if I'm not mistaken.

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

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1005


Gerald Davis


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 03:13:49 AM
 #2989

4) if you submit it you gain a valid share.
This. It won't be considered valid if I'm not mistaken.

It depends on the pool.  Some (most?) pools track validity of shares on each chain separately.  I know on Bitminter for example after an LP due to NMC block change the share is still valid for BTC purposes (but not NMC).

A pool could handle multiple chains in three ways
a) only given credit for a share if it is valid for all chains
b) given credit if it is valid for master chain (BTC)
c) track each chain separately and give credit is it is a valid share for that chain (each chain has separate share count).

Slush uses method B.  Bitminter uses method C.  You are correct if the pool uses method A then there is no value in submit-stale option.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 03:15:23 AM
 #2990

Yes siree, I do hate merged mining.

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

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1005


Gerald Davis


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 03:28:36 AM
 #2991

Yes siree, I do hate merged mining.

Yeah it does complicate things BUT I would argue that things are going to get more complicated anyways.  Pools will eventually need to use to provide a mechanism to update miners when transactions change (when fees becoming more importantly).  p2pool needs a method to track when the share chain has changed.  Likely in the future there will be other as of yet implemented events which will require altering the work being done.

Using LP for everything is an ugly hack but it works.  However what all this ugliness is pointing to is the fact that the pool-miner communication protocol needs to be more robust.   Miners today are relatively "dumb" and rely too much on the server.
gnar1ta$
Donator
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 03:51:11 AM
 #2992

Well good since I was using --submit-stale, merged mining, and was completely backwards on scantime, I'll consider that strike 3 for the day and just push the default button on cgminer...too bad --donation isn't default  Tongue

Losing hundreds of Bitcoins with the best scammers in the business - BFL, Avalon, KNC, HashFast.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 03:53:26 AM
 #2993

Well good since I was using --submit-stale, merged mining, and was completely backwards on scantime, I'll consider that strike 3 for the day and just push the default button on cgminer...too bad --donation isn't default  Tongue
Heh, you know I tried to make --donation default but there was outrage and threats of forking cgminer and death threats. All right, perhaps not the last but the others.

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

Activity: 1302
Merit: 1005


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 04:06:44 AM
 #2994

Heh, you know I tried to make --donation default but there was outrage and threats of forking cgminer and death threats. All right, perhaps not the last but the others.

Set it to 1% in example.conf file with a note to comment it out if donations aren't desired. I hope you're at least getting a reasonable trickle from those who do have it enabled.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 04:54:00 AM
 #2995

Heh, you know I tried to make --donation default but there was outrage and threats of forking cgminer and death threats. All right, perhaps not the last but the others.

Set it to 1% in example.conf file with a note to comment it out if donations aren't desired. I hope you're at least getting a reasonable trickle from those who do have it enabled.
Yes, thanks!  Kiss I'm currently getting ~450Mhash of donations. Since my mining rig is still in the workshop, this is actually all the mining I'm doing at the moment  Cry

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

Activity: 1428
Merit: 1000


Okey Dokey Lokey


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 08:26:12 AM
 #2996

Heh, you know I tried to make --donation default but there was outrage and threats of forking cgminer and death threats. All right, perhaps not the last but the others.

Set it to 1% in example.conf file with a note to comment it out if donations aren't desired. I hope you're at least getting a reasonable trickle from those who do have it enabled.
Yes, thanks!  Kiss I'm currently getting ~450Mhash of donations. Since my mining rig is still in the workshop, this is actually all the mining I'm doing at the moment  Cry
you wantz moar? Smiley

http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewratingdetail.php?nick=DingoRabiit&sign=ANY&type=RECV <-My Ratings
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=857670.0 GAWminers and associated things are not to be trusted, Especially the "mineral" exchange
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 09:34:52 AM
 #2997

Kiss I'm currently getting ~450Mhash of donations. Since my mining rig is still in the workshop, this is actually all the mining I'm doing at the moment  Cry
you wantz moar? Smiley
From the land of rhetorical questions  Wink But of course, I would never turn them down!

If you want to check out what my donation rate is, simply drop into irc.freenode.net #ozcoin

Here is the way to test it, and the current returned value (it fluctuates a lot):
<conman> !worker ckolivas.donation
<ozco> Worker ckolivas.donation hashrate is 401 is active: yes and is being monitored: no

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

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1052


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 11:56:39 AM
 #2998

Yes siree, I do hate merged mining.

Yeah it does complicate things BUT I would argue that things are going to get more complicated anyways.  Pools will eventually need to use to provide a mechanism to update miners when transactions change (when fees becoming more importantly).  p2pool needs a method to track when the share chain has changed.  Likely in the future there will be other as of yet implemented events which will require altering the work being done.

Using LP for everything is an ugly hack but it works.  However what all this ugliness is pointing to is the fact that the pool-miner communication protocol needs to be more robust.   Miners today are relatively "dumb" and rely too much on the server.
Actually, to correct that statement ...
There is no proper protocol definition, however some before have mentioned deepbit's web page where they have 'a' definition.
And that definition is the problem - it's next to useless.
It needs to be designed (not hacked), then standardised and then placed/updated in the wiki.
I still do not understand why it is true that a very high % of miners use pools but the wiki is useless in defining the pool protocol.
(damn I need to hurry up and find the time to get around to writing my own and testing/implementing it ...)

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2618
Merit: 1123


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 12:20:06 PM
 #2999

you wantz moar? Smiley
Ohhh now I see it in my wallet instead, lol. Thanks!

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
P4man
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile
January 18, 2012, 12:29:01 PM
 #3000

Heh, you know I tried to make --donation default but there was outrage and threats of forking cgminer and death threats. All right, perhaps not the last but the others.

I say, let them be outraged and threaten. No one is forcing them to use cgminer, no one preventing them from disabling the option. And if someone wants to fork, again, let them. Why would anyone switch to a poorly supported fork which only advantage is that you dont have to change a default setting (assuming you wouldnt want to donate) ?

FWIW, when I first tried cgminer, I wasnt opposed to donating but confused how it worked. I didnt look in to it, and kept it disabled. I bet there are lots people like that.

Pages: « 1 ... 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 [150] 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 ... 847 »
  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!