OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.1

[Aseras]

Cgminer hangs again. Could this be an issue with Sempron CPU's? Running a Sempron 145.

I doubt it, I've been running  rings on 145's for several months now.  Never had a cgminer hang that wasn't directly related to a card settings bork up.

You aren't trying to run it with an unlocked core or odd frequency settings by any chance?

I have a 5970 with one unstable core. I run it at 825 engine and 260 memclock. Any engine clock higher than that or memclock lower than that and the system freezes. The other core is happy at 875/220. SSH/screen other terminals are fine but unable to kill the cgminer process and restart.
Could it be other processes interfering with cgminer or confusing it? What would cause multiple sshd's to run, multiple udisk to run?

check the first core VRM temps ( the one closest to the dvi connectors ). the card is throttling because they are getting over 125C, when the card throttles itself this way it crashes cgminer. I have had the same problems, had to remove the heatsink and replace the pads on the vrm there.

[P_Shep]

Kano,

From the code, I see that when saving a conf file through the API, a blank parameter will throw up a missing file error... could that be changed to save the default (in use) conf file? Would seem to be a sensible thing to do.

[Inaba]

I can't see a workable solution either at the moment, which is why I'm trying to just shore up the EMC servers to handle LPs better.  Maybe if there's some way to identify a "backup" LP request to the server, so the server can prioritize active LPs and backup LPs in a QoS fashion or something... that way LPs can be pushed out as best effort for the backup LPs.  It would obviously require some changes to pool software, but I don't think they'd be that drastic and it would help out everyone.

[rjk]

I can't see a workable solution either at the moment, which is why I'm trying to just shore up the EMC servers to handle LPs better.  Maybe if there's some way to identify a "backup" LP request to the server, so the server can prioritize active LPs and backup LPs in a QoS fashion or something... that way LPs can be pushed out as best effort for the backup LPs.  It would obviously require some changes to pool software, but I don't think they'd be that drastic and it would help out everyone.

Slush prioritizes his LPs already, it sounds like a good idea.
Also, what is the bottleneck with many LPs? Is it processing power? Memory hog? Disk reads/writes blocking? Running out of sockets? I wonder if it could or should be offloaded onto a dedicated box, if it is that much of a load issue.

[Inaba]

Well, it's basically up to over 6000 outbound connections at the same instant on one server right now... how does Slush determine who gets LP priority?

[rjk]

Well, it's basically up to over 6000 outbound connections at the same instant on one server right now... how does Slush determine who gets LP priority?

LP priority is based on hashrate.

EDIT: Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg611014#msg611014

[kano]

Well, it's basically up to over 6000 outbound connections at the same instant on one server right now... how does Slush determine who gets LP priority?

LP priority is based on hashrate.

EDIT: Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg611014#msg611014

LP priority based on hash rate ... yeah right ... piss on the little guy
Slush is certainly on my ban list once I found out about that a while back (though I have never created a slush account ...)
I used to be 720MH/s (now 2.295GH/s) so I have plenty of sympathy for people with only one or 2 medium hashing ATI cards.
Of course setting a lower limit is fine (yes people should not be CPU mining) and that would also cover people using the pool as a backup but not mining, but everyone else should be random - and anyone mining BTC (and/or running a pool) should understand exactly what random means ...

[-ck]

I agree basing longpoll priority on absolute hashrate would be a real shame to all the smaller miners. The original bitcoin vision was that anyone connected to it could contribute a few cycles in a massively distributed computing power entity, and it's actually unfortunate that it is becoming such a "professional job" to actually earn something via mining. On the other hand, all it would take is some kind of nominal number of shares, say 1 in the last minute, to detect an active miner versus a backup miner. It would also kick botnets' arses.

[rjk]

I agree basing longpoll priority on absolute hashrate would be a real shame to all the smaller miners. The original bitcoin vision was that anyone connected to it could contribute a few cycles in a massively distributed computing power entity, and it's actually unfortunate that it is becoming such a "professional job" to actually earn something via mining. On the other hand, all it would take is some kind of nominal number of shares, say 1 in the last minute, to detect an active miner versus a backup miner. It would also kick botnets' arses.

I believe this is the case. At that link, you will see that Slush mentions CPU miners and says that this should deal with them. I assume that the priority doesn't apply to miners over a low rate such as 100mhash, and therefore implementing prioritization on EMC may not make a noticeable difference in load or such things.

[ddd1]

I used cgminer pool and it told me that the pool I'm on has 2.3% rejected.

Is this normal or should I look into my PC or change pool?

[DutchBrat]

Ckolivas:

this is a funny message generated by CGMiner (on all my miners) !:

Code:

 cgminer version 2.4.1 - Started: [2012-05-12 03:29:42]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):312.0 (avg):311.9 Mh/s | Q:193  A:83  R:4  HW:0  E:43%  U:4.4/m
 TQ: 2  ST: 5  SS: 0  DW: 11  NB: 2  LW: 139  GF: 0  RF: 0
 Connected to http://pool.bonuspool.co.cc:80 with LP as user 
 Block: 00000263027422ab47efedc55dcc2dc4...  Started: [03:47:03]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 GPU 0:  73.5C 2287RPM | 312.4/311.9Mh/s | A:84 R:4 HW:0 U:4.50/m I: 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [2012-05-12 03:45:47] Accepted 65beb547.b86069e7 GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:45:53] Accepted 3acd4866.8076a92d GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:45:54] Accepted ff3aae97.f1bf6754 GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:46:59] Accepted 0df92b7c.be02982a GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:47:03] [font=Verdana][b]LONGPOLL from pool 4 detected new block[/b][/font]
 [2012-05-12 03:47:31] Rejected 9d002557.57674fb4 GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:47:34] Rejected 751cb3f6.be3a7a7b GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:47:53] Rejected b102aecc.98c97f4d GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:47:59] Rejected 49048041.99b08d57 GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:48:04] Accepted 460ba46d.385763c2 GPU 0 pool 1
 [2012-05-12 03:48:16] Accepted cde0f3d9.bd62e648 GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:48:19] Accepted 7c523153.1d02f184 GPU 0 pool 0
 [2012-05-12 03:48:26] Accepted 9522afd5.ca52eaaf GPU 0 pool 0

I only have 3 pools !!! My main pool (pool 0) and 2 backup pools !!!

Pool 4 does not exist !!!

Lols 

[kano]

I used cgminer pool and it told me that the pool I'm on has 2.3% rejected.

Is this normal or should I look into my PC or change pool?

Just a little more information might be helpful

Edit: OK from browsing around the forum, you are using EMC and have around 1.4GH/s
The reject number is high if it is long term.
How long were you mining to get that number?
What are your long term numbers from cgminer?
Basically the output of the top of the screen (everything down to the "Accepted" lines) or if you have the API enabled, as much info as possible from the commands: config, summary, devs and pools.

Edit2: also the non-standard API 'stats' would be interesting if someone else using EMC would post theirs also

[P_Shep]

Something else to look into:

Since upping one of my BFLs to the 864 firmware, it seems to stop working (not the CGminer issue - I don't think). the 'status' reports 'Thread got zero hashes' and the 'dev' command reports enabled 'N', how ever it still says the dev status as 'Alive'. Not so sure it should be alive, trying to re-enable it remains disabled.

Edit: restarting CGminer will kick it back into action (for a while, anyway) so maybe some re-init code should be sent when re-enabling.

Edit2: It would seem it never recovers when it throttles

[ModusPwnd]

For some reason 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 will not properly save the configuration file for me. On restart after saving and having everything working I get this.

Code:

 [2012-05-07 02:24:42] Started cgminer 2.4.1
 [2012-05-07 02:24:42] Started cgminer 2.4.1
 [2012-05-07 02:24:42] Loaded configuration file cgminer.conf
 [2012-05-07 02:24:42] Fatal JSON error in configuration file.
 [2012-05-07 02:24:42] Configuration file could not be used.
 [2012-05-07 02:24:42] Icarus Detect: Failed to open bitforce:COM3
 [2012-05-07 02:24:43] Found 0 ztex board(s)
 [2012-05-07 02:24:43] Need to specify at least one pool server.
Input server details.
URL:

This isn't a tragedy per se but it makes it very hard to restart to try to reset my averages or change placement.

I'm having the same issue.  Did you ever figure out a fix?

[ddd1]

I used cgminer pool and it told me that the pool I'm on has 2.3% rejected.

Is this normal or should I look into my PC or change pool?

Just a little more information might be helpful

Edit: OK from browsing around the forum, you are using EMC and have around 1.4GH/s
The reject number is high if it is long term.
How long were you mining to get that number?
What are your long term numbers from cgminer?
Basically the output of the top of the screen (everything down to the "Accepted" lines) or if you have the API enabled, as much info as possible from the commands: config, summary, devs and pools.

Edit2: also the non-standard API 'stats' would be interesting if someone else using EMC would post theirs also

I got it down to 1.7% R 1.4% R with the eclipseMC EU server(I'm in europe).

I recently started to mine on bonuspool, it's not the standard 8332 port, do I manually need to change it to the correct port in cgminer?

It seems to be working but I need to check website if it indeed does.

Edit--> Sorry I forgot mention it is long term and when switching to EU server eclipsemc it now is 1.4% instead of 2.3%.
So is there anything else I can do to improve Rejected shares?

Also I switched to bonuspool so new pool and server now

[Inaba]

Ok, so I'm at stumped, maybe someone has an idea:

I have a W7 x64 box that I reloaded recently.  I loaded the ATI drivers and the SDK... firing up CGMiner, it mines just fine.  However, when I q out of CGminer, W7 will BSOD with a SYSTEM_SERVICE_EXCEPTION in atikmdag.sys.  I've Googled the hell out of it and tried all the suggestions and nothing seems to work.  I've uninstalled and reinstalled several different drivers versions, including 11.2 which I know worked with v2.4, v2.5 and v2.6 of the SDK.  Nothing changes the behavior.  

I realize it's not directly a CGMiner problem and something is wrong somewhere in the system, but bugger all if I can figure out what it is.  Does anyone have any ideas?  I've tried Driver Sweeper and reinstalled the drivers from scratch, but nothing works.

The system operates fine, I can play games, etc... and CGMiner mines fine.  The only time there is a problem is when I quit CGMiner, otherwise zero problems at all.  I'm completely stumped.

PS - this is mining with a pair of 6990's.


Anyone?

[kano]

...
I'm having the same issue.  Did you ever figure out a fix?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=28402.msg886474#msg886474

[os2sam]

Ok, so I'm at stumped, maybe someone has an idea:

I have a W7 x64 box that I reloaded recently.  I loaded the ATI drivers and the SDK... firing up CGMiner, it mines just fine.  However, when I q out of CGminer, W7 will BSOD with a SYSTEM_SERVICE_EXCEPTION in atikmdag.sys.  I've Googled the hell out of it and tried all the suggestions and nothing seems to work.

Anyone?

Did you find this article?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff558949%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

I would run Spinrite on the drive.
Sam

[hack_slash]

I'm seeing some odd behavior if I use load-balance for the pool strategy under 2.4.1.

I'm mining on EMC and Ozcoin.  If I use the default failover pool management strategy, I get a rejection rate of 0.4% or lower with either EMC or Ozcoin as the primary.  If I use load-balance, my rejection rate goes up to around 4 or 5%.  I can see in the logs that, when a longpoll indicates a new block, cgminer will submit 1 or 2 rejected/stale shares for pool 0, and then subsequent pool 0 shares are accepted.  For pool 1, however, cgminer continues to submit stale shares for a couple minutes.  I'm not sure if this is new behavior or not, as I haven't tried to use load-balance prior to 2.4.1.

[os2sam]

I'm seeing some odd behavior if I use load-balance for the pool strategy under 2.4.1.

I'm mining on EMC and Ozcoin.  If I use the default failover pool management strategy, I get a rejection rate of 0.4% or lower with either EMC or Ozcoin as the primary.  If I use load-balance, my rejection rate goes up to around 4 or 5%.

I believe this, at least partially, because of Merged Mining.  You get allot of Namecoin Long Poll's.  On Ozco you can disable NMC LP's, don't know about EMC but I would check and see if disabling NMC LP's helps.

Sam