OLD: BFGMiner 4.10.0: GBT+Stratum, RPC, Mac/Linux/Win64, Spondoolies SP30

[Luke-Jr]

There's a potential issue with the new features for final failover:

• URI parameter #getcbaddr to request coinbase address from bitcoind or compatible servers for solo mining.
• When running on systems with a configured Bitcoin Core server, it is automatically configured as a final failover and used for local block submission (GBT pools only) to reduce the risk of a stale block.

I run my own p2pool node locally... and the Bitcoin Core client I have running is using the disablewallet=1 to reduce unneeded resource use.  I have my p2pool configuration point to specific address instead for the default payout address.

BFGMiner doesn't know this since it sees Bitcoin Core running and instead requests #getcbaddr from Bitcoin Core, which can't because the wallet is disabled.

This should cause any practical problems, I think?

Is there a way we can configure this or disable the "Final Failover" pool?

--no-local-bitcoin

[BRADLEYPLOOF]

Is there any way to change clock speeds on gridseed 5 chip miners while BFGMiner is still running?  Through API perhaps?  Well, actually, I have no idea how to use the API...But being able to dynamically change the clock speeds of miners would be great.  Also, is there some place it shows the clock speed in the screen?  Would that be where the temp usually shows up?  I've got a little more BTC to donate to the cause.  Just a thought.  Thanks NWools and Luke-Jr!

[chrison999]

Did the problem with failover not working correctly with bfgminer 4.3.5 ever get fixed?  Just to refresh memories, failover worked going from pool 1 to pool 0 (when pool 0 became "alive") but didn't then go back to pool 1 when pool 0 went "dead" again.

I'm running 3 gridseed orbs and 6 GAWMiner furys on a raspi.  The problem happened with both the gridseeds and furys.

Thanks!

Chris

[imall4btc]

Guys,

There is a strange problem I've encountered with my G-Blade(using with BFGM 4.3.0 through MultiMiner) , when I use MulltiMiner, I get hashrate displayed as 5.45mH/s in MM window(at bottom right), but when I manually launch the miner in MM I'm getting hashrate around 4.88-5.1mH/s(rarely!)!  Moreover, when I launch the BFGM through a .bat file with the exact same set of commands, I'm hardly able to get 2.5-3.8mH/s!! 

So which one is  displaying the correct local hashrate? I'm totally confused! MM, the manual miner launched in MM or the miner that's  independently launched?? Please help. 

Thanks

P.S. My miners clock value is set to 800. I'm trying to achieve the best possible hashrate through these blades.  Any proper help/suggestion is very much appreciated. Thank you.

[jedimstr]

There's a potential issue with the new features for final failover:

• URI parameter #getcbaddr to request coinbase address from bitcoind or compatible servers for solo mining.
• When running on systems with a configured Bitcoin Core server, it is automatically configured as a final failover and used for local block submission (GBT pools only) to reduce the risk of a stale block.

I run my own p2pool node locally... and the Bitcoin Core client I have running is using the disablewallet=1 to reduce unneeded resource use.  I have my p2pool configuration point to specific address instead for the default payout address.

BFGMiner doesn't know this since it sees Bitcoin Core running and instead requests #getcbaddr from Bitcoin Core, which can't because the wallet is disabled.

This should cause any practical problems, I think?

Is there a way we can configure this or disable the "Final Failover" pool?

--no-local-bitcoin

You're right, probably no "practical problems", but it feels like an open loop.. I just want it closed.

Thanks, I'll use the --no-local-bitcoin param.

[nwoolls]

There is a strange problem I've encountered with my G-Blade(using with BFGM 4.3.0 through MultiMiner) , when I use MulltiMiner, I get hashrate displayed as 5.45mH/s in MM window(at bottom right), but when I manually launch the miner in MM I'm getting hashrate around 4.88-5.1mH/s(rarely!)!  Moreover, when I launch the BFGM through a .bat file with the exact same set of commands, I'm hardly able to get 2.5-3.8mH/s!! 

So which one is  displaying the correct local hashrate? I'm totally confused! MM, the manual miner launched in MM or the miner that's  independently launched?? Please help. 

Thanks

P.S. My miners clock value is set to 800. I'm trying to achieve the best possible hashrate through these blades.  Any proper help/suggestion is very much appreciated. Thank you.

I'm not sure why you are seeing varying hash-rates unless you have arguments specified for MultiMiner that you aren't specifying in a batch file.

As far clock speed, I would set it to at least 835. I get about 2.86 Mh/s for each of the 2 boards / devices found in a G-Blade.

[imall4btc]

There is a strange problem I've encountered with my G-Blade(using with BFGM 4.3.0 through MultiMiner) , when I use MulltiMiner, I get hashrate displayed as 5.45mH/s in MM window(at bottom right), but when I manually launch the miner in MM I'm getting hashrate around 4.88-5.1mH/s(rarely!)!  Moreover, when I launch the BFGM through a .bat file with the exact same set of commands, I'm hardly able to get 2.5-3.8mH/s!! 

So which one is  displaying the correct local hashrate? I'm totally confused! MM, the manual miner launched in MM or the miner that's  independently launched?? Please help. 

Thanks

P.S. My miners clock value is set to 800. I'm trying to achieve the best possible hashrate through these blades.  Any proper help/suggestion is very much appreciated. Thank you.

I'm not sure why you are seeing varying hash-rates unless you have arguments specified for MultiMiner that you aren't specifying in a batch file.

As far clock speed, I would set it to at least 835. I get about 2.86 Mh/s for each of the 2 boards / devices found in a G-Blade.

Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate?

Thanks

[nwoolls]

Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate?

Thanks

Current hash rate is shown in the bottom-right.

Questions asked in public benefit other users. Thanks!

[imall4btc]

Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate?

Thanks

Current hash rate is shown in the bottom-right.

Questions asked in public benefit other users. Thanks!

Alright, thanks! Mind telling the HW's you get when the clock speed of your device is 835? I'm getting 2.85mH/s with like 2-3 HW's when I  set the clock speed to 835.

Thank you

After failing to get my g-blades properly work with BFGM ad MM(due to no proper support and lack of interest from me{after 30+ tries also it didn't work for me, and moreover I think like this I'll destroy my equipment!}), I've decided to quit these two applications and hold hands of CGM 3.7.2(jmordica fork) - which has successfully worked for me, up to my expectations! Now I get around 5.7mH/s(2.85mH/s per blade) on my g-blade, with hardly 1-2 HW's. Thanks to all those who gave a hand of help.

Thank you

[MoreBloodWine]

Can I use BFGMiner for scryptoins / with the 1.2x Mh/s zeus blizzard devices ?

I have 4.2.0 compiled right now on my rPi with MinePeon. Minepeon I'm sure wont be an issue since it's more or less a pretty interface for bfgminer / cgminer.

[nwoolls]

Can I use BFGMiner for scryptoins / with the 1.2x Mh/s zeus blizzard devices ?

I have 4.2.0 compiled right now on my rPi with MinePeon. Minepeon I'm sure wont be an issue since it's more or less a pretty interface for bfgminer / cgminer.

You'll need BFGMiner 4.3 in order to mine with the ZeusMiner ASICs. It works great on the RPi in my testing so should work once MinePeon is updated to 4.3.

[MoreBloodWine]

Can I use BFGMiner for scryptoins / with the 1.2x Mh/s zeus blizzard devices ?

I have 4.2.0 compiled right now on my rPi with MinePeon. Minepeon I'm sure wont be an issue since it's more or less a pretty interface for bfgminer / cgminer.

You'll need BFGMiner 4.3 in order to mine with the ZeusMiner ASICs. It works great on the RPi in my testing so should work once MinePeon is updated to 4.3.

Minpeon wasnt even updated for 4.2 but I know how to compile it in.

[MoreBloodWine]

Ty BTW, bout to run sudo make on 4.3 after configures done... will post images of 4.3 hasing my BTC sticks when done since I don't have a zeus yet.

Also, does 4.3 do the "out of box" over clocking to the zeus like it does to the 1.6U2's which is running for m now at 1.9 each.

[nwoolls]

Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate?

Thanks

Current hash rate is shown in the bottom-right.

Questions asked in public benefit other users. Thanks!

Alright, thanks! Mind telling the HW's you get when the clock speed of your device is 835? I'm getting 2.85mH/s with like 2-3 HW's when I  set the clock speed to 835.

After failing to get my g-blades properly work with BFGM ad MM(due to no proper support and lack of interest from me{after 30+ tries also it didn't work for me, and moreover I think like this I'll destroy my equipment!}), I've decided to quit these two applications and hold hands of CGM 3.7.2(jmordica fork) - which has successfully worked for me, up to my expectations! Now I get around 5.7mH/s(2.85mH/s per blade) on my g-blade, with hardly 1-2 HW's. Thanks to all those who gave a hand of help.

I'm glad to hear you were able to find a working solution for your hardware. To answer your question, using BFGMiner (with or without MultiMiner) I get 2.84 Mh/s per board with 0% HW errors on one and 2% on another. The effective hashrate is about the same (2.79 Mh/s & 2.86 Mh/s).

I'm still not quite sure from your posts what issues you had with BFGMiner. Your last post indicated you were getting the same performance I am reporting, but then you struck through the text.

[scryptr]

In an earlier post, it was correctly stated that Gridseed blades DO NOT support BitCoin mining or Dual mining.  Simply, they will overheat and self-destruct if they are instructed to mine BitCoin.

However, the GC3355 ASIC chips that the blades contain have the capability to mine BitCoin, and dual mine BitCoin and scrypt coins.  JMordica's fork of CGminer TURNS OFF the BitCoin mining function of the GC3355 chips.

Single-chip GC3355 miners could dual mine without damage.  The 80-chip Gridseed blade (containing GC3355 chips) cannot, as stated above.

Does BFGminer TURN OFF the BitCoin mining function of the Gridseed blade?  As a previous poster stated, it may be possible to damage a Gridseed blade with BFGminer.

I'd like to use MinePeon with my Gridseed blades, and mine scrypt coin with BFGminer.  -Scryptr

[nwoolls]

In an earlier post, it was correctly stated that Gridseed blades DO NOT support BitCoin mining or Dual mining.  Simply, they will overheat and self-destruct if they are instructed to mine BitCoin.

However, the GC3355 ASIC chips that the blades contain have the capability to mine BitCoin, and dual mine BitCoin and scrypt coins.  JMordica's fork of CGminer TURNS OFF the BitCoin mining function of the GC3355 chips.

Single-chip GC3355 miners could dual mine without damage.  The 80-chip Gridseed blade (containing GC3355 chips) cannot, as stated above.

Does BFGminer TURN OFF the BitCoin mining function of the Gridseed blade?  As a previous poster stated, it may be possible to damage a Gridseed blade with BFGminer.

I'd like to use MinePeon with my Gridseed blades, and mine scrypt coin with BFGminer.  -Scryptr

Yes, both the Orb and G-Blade are treated similarly to dbartle's CGMiner driver: the device is reset and then only the scrypt cores are initialized. When mining with a DualMiner and specifying dual-mode mining, the device is reset and both scrypt and SHA cores are initialized.

SHA cores are never initialized by BFGMiner for any device other than the DualMiner USB stick.

[imall4btc]

Thanks for your reply, Nwoolls(you don't reply to pm's ). I wanted to know MM displays which speed at the "bottom right" of the page? Five second hash-rate, all time average or the current hash-rate?

Thanks

Current hash rate is shown in the bottom-right.

Questions asked in public benefit other users. Thanks!

Alright, thanks! Mind telling the HW's you get when the clock speed of your device is 835? I'm getting 2.85mH/s with like 2-3 HW's when I  set the clock speed to 835.

After failing to get my g-blades properly work with BFGM ad MM(due to no proper support and lack of interest from me{after 30+ tries also it didn't work for me, and moreover I think like this I'll destroy my equipment!}), I've decided to quit these two applications and hold hands of CGM 3.7.2(jmordica fork) - which has successfully worked for me, up to my expectations! Now I get around 5.7mH/s(2.85mH/s per blade) on my g-blade, with hardly 1-2 HW's. Thanks to all those who gave a hand of help.

I'm glad to hear you were able to find a working solution for your hardware. To answer your question, using BFGMiner (with or without MultiMiner) I get 2.84 Mh/s per board with 0% HW errors on one and 2% on another. The effective hashrate is about the same (2.79 Mh/s & 2.86 Mh/s).

I'm still not quite sure from your posts what issues you had with BFGMiner. Your last post indicated you were getting the same performance I am reporting, but then you struck through the text.

The problem I encountered was - when I posted my first response, I was getting 2.85mH/s with 2-3 HW's - I left the blades to work whole night - but next day when I saw BFGM(I ran the manual miner through MM) was mining at 3.xxmH/s and there were like 50-70 HW's per blade(and they kept increasing). So I had no other option than to quit. Of course MM has nothing to do with this, but there was no other option available in MM to replace BFGM(I have been using MM since I got my first 280x and it works like a charm for me).

Anyway, thanks and I hope you get an alternative in MM for these blades if possible.

[nwoolls]

I'm glad to hear you were able to find a working solution for your hardware. To answer your question, using BFGMiner (with or without MultiMiner) I get 2.84 Mh/s per board with 0% HW errors on one and 2% on another. The effective hashrate is about the same (2.79 Mh/s & 2.86 Mh/s).

I'm still not quite sure from your posts what issues you had with BFGMiner. Your last post indicated you were getting the same performance I am reporting, but then you struck through the text.

The problem I encountered was - when I posted my first response, I was getting 2.85mH/s with 2-3 HW's - I left the blades to work whole night - but next day when I saw BFGM(I ran the manual miner through MM) was mining at 3.xxmH/s and there were like 50-70 HW's per blade(and they kept increasing). So I had no other option than to quit. Of course MM has nothing to do with this, but there was no other option available in MM to replace BFGM(I have been using MM since I got my first 280x and it works like a charm for me).

Anyway, thanks and I hope you get an alternative in MM for these blades if possible.

Make sure are looking at the HW %, not the number / count. Most of these numbers are not directly comparable between CGMiner and BFGMiner. It's comparing apples and oranges.

[imall4btc]

I'm glad to hear you were able to find a working solution for your hardware. To answer your question, using BFGMiner (with or without MultiMiner) I get 2.84 Mh/s per board with 0% HW errors on one and 2% on another. The effective hashrate is about the same (2.79 Mh/s & 2.86 Mh/s).

I'm still not quite sure from your posts what issues you had with BFGMiner. Your last post indicated you were getting the same performance I am reporting, but then you struck through the text.

The problem I encountered was - when I posted my first response, I was getting 2.85mH/s with 2-3 HW's - I left the blades to work whole night - but next day when I saw BFGM(I ran the manual miner through MM) was mining at 3.xxmH/s and there were like 50-70 HW's per blade(and they kept increasing). So I had no other option than to quit. Of course MM has nothing to do with this, but there was no other option available in MM to replace BFGM(I have been using MM since I got my first 280x and it works like a charm for me).

Anyway, thanks and I hope you get an alternative in MM for these blades if possible.

Make sure are looking at the HW %, not the number / count. Most of these numbers are not directly comparable between CGMiner and BFGMiner. It's comparing apples and oranges.

Thanks, I'll make a note of it. Moreover I'm trying to learn and then start using SeedManager as it's more stable and stronger performance-wise.

[vs3]

Can someone give me an example of a bfgminer.conf file that has settings on per-device basis?
I have a few devices that achieve best results at different speeds. So, based on their serial number I want to configure them to start automatically at the desired speed.
(as opposed to me going and adjusting the speeds every time I start them).
Ideally I'd like to have one set of global settings with a few exceptions for this and that device. You can use NFY devices as an example - e.g. this is what I currently have:

Code:

{
"set-device" : [
	"NFY:baud=500000",
	"NFY:osc6_bits=56"
]
}