Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 10:32:14 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 ... 426 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers  (Read 828863 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.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 17, 2012, 07:27:11 PM
 #321

Dutchbrat and ancow:  How many pools do you have setup as backups in cgminer?  Of those, how many have merged mining, and how many have merged mining for multiple coins [ix/i0/dvc]?  I'm not positive, but it could be that cgminer's reported efficiency is related to hording work from backup pools.  In that circumstance, your BTC Guild efficiency may be significantly higher.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
1481020334
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020334

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020334
Reply with quote  #2

1481020334
Report to moderator
1481020334
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020334

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020334
Reply with quote  #2

1481020334
Report to moderator
1481020334
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020334

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020334
Reply with quote  #2

1481020334
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
ancow
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373


View Profile WWW
January 17, 2012, 07:39:37 PM
 #322

Dutchbrat and ancow:  How many pools do you have setup as backups in cgminer?  Of those, how many have merged mining, and how many have merged mining for multiple coins [ix/i0/dvc]?  I'm not positive, but it could be that cgminer's reported efficiency is related to hording work from backup pools.  In that circumstance, your BTC Guild efficiency may be significantly higher.

Since with cgminer, merged mining and "normal" mining don't mix well, I'm using two cgminer instances, one for the normal "pools" and one for BTC guild.

BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
DutchBrat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
January 17, 2012, 08:11:49 PM
 #323

i have BTCGuild as the main pool and Deepbit as the backup pool, NO merged mining there
Pontius
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 225


View Profile
January 18, 2012, 08:13:35 AM
 #324

3) The pool software will be receiving a few tweaks to be more aggressively aware of botnets which have seen a resurgence since bitcoin went back above $3.  This change will automatically enforce bans for inefficient workers.  While there is some luck involved in finding a share from a getwork, efficiency should never be below 50% after a few dozen getworks have been processed, unless the miner is grabbing significantly more work than it can use.

Uh, looks like I need a new pool. My efficiency is always around 4-5% (using cgminer with one primary and two backup pools; the second backup pool doesn't offer merged mining).
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 02:16:42 PM
 #325

In light of the reports about how poorly inefficient cgminer is, I'll be tweaking some settings in the new pool software when it launches.  Inefficiency will only be one piece of the puzzle, the other will be related to IP addresses.

A normal user would only use one IP to access one worker [there is no reason to use the same worker when connecting from two different locations].  Since some people have dynamic IPs, this will be extended to 3 IPs [1 current IP, 1 "expired" IP, and 1 spare in case you have network issues and change IPs twice in a short time frame].

This restriction should not affect any normal user.  If anybody has a special case, I may whitelist them upon request.  This change will make it significantly harder for botnets to operate on the pool without using proxies to mask the different IPs.  I will still ban inefficient workers, but it will be based not only on efficiency, but also the rate of getwork requests.  An inefficient worker asking for a 5 getworks per minute isn't a problem.  A botnet would be asking for 100+ per minute.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
Hotdog453
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 120



View Profile
January 18, 2012, 02:20:04 PM
 #326

I have never seen efficiency levels that low on CGMiner. I can't fathom getting 12%.

What are you people doing on your PCs at the same time as CGMiner? I'm assuming they're not all dedicated PCs, but even on my most "inefficient" machines, I'm looking at 80+%, when they're actively being used.
ancow
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 373


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 06:25:13 PM
 #327

Edit: I just restarted cgminer, so we'll see what the efficiency is in a day or so, but less that 50% is quite normal here.

OK, approximately a day later. I doubled the scantime parameter and the efficiency went up to 16%. before that it stayed at ~10%.


I have never seen efficiency levels that low on CGMiner. I can't fathom getting 12%.

What are you people doing on your PCs at the same time as CGMiner? I'm assuming they're not all dedicated PCs, but even on my most "inefficient" machines, I'm looking at 80+%, when they're actively being used.

The problem is that cgminer tries to keep the card active, so there is a queue of workitems. On each LP, both active and queued work is discarded. Since any merged mining pool (and apparently especially PoolserverJ with MM) will send an abnormally large amount of LPs, lots of work gets discarded and requested again right away.
There's also the fact that the default scantime is 60s, so every 60s any current work is discarded, if the GPU is too slow.

You can tweak cgminer to be more efficient even with MM and slow GPUs, but that will result in a dramatic increase in stales, so I'm not really eager to do that... Wink

BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2012, 06:36:24 PM
 #328

LPs aren't that much more frequent these days with merged mining now that NMC difficulty has essentially lined up with BTC difficulty.  Scantime is definitely the culprit though.  Slower cards will ask for work way earlier than they need to just to keep up to date with the pool.

I think the change I posted above should solve the performance issues in an automated fashion without causing it to false positive legitimate users except in very rare circumstances [which I'm willing to whitelist].

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 19, 2012, 02:58:46 PM
 #329

Fixed a problem for 12 users - An automatic payout batch wasn't able to execute from the server restart a few days ago.  bitcoind was offline when the payout was attempted, and the server was restarted before the cleanup script removed the batch from the payouts table.

I've checked the payout batches for the few periods of downtime earlier this week, and so far this is the only one I've identified.  I encourage everybody to make sure I'm not overlooking any unprocessed payouts from the last few days.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
DutchBrat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
January 19, 2012, 04:41:22 PM
 #330

Eleuthria:

I had a scantime of 8 secs on all my miners. i changed 1 of my miners to scantime 45 seconds and that improved my efficiency to 60%+

I'm currently monitoring to see whether this affects my stales/invalids in anyway
TheHarbinger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378


Why is it so damn hot in here?


View Profile
January 19, 2012, 10:45:25 PM
 #331

Eleuthria:

I had a scantime of 8 secs on all my miners. i changed 1 of my miners to scantime 45 seconds and that improved my efficiency to 60%+

I'm currently monitoring to see whether this affects my stales/invalids in anyway

Why was/is your scantime set so low?  Are you not useing Long Polling?  You are basically dumping un-solved work and requesting new work every 8 seconds.  Not only does this put un-needed work on your network, it does so to your pool's network also.

My scantime is set to 120, I use a pool with merged mining, and I run at 84% E.

12Um6jfDE7q6crm1s6tSksMvda8s1hZ3Vj
DutchBrat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 12:10:45 AM
 #332

Eleuthria:

I had a scantime of 8 secs on all my miners. i changed 1 of my miners to scantime 45 seconds and that improved my efficiency to 60%+

I'm currently monitoring to see whether this affects my stales/invalids in anyway

Why was/is your scantime set so low?  Are you not useing Long Polling?  You are basically dumping un-solved work and requesting new work every 8 seconds.  Not only does this put un-needed work on your network, it does so to your pool's network also.

My scantime is set to 120, I use a pool with merged mining, and I run at 84% E.

The thing is, a couple of months ago when the merged mining started I would get a lot of: "pool does not provide work quick enough" or "pool is not responding quick enough" (smtg like that) message on my GPU's. Lowering the scantime to 8 secs gave a massive reduction of those message and increased the number of Valid shares/min

But reduced my efficiency

In the end it all comes down to your valid shares/min so I left the in-efficiency.

It seems whatever caused this problem has been solved in the last few months for a higher scantime does not affect my valid shares/min anymore and increased my efficiency, so all is well Smiley
TheHarbinger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378


Why is it so damn hot in here?


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 01:56:52 AM
 #333

Eleuthria:

I had a scantime of 8 secs on all my miners. i changed 1 of my miners to scantime 45 seconds and that improved my efficiency to 60%+

I'm currently monitoring to see whether this affects my stales/invalids in anyway

Why was/is your scantime set so low?  Are you not useing Long Polling?  You are basically dumping un-solved work and requesting new work every 8 seconds.  Not only does this put un-needed work on your network, it does so to your pool's network also.

My scantime is set to 120, I use a pool with merged mining, and I run at 84% E.

The thing is, a couple of months ago when the merged mining started I would get a lot of: "pool does not provide work quick enough" or "pool is not responding quick enough" (smtg like that) message on my GPU's. Lowering the scantime to 8 secs gave a massive reduction of those message and increased the number of Valid shares/min

But reduced my efficiency

In the end it all comes down to your valid shares/min so I left the in-efficiency.

It seems whatever caused this problem has been solved in the last few months for a higher scantime does not affect my valid shares/min anymore and increased my efficiency, so all is well Smiley

I probably had to do with Namecoins being at such a relatively low difficulty to BTC, now that it is catching up, you should see far fewer of these "pool does not provide work quick enough" errors.

12Um6jfDE7q6crm1s6tSksMvda8s1hZ3Vj
BkkCoins
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


firstbits:1MinerQ


View Profile WWW
January 20, 2012, 10:36:07 AM
 #334

Is there some reason my worker hash rate has been showing up as half-value the last few hours?

cgminer reports I'm doing 630 MH/s as usual but for a while now on my account page it has been showing half rate - same as only one of my GPUs. Weird. Just wondering if there was some reporting change causing a bug or if only half my shares are being counted.

eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 22, 2012, 09:40:11 PM
 #335

So, I'm mining away at BTC Guild earning all these Namecoins and I don't have a clue what to do with them. I'm storing them at Cryptoexchange for now. I just want to know if it's possible to spend them like Bitcoin or is exchanging them for BTC the only option at this point?

Namecoins are not a currency, so I'd be surprised if you could find someone selling things for namecoins.  If you're not interested in namecoin, the only option is exchanging them for BTC (or holding onto them and speculating on the best time to do so).

I've done a bit more work on the current server, website should be loading a bit faster again, and it may reduce some of the load on the pool at the same time.  Hoping to ship out the new servers in the next week and then begin preparing the new server for a seamless transition.  I'm still hopeful that when the next move happens the worst you'll see is a handful of invalids (however many your shares miner had queued before the DNS updated).

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
os2sam
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1918


Think for yourself


View Profile
January 22, 2012, 11:39:12 PM
 #336

So, I'm mining away at BTC Guild earning all these Namecoins and I don't have a clue what to do with them. I'm storing them at Cryptoexchange for now. I just want to know if it's possible to spend them like Bitcoin or is exchanging them for BTC the only option at this point?

Namecoins are not a currency, so I'd be surprised if you could find someone selling things for namecoins.

Then why the heck are we mining them?  Just because we can?
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?
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 23, 2012, 01:09:50 AM
 #337

So, I'm mining away at BTC Guild earning all these Namecoins and I don't have a clue what to do with them. I'm storing them at Cryptoexchange for now. I just want to know if it's possible to spend them like Bitcoin or is exchanging them for BTC the only option at this point?

Namecoins are not a currency, so I'd be surprised if you could find someone selling things for namecoins.

Then why the heck are we mining them?  Just because we can?
Sam

Namecoin is a spinoff a bitcoin which attempts to use a blockchain system to store data, with proof of work hashing to ensure the integrity of that chain.  It is used as an alternative to DNS and provides the '.bit' top level domain to people with namecoin setup.

The reason we merge mine namecoins is because it does not hurt Bitcoin production, and it is not a currency, which means it is not in any way competing with Bitcoin adoption.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
kjj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302



View Profile
January 24, 2012, 04:21:18 AM
 #338

Eleuthria, do you have any plans to support OP_EVAL, P2SH or EVC?

p2pcoin: a USB/CD/PXE p2pool miner - 1N8ZXx2cuMzqBYSK72X4DAy1UdDbZQNPLf - todo
I routinely ignore posters with paid advertising in their sigs.  You should too.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 04:30:17 AM
 #339

After the new servers are ready I will be compiling bitcoind from the latest source which includes P2SH support, unless I can receive a clear reason that doing so would in some way damage bitcoin (from somebody other than Luke).

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
January 26, 2012, 02:36:26 PM
 #340

Hall of Fame got a few tweaks last night.  Most Shares is now only recent shares (still needs tweaking, is supposed to only show top shares for current BTC difficulty).  Blocks found has returned but has been reset.  The blocks found now includes NMC blocks.

Server move is still planned but may be delayed another week (so 2nd week of February) due to some personal issues with my day job.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 ... 426 »
  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!