comeonalready
|
|
April 22, 2014, 02:27:44 AM |
|
nicehashdev, I've sent you a pm regarding this stalled miner problem.
|
|
|
|
uberua
Member
Offline
Activity: 179
Merit: 10
|
|
April 22, 2014, 04:31:57 AM |
|
I have 2 rigs working with 1 BTC address at NiceHash. Everything was working fine before but now only one of them works at NiceHash, another one doesn't want to join NiceHash anymore and works at reserve pool (but nothing was changed in settings from my side). Does anyone have the same issue?
EDIT: Just joined after 15 minutes of work at reserve pool.
|
|
|
|
emdje
|
|
April 22, 2014, 12:13:58 PM |
|
When I came home this morning I found my card on the nicehash pool, but it was not getting any work because there was no work above or at the level of p I set. It should go to my backup pool then right? Ow and my first order was completed when I got home that particular one was not profitable though (taking in account the fee)
|
|
|
|
nicehashdev
|
|
April 22, 2014, 12:18:16 PM |
|
Sending different subscription ID for every stratum connection. Maybe that will make the difference? Let me know.
|
|
|
|
Rosta32
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
April 22, 2014, 12:37:38 PM |
|
When I came home this morning I found my card on the nicehash pool, but it was not getting any work because there was no work above or at the level of p I set. It should go to my backup pool then right? Ow and my first order was completed when I got home that particular one was not profitable though (taking in account the fee) I had the same problem today. The price limit feature is buggy and burned me several times. It only works consistently when you restart the miner. Whatever benefit I got mining here I gave up by losing hours of hashing.
|
|
|
|
suchmoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3808
Merit: 9024
https://bpip.org
|
|
April 22, 2014, 02:00:46 PM |
|
I know it's heresy to say that here among folks chasing the highest-priced order, but I think nicehash needs to get rid of the "p=" thing. It might have had its use when there was one or two orders in the system, but now there is steady supply. Instead of wasting time on fixing it or patching miners or whatever, why not spend that energy on let's say porting extranonce support to cgminer 3.7.2 clones for Gridseed. That would bring a lot of hashing power. Or adding something like X11.
|
|
|
|
pieran
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
|
April 22, 2014, 03:05:09 PM |
|
I know it's heresy to say that here among folks chasing the highest-priced order, but I think nicehash needs to get rid of the "p=" thing. It might have had its use when there was one or two orders in the system, but now there is steady supply. Instead of wasting time on fixing it or patching miners or whatever, why not spend that energy on let's say porting extranonce support to cgminer 3.7.2 clones for Gridseed. That would bring a lot of hashing power. Or adding something like X11.
I totally agree with you! Though I did not encounter any problems with the p= option (worked fine for me with SGminer 4.1.0 BAMT) I guess the devs could invest time in adding new features or enhancing already working parts of the service. Really loving this service and I hope it will get even more successful.
|
|
|
|
nicehashdev
|
|
April 22, 2014, 03:59:06 PM |
|
I was able to reproduce the bug locally, so I made some tests. Here are the results;
NiceHash works as expected - correctly. It sends auth error if p= is above and closes the connection. On the other side, sgminer falls into "bug-loop", where it after every x seconds try to connect and getting back same auth error, thus not working at all. It does stay connected to second pool, but performs no work from second pool. This to me, clearly looks like a sgminer bug, and not bug by NiceHash.
Again, restart of sgminer, fixes this issue.
Now, I am trying to get some ideas how to get past this. Suggestion was to use client.reconnect feature. But here are the catches; if I send client.reconnect to stratum.nicehash.com and port 3333, then miner will perform DDOS attack on NiceHash until it crashes (tested). If I send client.reconnect to some unresolvable host like 0.0.0.0, then miner NEVER tries to connect to real NiceHash anymore.
I will test some more options later, maybe I can, with correct sequence of returned responses, not trigger this bug from happening.
If you absolutely must use p= feature, I suggest you to also use some monitoring utility that restarts your miner in case of idling.
|
|
|
|
Bawb3
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 44
Merit: 0
|
|
April 22, 2014, 06:03:04 PM |
|
I like the p= feature, I can set it to what I'm willing to contribute to Nicehash, and then just mine on my secondary pool. Whenever an order above my price comes in, it will switch, then go back once the orders fulfilled/cancelled. I just use CGwatcher, and set the monitor to restart the miner if no shares are submitted within 2 minuets, problem solved.
|
|
|
|
ingvarfervent
|
|
April 23, 2014, 05:28:38 AM |
|
Hi. When add X11 algo ?
|
|
|
|
|
Vitalogy
|
|
April 23, 2014, 10:19:52 PM |
|
I'm wondering, as a buyer what is the best pool reward system to look for? Knowing that I will mine with a high hashrate on a relatively short time.
Am I correct to think that Proportional & PPS are the best?
What about PPLNS? A popular reward system is to pay the shares submited in the last X minutes. So what happen if the pool don't find a block while I'm mining during that X minutes long round? I get no reward. Right?
|
|
|
|
nicehashdev
|
|
April 23, 2014, 11:43:19 PM |
|
PPS, Proportional.
But any system will be OK, if you limit the speed and mine for longer time.
|
|
|
|
Goolicious
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 4
Merit: 0
|
|
April 24, 2014, 04:31:43 AM |
|
Hello,
I got a little problem with my miner (SHA-256).
I use the "p=0.08" to let it start, if the price goes to 0.08/THs/day and above. But it is mining right away for a lower amount.
Did I configure something wrong?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
dopedick47
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
|
|
April 24, 2014, 06:52:04 AM |
|
When is x11 coming?
|
|
|
|
dhsc19
Member
Offline
Activity: 96
Merit: 10
|
|
April 24, 2014, 07:46:49 AM |
|
I'm not sure what advantage I would have as a provider for scrypt-adaptive-n. The bids are just below twice as much as scrypt and my hash rate is cut to 1/3 to 1/2. The bids need to be at least two or three times that of scrypt just for me to meet the amount I could earn providing for scrypt. Is there everyone providing for scrypt-adaptive-n meeting or beating the earnings compared to providing for scrypt?
|
|
|
|
phzi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 08:05:32 AM |
|
I'm not sure what advantage I would have as a provider for scrypt-adaptive-n. The bids are just below twice as much as scrypt and my hash rate is cut to 1/3 to 1/2. The bids need to be at least two or three times that of scrypt just for me to meet the amount I could earn providing for scrypt. Is there everyone providing for scrypt-adaptive-n meeting or beating the earnings compared to providing for scrypt?
With skilled tuning, you can get 55%+ out of an nscrypt rig. Recently, there have been a few times where nscrypt was more profitable then scrypt for my rigs on nicehash, and the price went above 11BTC/GH for a bit. I think as more scrypt ASIC miners roll out (presuming there is really any reason to have alternative blockchains beyond BTC and LTC), nscrypt will become increasingly more profitable for GPU miners.
|
|
|
|
nicehashdev
|
|
April 24, 2014, 04:04:53 PM |
|
We are working hard to bring you fixed mining software (cgminer & sgminer). Fixes will include: - idlebug fix - new stratum method to change extranonce1 - no more reconnects needed when switching orders - cgminer 3.7.2 with above + fixed extranonce bug
|
|
|
|
dhsc19
Member
Offline
Activity: 96
Merit: 10
|
|
April 24, 2014, 04:24:40 PM |
|
I'm not sure what advantage I would have as a provider for scrypt-adaptive-n. The bids are just below twice as much as scrypt and my hash rate is cut to 1/3 to 1/2. The bids need to be at least two or three times that of scrypt just for me to meet the amount I could earn providing for scrypt. Is there everyone providing for scrypt-adaptive-n meeting or beating the earnings compared to providing for scrypt?
With skilled tuning, you can get 55%+ out of an nscrypt rig. Recently, there have been a few times where nscrypt was more profitable then scrypt for my rigs on nicehash, and the price went above 11BTC/GH for a bit. I think as more scrypt ASIC miners roll out (presuming there is really any reason to have alternative blockchains beyond BTC and LTC), nscrypt will become increasingly more profitable for GPU miners. I can only get "bursts" of 1/2 the hash rate on my R9 280X with all the various suggested settings (overclocking, 8193 thread, xintensity, etc.) I'm just not get a steady rate unfortunately and it averages less than 1/2 for me. Will just have to keep watching to see when it will become more profitable for me. Anyone trying the mixed algo configs on the development versions of sgminer? You can set up load-balanced or quota pools to mine scrypt and nfactor at the same time on a single GPU. Or set up failover mode, primary pool mines scrypt and failover mines nfactor. Would be interesting to see how the "p=" setting can play into getting the GPU to mine nscrypt only when its profitability it higher than scrypt. It might be interesting to try once the idle bug is fixed and implemented in the capable versions of sgminer.
|
|
|
|
phzi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 04:52:04 PM |
|
I can only get "bursts" of 1/2 the hash rate on my R9 280X with all the various suggested settings (overclocking, 8193 thread, xintensity, etc.) I'm just not get a steady rate unfortunately and it averages less than 1/2 for me. Will just have to keep watching to see when it will become more profitable for me.
Also keep in mind that most people see fairly significant power savings when hashing scrypt(n=11) vs scrypt(n=10). My 290s can be tuned up to 470KH/s with low reject rates, and use less power then when they are hashing scrypt at 850KH/s. Anyone trying the mixed algo configs on the development versions of sgminer? You can set up load-balanced or quota pools to mine scrypt and nfactor at the same time on a single GPU. Or set up failover mode, primary pool mines scrypt and failover mines nfactor. Would be interesting to see how the "p=" setting can play into getting the GPU to mine nscrypt only when its profitability it higher than scrypt. It might be interesting to try once the idle bug is fixed and implemented in the capable versions of sgminer.
I made a post somewhere above about this. I showed how you can use p= to automatically switch between nscrypt and scrypt depending on what is more profitable (within a margin of error). The idle bug does throw a bit of a wrench in this tho. (Personally, I'm not mining here until the idle and p= problems are resolved. But I have been buying hashing power on occasion.)
|
|
|
|
|