[ANN] TeamRedMiner v0.10.10 - Ironfish/Kaspa/ZIL/Kawpow/Etchash and More

[peterboy1]

yeah, seems dev pool has problem. isnt it a little unfair if miner reduced where the reason is out of our control?

[peteris-apse]

also I am having this error

Code:

[2018-11-04 16:17:05] Pool xmr-eu1.nanopool.org failed to parse server rpc: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":{"status":"OK"},"error":null}

anything I can do about it?

[kerney666]

Have this error all the time. Is it messing with my hashrate?

Code:

[2018-11-04 16:08:26] Dev pool failed to connect.

I dont want to block anything. I am mining on nanopool with hiveos. Can we fix this? For me it seems that miner trys to connect to dev pool all the time therefore is messing with hashrate. It is fluctuating from 6 to 11mhs one rig.

edit: Also same errors at same time on Windows rig with vega. With the hashrate also power consumption is also fluctuating for all rigs mining monero at same time.

Am I right or is this considered to be normal?

Hey peteris-apse and all other miners!

We had some issues with our dev fee mechanism both last night and the last ~60 mins. Different reasons, and the last one was outside of our control although we need to handle it better. I daresay it's very rare and you should not be expecting it.

The power consumption has been documented and described earlier in the thread, I don't want to repeat it here. See my response to pbfarmer earlier for an explanation. It will be addressed for sure. We might do a poor mans solution first and release within 1-2 days, pending tests to verify it addresses the issue in a decent way.

[kerney666]

also I am having this error

Code:

[2018-11-04 16:17:05] Pool xmr-eu1.nanopool.org failed to parse server rpc: {"id":4,"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":{"status":"OK"},"error":null}

anything I can do about it?

This is so annoying. You would expect a pool like nanopool to have a better stratum implementation. The reason you include the "id" in each message is to support an asynchronous flow where the miner can send multiple messages quickly with different ids, then map each response received to the corresponding message sent using the id in each response.

But, Nanopool doesn't support multiple outstanding messages, they always send the id of the last received message. So, I'm guessing what happened was that you sent two shares in quick succession, id 3 and 4. Nanopool sends two replies, both with id 4, which is a broken implementation. We can't map the second reply, because we've already seen a reply for id 4, and fail to process the message.

We will fix this in the next 1-2 days. Supportxmr works fine.

Just so I understand, is the miner still mining ok with this error message, or it doesn't work at all? As long as its for shares only, we will lose track of a few shares, and our poolside hashrate in the miner will be a little lower, but everything is otherwise working ok.

[kerney666]

yeah, seems dev pool has problem. isnt it a little unfair if miner reduced where the reason is out of our control?

It's always unfair when honest users are effected and have done nothing wrong, fully agree there! Our uptime on the dev fee mechanism has been > 99.9% since the inception of this miner (as a lyra2z miner only, called tdxminer), the last week has been out of the ordinary...

The problem is that it's impossible to separate the case of our server being down from someone blocking us on purpose anywhere in the network layer. Hence, the crude mechanism.

You can make sure our incentives are aligned in having as close to zero downtime as possible though. The user loses a little bit of hashrate, but at the same time, we're losing all our dev fee, -100%, across all coins. The fluctuations you're mentioning seem way too high, need to test it.

Again, sincerest apologies to all miners!

[peterboy1]

yeah, seems dev pool has problem. isnt it a little unfair if miner reduced where the reason is out of our control?

It's always unfair when honest users are effected and have done nothing wrong, fully agree there! Our uptime on the dev fee mechanism has been > 99.9% since the inception of this miner (as a lyra2z miner only, called tdxminer), the last week has been out of the ordinary...

The problem is that it's impossible to separate the case of our server being down from someone blocking us on purpose anywhere in the network layer. Hence, the crude mechanism.

You can make sure our incentives are aligned in having as close to zero downtime as possible though. The user loses a little bit of hashrate, but at the same time, we're losing all our dev fee, -100%, across all coins. The fluctuations you're mentioning seem way too high, need to test it.

Again, sincerest apologies to all miners!

on point. anyway, still the best miner out there. please keep improving. thanks

[peteris-apse]

Just so I understand, is the miner still mining ok with this error message, or it doesn't work at all? As long as its for shares only, we will lose track of a few shares, and our poolside hashrate in the miner will be a little lower, but everything is otherwise working ok.

it is still working, tho i have quite high lost shares - lie 2-3% will test supportxmr pool then.

[TrM_TrM]

Miner hangs the RIG when trying to close it.
Same problem on two different RIG's.
1- G3900 / ram 4gb / 4xRX570 4GB + 3 RX470 8GB / LTSB 14393 / 18.6.1
2- G3900 / ram 4gb / 7xRX470 4GB /  / LTSB 14393 / 18.6.1

Are you closing it down with the "X"?
If so, try using CTRL+C and then typing "Y" + Enter.
If it still does, maybe your cards are not happy with the straps.

Yes, with X.
I tried. It did'nt help.

Also, i get 0 h/s for most of the cards.
Only 1 or 2  cards from each start mining.

I tried to run the miner with stock clocks and voltages, with config 2+2...  Nothing helps.
Strange thing is that i can mine on my rigs without any problems ethash or Cryptonight v7, but have problems with v8.
SRB crashes out in 1-2 hours, TRM gives 0 h/s on almost all cards.

[kerney666]

Miner hangs the RIG when trying to close it.
Same problem on two different RIG's.
1- G3900 / ram 4gb / 4xRX570 4GB + 3 RX470 8GB / LTSB 14393 / 18.6.1
2- G3900 / ram 4gb / 7xRX470 4GB /  / LTSB 14393 / 18.6.1

Are you closing it down with the "X"?
If so, try using CTRL+C and then typing "Y" + Enter.
If it still does, maybe your cards are not happy with the straps.

Yes, with X.
I tried. It did'nt help.

Also, i get 0 h/s for most of the cards.
Only 1 or 2  cards from each start mining.

I tried to run the miner with stock clocks and voltages, with config 2+2...  Nothing helps.
Strange thing is that i can mine on my rigs without any problems ethash or Cryptonight v7, but have problems with v8.
SRB crashes out in 1-2 hours, TRM gives 0 h/s on almost all cards.

I'll start running tests tonight for these 0 h/s init issues. May I ask what driver you're using?

[TrM_TrM]

I'll start running tests tonight for these 0 h/s init issues. May I ask what driver you're using?

18.6.1

[ku4eto]

Miner hangs the RIG when trying to close it.
Same problem on two different RIG's.
1- G3900 / ram 4gb / 4xRX570 4GB + 3 RX470 8GB / LTSB 14393 / 18.6.1
2- G3900 / ram 4gb / 7xRX470 4GB /  / LTSB 14393 / 18.6.1

Are you closing it down with the "X"?
If so, try using CTRL+C and then typing "Y" + Enter.
If it still does, maybe your cards are not happy with the straps.

Yes, with X.
I tried. It did'nt help.

Also, i get 0 h/s for most of the cards.
Only 1 or 2  cards from each start mining.

I tried to run the miner with stock clocks and voltages, with config 2+2...  Nothing helps.
Strange thing is that i can mine on my rigs without any problems ethash or Cryptonight v7, but have problems with v8.
SRB crashes out in 1-2 hours, TRM gives 0 h/s on almost all cards.

If you have pasted straps from 1500 to the higher ones, i would say its bad straps. Try running it on 1 card, which you have flashed the stock BIOS before that.

[Doucesti]

Hi! Is there a ssl tls support? I can't find how to write it in start_cnv8.bat
Thanks!

[iRonNuke]

Hi I have just tested out TeamRedMiner and it gets a little better hashrates than all other Cryptonight-miners out there! Even a little bit less power draw as well.

I'm currently mining to NiceHash and are getting these posts, is it normal not to report hashrate to some cards at pool? Or is it just NiceHash that reports wrong?

[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 0 - cnv8: 906.4 h/s, avg 901.3 h/s, pool 2.557kh/s 6/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 1 - cnv8: 905.5 h/s, avg 900.6 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 2 - cnv8: 809.1 h/s, avg 797.9 h/s, pool 255.7 h/s 1/2
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 3 - cnv8: 944.9 h/s, avg 924.2 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 4 - cnv8: 423.5 h/s, avg 418.9 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 5 - cnv8: 418.1 h/s, avg 413.7 h/s, pool 767.0 h/s 3/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 6 - cnv8: 422.2 h/s, avg 417.6 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 7 - cnv8: 945.0 h/s, avg 939.9 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 8 - cnv8: 903.8 h/s, avg 903.3 h/s, pool 1.534kh/s 3/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 9 - cnv8: 2.013kh/s, avg 2.007kh/s, pool 2.557kh/s 8/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU10 - cnv8: 2.030kh/s, avg 2.023kh/s, pool 2.557kh/s 7/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats Total - cnv8: 10.72kh/s, avg 10.65kh/s, pool 10.23kh/s

Btw,
GPU 0,1,2,8 is Sapphire RX 570 4GB,
GPU 3,7 is Sapphire RX 580 8GB
GPU 4,5,6 is Sapphire RX 560 4GB
GPU 9, 10 is Gigabyte Vega 56

Thanks!

[kerney666]

Hi I have just tested out TeamRedMiner and it gets a little better hashrates than all other Cryptonight-miners out there! Even a little bit less power draw as well.

I'm currently mining to NiceHash and are getting these posts, is it normal not to report hashrate to some cards at pool? Or is it just NiceHash that reports wrong?

[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 0 - cnv8: 906.4 h/s, avg 901.3 h/s, pool 2.557kh/s 6/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 1 - cnv8: 905.5 h/s, avg 900.6 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 2 - cnv8: 809.1 h/s, avg 797.9 h/s, pool 255.7 h/s 1/2
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 3 - cnv8: 944.9 h/s, avg 924.2 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 4 - cnv8: 423.5 h/s, avg 418.9 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 5 - cnv8: 418.1 h/s, avg 413.7 h/s, pool 767.0 h/s 3/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 6 - cnv8: 422.2 h/s, avg 417.6 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 7 - cnv8: 945.0 h/s, avg 939.9 h/s, pool   0.0 h/s 0/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 8 - cnv8: 903.8 h/s, avg 903.3 h/s, pool 1.534kh/s 3/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU 9 - cnv8: 2.013kh/s, avg 2.007kh/s, pool 2.557kh/s 8/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats GPU10 - cnv8: 2.030kh/s, avg 2.023kh/s, pool 2.557kh/s 7/0
[2018-11-04 18:56:59] Stats Total - cnv8: 10.72kh/s, avg 10.65kh/s, pool 10.23kh/s

Btw,
GPU 0,1,2,8 is Sapphire RX 570 4GB,
GPU 3,7 is Sapphire RX 580 8GB
GPU 4,5,6 is Sapphire RX 560 4GB
GPU 9, 10 is Gigabyte Vega 56

Thanks!

The cards seem to be hashing just fine! The poolside hashrate displayed here is based on the accepted shares found per gpu. Don’t know how long you ran before snapping the hashrates, but your Vegas have found 8 vs 7 shares, not that many. The found shares have probably bumped your pool diff as well, making it even more difficult for the smaller cards to find shares at this point.

I’m guessing that when I’m writing this most gpus have found shares?

[iRonNuke]

The cards seem to be hashing just fine! The poolside hashrate displayed here is based on the accepted shares found per gpu. Don’t know how long you ran before snapping the hashrates, but your Vegas have found 8 vs 7 shares, not that many. The found shares have probably bumped your pool diff as well, making it even more difficult for the smaller cards to find shares at this point.

I’m guessing that when I’m writing this most gpus have found shares?

[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 0 - cnv8: 911.8 h/s, avg 907.8 h/s, pool 1.009kh/s 9/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 1 - cnv8: 909.8 h/s, avg 908.1 h/s, pool 740.1 h/s 5/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 2 - cnv8: 802.8 h/s, avg 803.1 h/s, pool 235.5 h/s 3/3
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 3 - cnv8: 944.8 h/s, avg 942.0 h/s, pool 134.5 h/s 2/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 4 - cnv8: 417.4 h/s, avg 420.4 h/s, pool 403.7 h/s 2/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 5 - cnv8: 410.5 h/s, avg 418.8 h/s, pool 168.2 h/s 4/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 6 - cnv8: 421.5 h/s, avg 420.4 h/s, pool 201.8 h/s 2/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 7 - cnv8: 944.9 h/s, avg 944.4 h/s, pool 874.5 h/s 7/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 8 - cnv8: 911.7 h/s, avg 909.3 h/s, pool 740.0 h/s 8/1
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU 9 - cnv8: 2.021kh/s, avg 2.017kh/s, pool 1.547kh/s 18/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats GPU10 - cnv8: 2.031kh/s, avg 2.032kh/s, pool 2.422kh/s 24/0
[2018-11-04 19:40:01] Stats Total - cnv8: 10.73kh/s, avg 10.72kh/s, pool 8.477kh/s

Yeah they are still hashing. Every cards have found shares now. But should the total pool hashrate be that low? Around 8200-8500 H/s average.

[kerney666]

Hi! Is there a ssl tls support? I can't find how to write it in start_cnv8.bat
Thanks!

Sorry, not at this time. We will probably pull in OpenSSL at some point. For the time being, a simple xmrig-proxy setup would give you the necessary wire security, then point the miner to the proxy instead. I understand if this feels messy though.

[Doucesti]

The cards seem to be hashing just fine! The poolside hashrate displayed here is based on the accepted shares found per gpu. Don’t know how long you ran before snapping the hashrates, but your Vegas have found 8 vs 7 shares, not that many. The found shares have probably bumped your pool diff as well, making it even more difficult for the smaller cards to find shares at this point.

I’m guessing that when I’m writing this most gpus have found shares?

Do you suggest that I should mine to two different pools/wallet?
One for my 1x vega and one for my 3x 7870 ?

Thanks!

[kerney666]

Yeah they are still hashing. Every cards have found shares now. But should the total pool hashrate be that low? Around 8200-8500 H/s average.

You’ve been unlucky, both with a few more rejected shares than expected and not found as many shares as expected. NiceHash _will_ give you more rejects than direct mining though, I have written about this earlier in the thread, see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5059817.msg47525720#msg47525720.

The combination of the pool diff and the time you have been mining gives us a ballpark feeling for if you’re ok and you still need more time, esp if we look at individual gpus, many with only 2-3 shares found at this point.

[keksik]

hello, im having trouble mining when integrated vga is on. i dont have these problems when using SRB. is there any parameter to use, to skip initiating integrated vga?
also tried to test gpu one by one via id parameter. and what is stable in SRB is not in this miner. despite for rx 580 i used 7+7 to avoid hangs, it hanged anyway.

[todxx]

hello, im having trouble mining when integrated vga is on. i dont have these problems when using SRB. is there any parameter to use, to skip initiating integrated vga?
also tried to test gpu one by one via id parameter. and what is stable in SRB is not in this miner. despite for rx 580 i used 7+7 to avoid hangs, it hanged anyway.

Hi keksik,

What kind of troubles are you having when mining while integrated vga is on?  Is the miner failing to start?  Can you post the output of the miner when this happens?

When you say that your rx 580 hangs, do you mean that the miner is reporting 0h/s hashrate, or is your entire rig hanging/becoming unresponsive?