Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 10:31:18 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   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 »
  Print  
Author Topic: An (even more) optimized version of cpuminer (pooler's cpuminer, CPU-only)  (Read 1529428 times)
Nemo1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
August 10, 2013, 07:05:25 PM
 #661

For the fun of it I compiled cpuminer on Raspberry PI, which is overclocked to 800MHz

Scrypt mining runs at 0.36khs  Grin



Save Donbass

“Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right.”
“We are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided.”
“It is important to fight and fight again, and keep fighting, for only then can evil be kept at bay, though never quite eradicated.”
1481020278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020278
Reply with quote  #2

1481020278
Report to moderator
1481020278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020278
Reply with quote  #2

1481020278
Report to moderator
1481020278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020278
Reply with quote  #2

1481020278
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481020278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020278
Reply with quote  #2

1481020278
Report to moderator
1481020278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020278
Reply with quote  #2

1481020278
Report to moderator
1481020278
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020278

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020278
Reply with quote  #2

1481020278
Report to moderator
minerchamp123
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 8


View Profile
August 11, 2013, 06:04:24 PM
 #662

I am looking for a way to limit the cpu power used, because at 100% my pc will overheat after a while, any way to do this?
Is there a list of the avaible commands somewhere?

Thanks!
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


/dev/null


View Profile
August 11, 2013, 07:01:46 PM
 #663

I am looking for a way to limit the cpu power used, because at 100% my pc will overheat after a while, any way to do this?
Is there a list of the avaible commands somewhere?

Thanks!
minerd --help Wink use less threads

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
Nemo1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
August 11, 2013, 07:02:02 PM
 #664

--help for all the args

You should use -t to limit the number of threads to say half of the cores on your CPU



Save Donbass

“Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right.”
“We are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided.”
“It is important to fight and fight again, and keep fighting, for only then can evil be kept at bay, though never quite eradicated.”
Ifaistos
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18



View Profile
August 15, 2013, 04:11:39 PM
 #665

Started playing around with the recent cpuminer (2.3.2) and litecoin/scrypt on a old spare quad Xeon server i have
I noticed that the performance on the older Xeon@3Ghz is not in par with my quad core2 Q6600@3Ghz
Both machines have 8Gigs of ram, Ubuntu X64 and cpuminer was compiled on each machine

The Q6600 gives me around 6.5 khash/s per core while the Xeon 1.60 khash/s
cpuinfo reports pretty similar bogomips although this is not a true performance measure

i.e Q6600

Quote
processor   : 1
vendor_id   : GenuineIntel
cpu family   : 6
model      : 15
model name   : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU    Q6600  @ 2.40GHz
stepping   : 11
cpu MHz      : 3000.000
cache size   : 4096 KB
physical id   : 0
siblings   : 4
core id      : 1
cpu cores   : 4
apicid      : 1
initial apicid   : 1
fpu      : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level   : 10
wp      : yes
flags      : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm lahf_lm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority
bogomips   : 5994.00
clflush size   : 64
cache_alignment   : 64
address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:


Xeon

Quote
processor   : 1
vendor_id   : GenuineIntel
cpu family   : 15
model      : 4
model name   : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
stepping   : 3
cpu MHz      : 2992.877
cache size   : 2048 KB
physical id   : 3
siblings   : 2
core id      : 0
cpu cores   : 1
apicid      : 7
initial apicid   : 7
fpu      : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level   : 5
wp      : yes
flags      : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc pebs bts pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl cid cx16 xtpr
bogomips   : 5985.52
clflush size   : 64
cache_alignment   : 128
address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:


The only major difference i can think off is that the Q6600 uses DDR2 while the Xeon older server DDR memory, but i really wonder if that alone could account for the huge performance difference,since both have rather large caches.

One other strange thing i noticed is that cpuminer uses roughly 75% of the core's "power" (Top shows 75% nice 25% idle) in both cases
(Was expecting to  see a 100% nice on the core it was running)

My interest is purely from a dev standpoint as with the the GPU's doing most of the work, the few khash difference per cpu core is nothing in a production system.
pooler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644


View Profile
August 15, 2013, 06:25:45 PM
 #666

Started playing around with the recent cpuminer (2.3.2) and litecoin/scrypt on a old spare quad Xeon server i have
I noticed that the performance on the older Xeon@3Ghz is not in par with my quad core2 Q6600@3Ghz
Both machines have 8Gigs of ram, Ubuntu X64 and cpuminer was compiled on each machine

The Q6600 gives me around 6.5 khash/s per core while the Xeon 1.60 khash/s
[...]

You didn't mention the exact model of the Xeon, but judging from the cpuinfo report you provided it looks like it's an old Netburst-based processor, which would partially explain why it is so slow. Does it support hyperthreading by any chance? Have you tried running a single thread to see if the per-thread speed is higher?

While I'm here, here's a non-exhaustive list of things that can significantly influence your hash rate:
  • running in 32 or 64 bit mode;
  • CPU microarchitecture (Netburst, Core 2, Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Haswell, ...);
  • CPU cache size and speed;
  • CPU clock frequency;
  • hyperthreading;
  • the CPU time used by concurrently running applications.
On the other hand, all other things being equal, the following do (should) not influence the hash rate:
  • the amount or speed of RAM;
  • the operating system (as long as it provides full support for the capabilities of the CPU it's running on).

BTC: 15MRTcUweNVJbhTyH5rq9aeSdyigFrskqE · LTC: LTCPooLqTK1SANSNeTR63GbGwabTKEkuS7
Ifaistos
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18



View Profile
August 15, 2013, 08:25:26 PM
 #667

I think you are probably right about being a old core/family with 2 hyperthreaded cores (i'll check tomorrow)

Quote
While I'm here, here's a non-exhaustive list of things that can significantly influence your hash rate:
running in 32 or 64 bit mode;
CPU microarchitecture (Netburst, Core 2, Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Haswell, ...);
CPU cache size and speed;
CPU clock frequency;
hyperthreading;
the CPU time used by concurrently running applications.


As the gear-heads would say "There is no replacement for displacement"  Grin

Any idea on why top shows 25% idle (even for 1 thread) ?
Started looking over the code now that i am back home, hopefully if i get some time i could add some powerpc stuff i am more familiar with
K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


/dev/null


View Profile
August 15, 2013, 09:08:16 PM
 #668

I think you are probably right about being a old core/family with 2 hyperthreaded cores (i'll check tomorrow)

Quote
While I'm here, here's a non-exhaustive list of things that can significantly influence your hash rate:
running in 32 or 64 bit mode;
CPU microarchitecture (Netburst, Core 2, Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Haswell, ...);
CPU cache size and speed;
CPU clock frequency;
hyperthreading;
the CPU time used by concurrently running applications.


As the gear-heads would say "There is no replacement for displacement"  Grin

Any idea on why top shows 25% idle (even for 1 thread) ?
Started looking over the code now that i am back home, hopefully if i get some time i could add some powerpc stuff i am more familiar with
powerpc ASM? if so that would be fun to test on some older machines Smiley

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
yourofl10
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 06:40:57 PM
 #669

Is having a lower scantime better when solo mining?

pooler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 07:02:18 PM
 #670

Is having a lower scantime better when solo mining?
If you are solo mining you may want to set it to a lower value than the default (5 seconds), provided that the *coin daemon is running locally. That can lower the probability of your solutions getting rejected.
If you are mining at a pool, the option is completely ignored by the miner, as better solutions (long polling or Stratum) will then be available.

BTC: 15MRTcUweNVJbhTyH5rq9aeSdyigFrskqE · LTC: LTCPooLqTK1SANSNeTR63GbGwabTKEkuS7
yourofl10
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 07:04:16 PM
 #671

Is having a lower scantime better when solo mining?
If you are solo mining you may want to set it to a lower value than the default (5 seconds), provided that the *coin daemon is running locally. That can lower the probability of your solutions getting rejected.
If you are mining at a pool, the option is completely ignored by the miner, as better solutions (long polling or Stratum) will then be available.

Cool, thanks very much! When I add the -H option, it shows the output of the hash generate (whether it's rejected/accepted), correct?

pooler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 07:26:49 PM
 #672

When I add the -H option, it shows the output of the hash generate (whether it's rejected/accepted), correct?
There is no -H option... unless you're referring to some other fork of cpuminer?
Anyway, the cpuminer discussed in this thread always displays whether a submitted solution (share or block) is accepted ("yay!!!") or rejected ("booooo").

BTC: 15MRTcUweNVJbhTyH5rq9aeSdyigFrskqE · LTC: LTCPooLqTK1SANSNeTR63GbGwabTKEkuS7
yourofl10
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 07:29:07 PM
 #673

When I add the -H option, it shows the output of the hash generate (whether it's rejected/accepted), correct?
There is no -H option... unless you're referring to some other fork of cpuminer?
Anyway, the cpuminer discussed in this thread always displays whether a share is accepted ("yay!!!") or rejected ("booooo").

It must be a fork then, my bad.  Lips sealed

K1773R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


/dev/null


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 07:52:03 PM
 #674

When I add the -H option, it shows the output of the hash generate (whether it's rejected/accepted), correct?
There is no -H option... unless you're referring to some other fork of cpuminer?
Anyway, the cpuminer discussed in this thread always displays whether a submitted solution (share or block) is accepted ("yay!!!") or rejected ("booooo").
its the quarkcoin miner fork:
Code:
-H, --hashdebug       enable hash debug output

[GPG Public Key]  [Devcoin Builds]  [BBQCoin Builds]  [Multichain Blockexplorer]  [Multichain Blockexplorer - PoS Coins]  [Ufasoft Miner Linux Builds]
BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM AK1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: NK1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: LKi773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: EK1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: bK1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
yourofl10
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 08:05:33 PM
 #675

I noticed when scantime was 1 the threads/khash updated fast. When I had it set to 99 it updated MUCH slower, but I got more of the following with -H:

[2013-08-17 20:03:10] DEBUG: hash > target (false positive)
Hash:   000000c097ceb4fc80c0f2b4f5df5e5e5485e27f7ba0e128fe32db6c9c9ef33c
Target: 00000001d5780000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Any ideas?

auctioneeeeer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 248


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 08:14:01 PM
 #676

I noticed when scantime was 1 the threads/khash updated fast. When I had it set to 99 it updated MUCH slower, but I got more of the following with -H:

[2013-08-17 20:03:10] DEBUG: hash > target (false positive)
Hash:   000000c097ceb4fc80c0f2b4f5df5e5e5485e27f7ba0e128fe32db6c9c9ef33c
Target: 00000001d5780000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Any ideas?

Pretty sure those are orphans.  Also, sent you a 5555 qrk for your advice in the other thread.  Thanks again.
yourofl10
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 08:15:58 PM
 #677

I noticed when scantime was 1 the threads/khash updated fast. When I had it set to 99 it updated MUCH slower, but I got more of the following with -H:

[2013-08-17 20:03:10] DEBUG: hash > target (false positive)
Hash:   000000c097ceb4fc80c0f2b4f5df5e5e5485e27f7ba0e128fe32db6c9c9ef33c
Target: 00000001d5780000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Any ideas?

Pretty sure those are orphans.  Also, sent you a 5555 qrk for your advice in the other thread.  Thanks again.
Possibly, good thought. Or maybe the blocks that other people found when it synced? Not sure. Thanks for the tip! Much appreciated. Cheesy Happy mining bud!

pooler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644


View Profile
August 17, 2013, 08:28:29 PM
 #678

I noticed when scantime was 1 the threads/khash updated fast. When I had it set to 99 it updated MUCH slower, but I got more of the following with -H:

[2013-08-17 20:03:10] DEBUG: hash > target (false positive)
Hash:   000000c097ceb4fc80c0f2b4f5df5e5e5485e27f7ba0e128fe32db6c9c9ef33c
Target: 00000001d5780000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Any ideas?
Assuming you're using the fork mentioned by K1773R, what -H does is enabling some debug output. (So if I got this right it's basically a limited version of the --debug/-D option available with the cpuminer discussed here.)

Thread hash rate is updated when work is refreshed, so obviously with a lower scan time the hash rate will be updated more frequently. (Again, this only applies to solo mining.)
This is irrelevant with respect to mining speed. The only reason why you may want to lower the scan time is to avoid working on stale data, in case the network is producing blocks quickly.

Pretty sure those are orphans.
If the hash is higher than the target it can't be an orphan, all you have is a false positive which should not even be considered as a block candidate. So for instance the false positive mentioned by yourofl10 should not have been submitted upstream by the miner, and should therefore be neither accepted nor rejected.
No idea why the miner you are talking about generates false positives; it could be a wanted behavior (possibly a hack to generate hashes faster) or a bug. In either case, this is not the right thread to discuss this.

BTC: 15MRTcUweNVJbhTyH5rq9aeSdyigFrskqE · LTC: LTCPooLqTK1SANSNeTR63GbGwabTKEkuS7
vodz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 257



View Profile
August 19, 2013, 10:58:19 AM
 #679

My micro optimizations:
http://ftp://ftp.simtreas.ru/pub/my/cpuminer-2.3.2-vodz.tgz
* micro-json, micro-curl
* optimize for speed: hex2bin, bin2hex, stratum_recv_line, (le/be)32(enc/dec)
*                     stratum_handle_method, miner_thread, ssprintf,
*                     sha256_transform_swap
* pasted the code, added micro-configure, removed sha256d*, removed getwork
* added sha256_x86x64.asm by Ufasoft

This special for busybox version (mining from flash/floppy...)
shawnim
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4


View Profile
August 24, 2013, 11:19:34 PM
 #680

I am seeing "Stratum connection timed out" messages in the log and not getting credit on coinotron.
I am using pooler-cpuminer 2.3.2 Linux 64 bit binary on Ubuntu 13.04 on an i7 2670QM CPU.
I am minging ftc through the coinotron pool. (Although I see the same problem with ltc).
The log file shows:
Code:
[2013-08-24 00:09:05] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://coinotron.com:3337/
[2013-08-24 00:09:05] 6 miner threads started, using 'scrypt' algorithm.
[2013-08-24 00:09:06] Stratum detected new block
[2013-08-24 00:09:30] accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 27.47 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-08-24 00:10:35] Stratum detected new block
[2013-08-24 00:12:35] Stratum connection timed out
[2013-08-24 00:12:35] Stratum connection interrupted
[2013-08-24 00:12:36] Stratum detected new block
[2013-08-24 00:14:36] Stratum connection timed out
[2013-08-24 00:14:36] Stratum connection interrupted
My config file is:
Code:
{
"url" : "stratum+tcp://coinotron.com:3337/",
"user" : "shawnim.ftcworker2",
"pass" : "...XXX...",
"threads" : "6",
"quiet" : true
}
When I run with debug=true and protocol-dump=true, I also see:
Code:
[2013-08-24 13:43:17] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://coinotron.com:3337/
[2013-08-24 13:43:17] 6 miner threads started, using 'scrypt' algorithm.
* About to connect() to coinotron.com port 3337 (#0)
*   Trying 198.144.121.73...
* TCP_NODELAY set
* Adding handle: conn: 0x7f8cbc021330
* Adding handle: send: 0
* Adding handle: recv: 0
* Curl_addHandleToPipeline: length: 1
* - Conn 0 (0x7f8cbc021330) send_pipe: 1, recv_pipe: 0
* Connected to coinotron.com (198.144.121.73) port 3337 (#0)
* Connection #0 to host coinotron.com left intact
[2013-08-24 13:43:17] > {"id": 1, "method": "mining.subscribe", "params": ["cpuminer/2.3.2"]}
[2013-08-24 13:43:17] < {"error": null, "id": 1, "result": [["mining.notify", "f3f88c69421345caa15262c0f6935907"], "08039099", 4]}
[2013-08-24 13:43:17] Failed to get Stratum session id
[2013-08-24 13:43:17] > {"id": 2, "method": "mining.authorize", "params": ["shawnim.ftcworker2", "...XXX..."]}
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] < { "id": null, "method": "mining.set_difficulty", "params": [256]}
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] Stratum difficulty set to 256
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] < {"params": ["2506", "a0ca6326f90b50a687e03eabfb7f458c549dc144ae8abcf56db76568292d2787", "01000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffffffff2303311701062f503253482f04d21a195208", "092f7374726174756d2f000000000100c817a8040000001976a9140f0eeb3829239081e670b545bf6c6e6a4c15b1ba88ac00000000", [], "00000001", "1c0151e2", "52191ae1", true], "id": null, "method": "mining.notify"}
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] < {"error": null, "id": 2, "result": true}
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] DEBUG: job_id='2506' extranonce2=00000000 ntime=52191ae1
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] Stratum detected new block
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] < { "id": 9876, "method": "client.get_version", "params": []}
[2013-08-24 13:43:18] > {"id": 9876, "result": "cpuminer/2.3.2", "error": null}
[2013-08-24 13:43:19] thread 1: 4104 hashes, 6.23 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:43:19] thread 0: 4104 hashes, 5.71 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:43:19] thread 4: 4104 hashes, 4.37 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:43:19] thread 2: 4104 hashes, 4.25 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:43:19] thread 5: 4104 hashes, 4.11 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:43:19] thread 3: 4104 hashes, 3.63 khash/s
...
[2013-08-24 13:48:23] thread 3: 255660 hashes, 2.25 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] Stratum connection timed out
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] Stratum connection interrupted
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] thread 5: 163656 hashes, 2.24 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] thread 4: 137388 hashes, 1.78 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] thread 2: 62232 hashes, 2.23 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] thread 1: 137988 hashes, 2.26 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] thread 3: 20340 hashes, 3.24 khash/s
[2013-08-24 13:48:29] thread 0: 103812 hashes, 2.65 khash/s
* About to connect() to coinotron.com port 3337 (#1)
*   Trying 198.144.121.73...
* TCP_NODELAY set
* Adding handle: conn: 0x7f8cbc0201e0
* Adding handle: send: 0
* Adding handle: recv: 0
* Curl_addHandleToPipeline: length: 1
* - Conn 1 (0x7f8cbc0201e0) send_pipe: 1, recv_pipe: 0
* Connected to coinotron.com (198.144.121.73) port 3337 (#1)
* Connection #1 to host coinotron.com left intact
[2013-08-24 13:48:30] > {"id": 1, "method": "mining.subscribe", "params": ["cpuminer/2.3.2"]}
[2013-08-24 13:48:30] < {"error": null, "id": 1, "result": [["mining.notify", "81d0adb457f242d7b33fc8fb32f1d874"], "08039244", 4]}

I am able to successfully mine btc using the original cpuminer code that I compiled from source with the stratum proxy and slush's pool so I don't think it is a network issue on my part.

Anyone successfully mining scrypt currencies using pooler-cpuminer, stratum, and coinotron?
Any help or pointers greatly appreciated.
Shawn
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 »
  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!