|
-Redacted-
|
 |
September 10, 2013, 11:39:57 AM |
|
Looks like your second board is an EOL board, and has a problem starting at, or just after, the 8th chip. U47 or U48...
|
|
|
|
|
|
zurg
|
|
September 10, 2013, 11:53:01 AM |
|
Looks like your second board is an EOL board, and has a problem starting at, or just after, the 8th chip. U47 or U48...
So I gotta scrape the connections off somewhere? lol |
|
|
|
|
|
zurg
|
|
September 10, 2013, 11:58:03 AM |
|
Ok, I am about had it with Slashe's constant weird fluctuations.
Trying to setup Bitminter pool,.. but I just cant seem to figure it out.
2. Enabled (1 or 0), Pool address, port, user, password
Yes mint.bitminter.com 8332 workername_BF password
But when I fire that off just by itself Hashrate drops to 0 so I know it's not connecting.
Am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Redacted-
|
|
September 10, 2013, 11:59:55 AM |
|
Ok, I am about had it with Slashe's constant weird fluctuations.
Trying to setup Bitminter pool,.. but I just cant seem to figure it out.
2. Enabled (1 or 0), Pool address, port, user, password
Yes mint.bitminter.com 8332 workername_BF password
But when I fire that off just by itself Hashrate drops to 0 so I know it's not connecting.
Am I missing something?
Chainminer doesn't always like ports that aren't 3333. It specifically doesn't like port 8332. Change that to 3333 and it should work for you. |
|
|
|
|
|
zurg
|
|
September 10, 2013, 12:23:55 PM |
|
Ok, I am about had it with Slashe's constant weird fluctuations.
Trying to setup Bitminter pool,.. but I just cant seem to figure it out.
2. Enabled (1 or 0), Pool address, port, user, password
Yes mint.bitminter.com 8332 workername_BF password
But when I fire that off just by itself Hashrate drops to 0 so I know it's not connecting.
Am I missing something?
Chainminer doesn't always like ports that aren't 3333. It specifically doesn't like port 8332. Change that to 3333 and it should work for you. I got nothing.  Even tried port forwarding in the firewall... |
|
|
|
|
|
-Redacted-
|
|
September 10, 2013, 12:29:03 PM |
|
I'm not certain what's going on with that address - doesn't seem to be up...
C:\Users\x>ping mint.bitminter.com
Pinging us1.bitminter.com [192.31.187.114] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
zurg
|
|
September 10, 2013, 12:31:31 PM |
|
I'm not certain what's going on with that address - doesn't seem to be up...
C:\Users\x>ping mint.bitminter.com
Pinging us1.bitminter.com [192.31.187.114] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
I actually do get replies from it... 70ms |
|
|
|
|
|
zurg
|
|
September 10, 2013, 01:47:51 PM |
|
After you do that then wait about 30 minutes, then run nano /run/shm/.stat.log
If you notice any chips pushing 0.600 or below turn them off by replacing AIfDSo to aifdso on the same line number as the chip. This is important because auto tuning will keep working with them if it can causing errors that may throw off some pools.
How to I save the file after modifying? I get Permission denied. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
AsicShill
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
September 10, 2013, 02:00:57 PM |
|
I'm not certain what's going on with that address - doesn't seem to be up...
C:\Users\x>ping mint.bitminter.com
Pinging us1.bitminter.com [192.31.187.114] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
To prevent ddos-ing they may be dropping ICMP echoes. Ping may not be a reliable check of accessibility. |
|
|
|
|
dracore
Member
Offline
Activity: 111
Merit: 10
|
|
September 10, 2013, 06:19:57 PM |
|
What does it mean when you have low rates? And a "speed up" for one of them?
Is this a pool issue? Or chip issue?
1 AIfDSo 55 0.501 0.507 35 5 0 1 48 [0:0] 0 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
2 AIfDSo 55 0.301 0.476 21 2 0 0 45 [0:1] 0 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
3 AIfDSo 55 0.387 0.497 27 0 0 0 47 [0:2] 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 AIfDSo 55 0.429 0.497 30 2 0 0 47 [0:3] 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 AIfDSo 55 0.558 0.476 39 2 0 0 45 [0:4] 0 3 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
6 AIfDSo 55 0.329 0.486 23 3 0 0 46 [0:5] 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
7 AIfDSo 55 0.429 0.528 30 3 0 0 50 [0:6] 36 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
8 AIfDSo 55 0.358 0.497 25 3 0 0 47 [0:7] 36 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 AiFDso 55 0.129 0.159 9 3 0 0 15 [0:8] 405 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 speed up
10 AIfDSo 55 0.401 0.486 28 4 0 0 46 [0:9] 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
11 AIfDSo 55 0.458 0.423 32 1 0 0 40 [0:A] 36 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
12 AIfDSo 55 0.387 0.486 27 3 0 0 46 [0:B] 0 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
13 AIfDSo 55 0.501 0.497 35 0 0 0 47 [0:C] 36 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 AIfDSo 55 0.415 0.539 29 2 0 0 51 [0:D] 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
15 AIfDSo 55 0.401 0.497 28 6 0 0 47 [0:E] 0 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1
16 AIfDSo 55 0.472 0.528 33 2 0 0 50 [0:F] 0 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
speed:825 noncerate[GH/s]:6.457 (0.404/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:7.578 good:451 errors:41 spi-err:0 miso-err:1 jobs:326 cores:95% good:15 bad:1 off:0 (best[GH/s]:27.760) Tue Sep 10 18:16:21 2013
0: 825 6.457 7.578 451 41 0 1 15 1 0 (0.404/chip) 95%
|
|
|
|
|
af_newbie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
|
|
September 10, 2013, 06:21:34 PM |
|
What does it mean when you have low rates? And a "speed up" for one of them?
Is this a pool issue? Or chip issue?
1 AIfDSo 55 0.501 0.507 35 5 0 1 48 [0:0] 0 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
2 AIfDSo 55 0.301 0.476 21 2 0 0 45 [0:1] 0 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
3 AIfDSo 55 0.387 0.497 27 0 0 0 47 [0:2] 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 AIfDSo 55 0.429 0.497 30 2 0 0 47 [0:3] 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 AIfDSo 55 0.558 0.476 39 2 0 0 45 [0:4] 0 3 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
6 AIfDSo 55 0.329 0.486 23 3 0 0 46 [0:5] 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
7 AIfDSo 55 0.429 0.528 30 3 0 0 50 [0:6] 36 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
8 AIfDSo 55 0.358 0.497 25 3 0 0 47 [0:7] 36 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 AiFDso 55 0.129 0.159 9 3 0 0 15 [0:8] 405 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 speed up
10 AIfDSo 55 0.401 0.486 28 4 0 0 46 [0:9] 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
11 AIfDSo 55 0.458 0.423 32 1 0 0 40 [0:A] 36 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
12 AIfDSo 55 0.387 0.486 27 3 0 0 46 [0:B] 0 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
13 AIfDSo 55 0.501 0.497 35 0 0 0 47 [0:C] 36 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 AIfDSo 55 0.415 0.539 29 2 0 0 51 [0:D] 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
15 AIfDSo 55 0.401 0.497 28 6 0 0 47 [0:E] 0 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1
16 AIfDSo 55 0.472 0.528 33 2 0 0 50 [0:F] 0 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
speed:825 noncerate[GH/s]:6.457 (0.404/chip) hashrate[GH/s]:7.578 good:451 errors:41 spi-err:0 miso-err:1 jobs:326 cores:95% good:15 bad:1 off:0 (best[GH/s]:27.760) Tue Sep 10 18:16:21 2013
0: 825 6.457 7.578 451 41 0 1 15 1 0 (0.404/chip) 95%
Not sure about the rates, but speed up or down is the auto feature. Just tells you what auto has decided to do. |
|
|
|
|
Inspector 2211
|
|
September 10, 2013, 06:34:11 PM |
|
Sorry if this has already been mentioned somewhere in this thread or in the long "Bitfury in the U.S." thread:
I was not able to get the starter kit mining against us2.eclipsemc.com
Both the Eclipse status page and the apache status page on the Raspberry Pi showed 0 GH/s
Restarting the miner and/or the stratum proxy did not help.
However, once I started mining against stratum.mining.eligius.st, everything started working and the
starter kit achieves its advertised hash rate of 25 GH/s.
Maybe this note should be put into the first post, if someone else can confirm this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
-Redacted-
|
|
September 10, 2013, 06:38:11 PM |
|
Nope - I mine just fine using us1 or us2.eclipsemc.com. Just make certain you use port 3333.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimrome
|
|
September 10, 2013, 06:47:46 PM |
|
Sorry if this has already been mentioned somewhere in this thread or in the long "Bitfury in the U.S." thread:
I was not able to get the starter kit mining against us2.eclipsemc.com
Both the Eclipse status page and the apache status page on the Raspberry Pi showed 0 GH/s
Restarting the miner and/or the stratum proxy did not help.
However, once I started mining against stratum.mining.eligius.st, everything started working and the
starter kit achieves its advertised hash rate of 25 GH/s.
Maybe this note should be put into the first post, if someone else can confirm this issue.
Try port 3333, it's working for me. |
|
|
|
|
cet
Member
Offline
Activity: 100
Merit: 10
|
|
September 10, 2013, 07:14:18 PM |
|
Has anyone had any luck getting more than 4 h-boards running on the same m-board? My rig is stable with all boards running at above 25gh/s when I have 4 h-boards. When I add the next 4 h-boards they seem to auto tune down in speed to the point where the output on an 8 h-board rig is no faster than a 4 h-board rig. Anyone have any hints?
/cet
|
|
|
|
|
Sitarow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1047
|
|
September 10, 2013, 08:49:52 PM |
|
Has anyone had any luck getting more than 4 h-boards running on the same m-board? My rig is stable with all boards running at above 25gh/s when I have 4 h-boards. When I add the next 4 h-boards they seem to auto tune down in speed to the point where the output on an 8 h-board rig is no faster than a 4 h-board rig. Anyone have any hints?
/cet
I have 16 on an mboard v1 and have fans on them. pulls between 350 and 370watts. |
|
|
|
|
|
jimrome
|
|
September 10, 2013, 08:52:36 PM |
|
Has anyone had any luck getting more than 4 h-boards running on the same m-board? My rig is stable with all boards running at above 25gh/s when I have 4 h-boards. When I add the next 4 h-boards they seem to auto tune down in speed to the point where the output on an 8 h-board rig is no faster than a 4 h-board rig. Anyone have any hints?
/cet
What are you seeing when you look at /run/shm/.stat.log? |
|
|
|
|
Sitarow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1047
|
|
September 10, 2013, 08:58:41 PM |
|
Has anyone had any luck getting more than 4 h-boards running on the same m-board? My rig is stable with all boards running at above 25gh/s when I have 4 h-boards. When I add the next 4 h-boards they seem to auto tune down in speed to the point where the output on an 8 h-board rig is no faster than a 4 h-board rig. Anyone have any hints?
/cet
What are you seeing when you look at /run/shm/.stat.log? Details Posted here. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=250249.msg3103697#msg3103697And I did these steps to order and insert the cards with least amount of slow/bad chips at the start and the bad boards at the back. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=288109.msg3119313#msg3119313 |
|
|
|
|
|
jimrome
|
|
September 10, 2013, 09:24:02 PM |
|
Has anyone had any luck getting more than 4 h-boards running on the same m-board? My rig is stable with all boards running at above 25gh/s when I have 4 h-boards. When I add the next 4 h-boards they seem to auto tune down in speed to the point where the output on an 8 h-board rig is no faster than a 4 h-board rig. Anyone have any hints?
/cet
What are you seeing when you look at /run/shm/.stat.log? Details Posted here. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=250249.msg3103697#msg3103697And I did these steps to order and insert the cards with least amount of slow/bad chips at the start and the bad boards at the back. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=288109.msg3119313#msg3119313From this: 0: 825 29.936 31.836 2091 100 0 0 15 1 0 (1.871/chip) 95%
1: 880 31.081 33.083 2171 101 0 0 16 0 0 (1.943/chip) 100%
2: 880 28.146 30.821 1966 35 0 0 16 0 0 (1.759/chip) 98%
3: 770 26.285 29.690 1836 193 1 0 14 2 0 (1.643/chip) 86%
4: 770 25.641 28.031 1791 145 1 0 14 2 0 (1.603/chip) 92%
5: 825 29.664 31.286 2072 85 1 0 15 0 1 (1.854/chip) 93%
6: 880 21.289 22.873 1487 94 1 0 16 0 0 (1.331/chip) 97%
7: 880 28.390 29.986 1983 107 1 0 16 0 0 (1.774/chip) 99%
I'll have to come back to this, meeting time |
|
|
|
|
|
Inspector 2211
|
|
September 10, 2013, 09:43:34 PM |
|
Nope - I mine just fine using us1 or us2.eclipsemc.com. Just make certain you use port 3333.
Wow - their FAQ states use port 8337 What am I missing here? This issue cost me, like, 2 days of mining revenue. |
|
|
|
|
