Nubminer
Member
 Offline
Activity: 75
Merit: 10
|
 |
May 12, 2015, 12:39:04 AM |
|
what should I try for startup batch
i am getting more boos than yay's
[2015-05-11 18:29:09] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 267353
[2015-05-11 18:29:09] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8297
[2015-05-11 18:29:09] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9802
[2015-05-11 18:29:10] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8252
[2015-05-11 18:29:10] accepted: 121/125 (96.80%), 18125 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 18:29:17] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9669
[2015-05-11 18:29:17] accepted: 122/126 (96.83%), 18128 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 18:29:20] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9958
[2015-05-11 18:29:20] accepted: 122/127 (96.06%), 18143 khash/s booooo
[2015-05-11 18:29:20] reject reason: Share above target.
[2015-05-11 18:29:24] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8235
[2015-05-11 18:29:24] accepted: 123/128 (96.09%), 18144 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 18:29:31] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9829
[2015-05-11 18:29:32] accepted: 123/129 (95.35%), 18150 khash/s booooo
[2015-05-11 18:29:32] reject reason: Share above target.
[2015-05-11 18:29:33] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 10018
[2015-05-11 18:29:34] accepted: 123/130 (94.62%), 18167 khash/s booooo
[2015-05-11 18:29:34] reject reason: Share above target.
[2015-05-11 18:29:51] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9762
[2015-05-11 18:29:52] accepted: 123/131 (93.89%), 18171 khash/s booooo
[2015-05-11 18:29:52] reject reason: Share above target.
[2015-05-11 18:30:04] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 267353
[2015-05-11 18:30:04] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8269
[2015-05-11 18:30:04] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9754
[2015-05-11 18:30:05] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9745
currently using standard batch with no intensity adjustment
ccminer -a x11 -o stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:3336 -u -p
using nicehash because westhash just gives me nothing but rejects or timeouts -
located on US west coast 100MB connection
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
|
May 12, 2015, 01:51:26 AM |
|
@ bensam1231 In your bat file... if westhash goes down then nicehash takes over... but if nicehash then goes down does it go back to westhash? thx
ccminer.exe -q -a quark -o stratum+tcp://stratum.westhash.com:3345 -u -p x -o stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:3345 -u -p x
Yes, it's failover. When westhash comes back up it should switch back to it, unless failover in ccminer is different from sgminer. i thought ccminer had no form of failover bensam? ... in fact - ive tested your setup - and it seems ccminer only picks up the second pool that you input and mines there only ... sgminer has failover builtin ... we have both running in the farm - and only sgminer drops to failover when the pool drops ... miner control or other packages ( all windows which we cant use here due to linux - as far as i know anyway ) are the ones that do that 'for' ccminer ... would be nice if it was built in ... #crysx |
|
|
|
bensam1231
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1024
|
|
May 12, 2015, 02:27:37 AM |
|
@ bensam1231 In your bat file... if westhash goes down then nicehash takes over... but if nicehash then goes down does it go back to westhash? thx
ccminer.exe -q -a quark -o stratum+tcp://stratum.westhash.com:3345 -u -p x -o stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:3345 -u -p x
Yes, it's failover. When westhash comes back up it should switch back to it, unless failover in ccminer is different from sgminer. i thought ccminer had no form of failover bensam? ... in fact - ive tested your setup - and it seems ccminer only picks up the second pool that you input and mines there only ... sgminer has failover builtin ... we have both running in the farm - and only sgminer drops to failover when the pool drops ... miner control or other packages ( all windows which we cant use here due to linux - as far as i know anyway ) are the ones that do that 'for' ccminer ... would be nice if it was built in ... #crysx You didn't notice that till other people pointed it out, good catch on that one after the fact bro. Quit being a douche and move on already. I let you get the last word in and you went out of your way to do this again. You don't want to ruin the thread, don't start shit. Me not responding to your earlier 'spiel' and then you going 'oh I'm good enough to not say anything else' right after you did was not you winning. It was me being the respectable person and setting things down and moving on, because I actually care if this devolves into a two-three page long bitch fest. Don't assume a lack of a response is submission, rather restraint and self control. Exactly what you were preaching, but couldn't practice. In the batchfile I gave I had MM pools in front of the westhash pool and it fell over to the westhash pool, I didn't check to see if it picked up the MM pools after they cameback up. As per other people, apparently it wont swap back to other pools when they come up (although one person said it does on occasion). As I said I thought it was the same as sgminer, but it might be different. |
I buy private Nvidia miners. Send information and/or inquiries to my PM box.
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
|
May 12, 2015, 02:46:38 AM |
|
@ bensam1231 In your bat file... if westhash goes down then nicehash takes over... but if nicehash then goes down does it go back to westhash? thx
ccminer.exe -q -a quark -o stratum+tcp://stratum.westhash.com:3345 -u -p x -o stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:3345 -u -p x
Yes, it's failover. When westhash comes back up it should switch back to it, unless failover in ccminer is different from sgminer. i thought ccminer had no form of failover bensam? ... in fact - ive tested your setup - and it seems ccminer only picks up the second pool that you input and mines there only ... sgminer has failover builtin ... we have both running in the farm - and only sgminer drops to failover when the pool drops ... miner control or other packages ( all windows which we cant use here due to linux - as far as i know anyway ) are the ones that do that 'for' ccminer ... would be nice if it was built in ... #crysx You didn't notice that till other people pointed it out, good catch on that one after the fact bro. Quit being a douche and move on already. I let you get the last word in and you went out of your way to do this again. You don't want to ruin the thread, don't start shit. Me not responding to your earlier 'spiel' and then you going 'oh I'm good enough to not say anything else' right after you did was not you winning. It was me being the respectable person and setting things down and moving on, because I actually care if this devolves into a two-three page long bitch fest. Don't assume a lack of a response is submission, rather restraint and self control. Exactly what you were preaching, but couldn't practice. In the batchfile I gave I had MM pools in front of the westhash pool and it fell over to the westhash pool, I didn't check to see if it picked up the MM pools after they cameback up. As per other people, apparently it wont swap back to other pools when they come up (although one person said it does on occasion). As I said I thought it was the same as sgminer, but it might be different. bensam ... i wake up and go through each post as i read them ... then i post ... i dont read the WHOLE thread then go back ... too much time wasted ... douchebag? ... well - i certainly dont go out of my way to do anything of the like to become something like that ... i realized after reading the rest that i had posted a little too early ... my mistake bensam - i didnt mean to offend you ... it was more constructive that it was an attack - as you so clearly took it ... so once again - my apologies ... im not here to attck anyone - just to be as constructive as i can ... you're aggression is uncalled for and certainly not welcome - but i wont take offense ... ill put my tail between my legs and take it on the chin ... there is no opposition on my part - nor am i trying to provoke ... as for you 'letting' me get the 'last word' in - geez tanx ... im appreciative of that ... :| it really DOES show how 'respectable' you really are ... nice one ... stop thinking that im against you and that im just spilling my 'shit' here - and instead work with me as well as the rest of the community to sort things ... and stop the aggression bensam ... im no genius - but it does not take one to work things out with the whole communities input ... SHEESH! ... in any case ( and more to the point ) - ccminer does not have anything built in - its been conversed many times over previously and in other threads ... it would be nice if it did like sgminer - but its not built that way ... maybe one day some dev will extend it to that ... apparently a batch file in windows consistently crashes on exit also - but that is of no real consequence IF the rotational batch works .. im looking for a working batch ( working by means of others opinions and experience here - i dont use windows ) - because i remember in one of the threads that someone had a WORKING version of the batch for windows ... minercontrol seems to be the one app that is always brought up ... maybe time to test with windows on a couple of machines on the farm and see ... sp - would it be that hard to add a --failover or --load-balance ( like in sgminer ) option to your ( sp-mod) fork? ... #crysx |
|
|
|
|
sambiohazard
|
|
May 12, 2015, 04:43:09 AM |
|
Release 50 --- this is acting odd for me
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:333
6
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] NVAPI GPU monitoring enabled.
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] 2 miner threads started, using 'x11' algorithm.
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Binding thread 0 to cpu 0 (mask 1)
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Binding thread 1 to cpu 1 (mask 2)
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Stratum difficulty set to 0.04
[2015-05-11 17:35:15] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 305840
[2015-05-11 17:35:19] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 10481
[2015-05-11 17:35:19] accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 10960 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:29] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 10743
[2015-05-11 17:35:29] accepted: 2/2 (100.00%), 17886 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:33] Stratum set nonce 2000192c2b with extranonce2 size=3
[2015-05-11 17:35:34] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 10399
[2015-05-11 17:35:34] accepted: 2/3 (66.67%), 18971 khash/s booooo
[2015-05-11 17:35:34] reject reason: Share above target.
[2015-05-11 17:35:39] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 10006
[2015-05-11 17:35:39] accepted: 3/4 (75.00%), 19416 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:43] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 305841
[2015-05-11 17:35:43] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 10651
[2015-05-11 17:35:43] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 9937
[2015-05-11 17:35:56] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 9147
[2015-05-11 17:35:57] accepted: 4/5 (80.00%), 19660 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:59] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8849
[2015-05-11 17:36:00] accepted: 5/6 (83.33%), 19643 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] Stratum set nonce 00513399 with extranonce2 size=3
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 305843
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 9192
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 10083
[2015-05-11 17:36:04] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 28230
[2015-05-11 17:36:04] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9901
[2015-05-11 17:36:04] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8884
[2015-05-11 17:36:05] CTRL_C_EVENT received, exiting
Also when I do use CTRL-C it gives me a windows error (unhandled win32 exception occurred in ccminer)
release 45 is still stable for me
Hi everyone, i think this is a problem with multipools like yaamp, nicehash/westhash etc. I mined with release49 for 24 hours on blockcoinpool and never got any errors with 2920 khash/s and 98.5% accept rate. I have been mining on crysx's proxy for last 24 hours which inturn mines on yaamp and i got similar errors, hashrate of only 2890 khash/s & ~85% accept rate. Regards Sam  |
|
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
|
May 12, 2015, 05:04:41 AM |
|
Release 50 --- this is acting odd for me
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:333
6
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] NVAPI GPU monitoring enabled.
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] 2 miner threads started, using 'x11' algorithm.
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Binding thread 0 to cpu 0 (mask 1)
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Binding thread 1 to cpu 1 (mask 2)
[2015-05-11 17:35:14] Stratum difficulty set to 0.04
[2015-05-11 17:35:15] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 305840
[2015-05-11 17:35:19] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 10481
[2015-05-11 17:35:19] accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 10960 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:29] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 10743
[2015-05-11 17:35:29] accepted: 2/2 (100.00%), 17886 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:33] Stratum set nonce 2000192c2b with extranonce2 size=3
[2015-05-11 17:35:34] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 10399
[2015-05-11 17:35:34] accepted: 2/3 (66.67%), 18971 khash/s booooo
[2015-05-11 17:35:34] reject reason: Share above target.
[2015-05-11 17:35:39] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 10006
[2015-05-11 17:35:39] accepted: 3/4 (75.00%), 19416 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:43] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 305841
[2015-05-11 17:35:43] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 10651
[2015-05-11 17:35:43] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 9937
[2015-05-11 17:35:56] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 9147
[2015-05-11 17:35:57] accepted: 4/5 (80.00%), 19660 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:35:59] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8849
[2015-05-11 17:36:00] accepted: 5/6 (83.33%), 19643 khash/s yay!!!
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] Stratum set nonce 00513399 with extranonce2 size=3
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 305843
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 9192
[2015-05-11 17:36:03] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 10083
[2015-05-11 17:36:04] stratum.nicehash.com:3336 x11 block 28230
[2015-05-11 17:36:04] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980, 9901
[2015-05-11 17:36:04] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980, 8884
[2015-05-11 17:36:05] CTRL_C_EVENT received, exiting
Also when I do use CTRL-C it gives me a windows error (unhandled win32 exception occurred in ccminer)
release 45 is still stable for me
Hi everyone, i think this is a problem with multipools like yaamp, nicehash/westhash etc. I mined with release49 for 24 hours on blockcoinpool and never got any errors with 2920 khash/s and 98.5% accept rate. I have been mining on crysx's proxy for last 24 hours which inturn mines on yaamp and i got similar errors, hashrate of only 2890 khash/s & ~85% accept rate. Regards Sam i noticed that sam ... if you look at the graph - i even pointed some of the farms miners on x11 - and it does exactly what you say it does ... and further - the amount of rejects are almost 98% ... it seems that yaamp and westhash have this issue due to the extranonce sizes - yaamp especially ( but both yaamp and westhash / nicehash ) ... we mine blackcoinpool also - and using the same stratum-proxy that we do for the donation link ( which we have just setup for granitecoin donation and will for devs if they would like ) - we dont get any of those sorts of issues also ... so we are replicating the exact same issues you are receiving - regardless of whether its through the donation link OR directly ... we have also been mining through mintsy - and renting out the farm via mintsy ... its does the same thing - except that it shows NO results for mining on the sites ( yaamp or westhash ) but accepted shares on the miner ... when we contacted the devs on mintsy - they said that they are working on a fix for this - but due to the extranonce2 size changes - even their stratum backends were having issues too ... we are not alone ... but there does not seem to be any fix for it - yet ... #crysx |
|
|
|
|
CapnBDL
|
|
May 12, 2015, 05:21:24 AM |
|
@ bensam1231 In your bat file... if westhash goes down then nicehash takes over... but if nicehash then goes down does it go back to westhash? thx
ccminer.exe -q -a quark -o stratum+tcp://stratum.westhash.com:3345 -u -p x -o stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:3345 -u -p x
Yes, it's failover. When westhash comes back up it should switch back to it, unless failover in ccminer is different from sgminer. i thought ccminer had no form of failover bensam? ... in fact - ive tested your setup - and it seems ccminer only picks up the second pool that you input and mines there only ... sgminer has failover builtin ... we have both running in the farm - and only sgminer drops to failover when the pool drops ... miner control or other packages ( all windows which we cant use here due to linux - as far as i know anyway ) are the ones that do that 'for' ccminer ... would be nice if it was built in ... #crysx You didn't notice that till other people pointed it out, good catch on that one after the fact bro. Quit being a douche and move on already. I let you get the last word in and you went out of your way to do this again. You don't want to ruin the thread, don't start shit. Me not responding to your earlier 'spiel' and then you going 'oh I'm good enough to not say anything else' right after you did was not you winning. It was me being the respectable person and setting things down and moving on, because I actually care if this devolves into a two-three page long bitch fest. Don't assume a lack of a response is submission, rather restraint and self control. Exactly what you were preaching, but couldn't practice. In the batchfile I gave I had MM pools in front of the westhash pool and it fell over to the westhash pool, I didn't check to see if it picked up the MM pools after they cameback up. As per other people, apparently it wont swap back to other pools when they come up (although one person said it does on occasion). As I said I thought it was the same as sgminer, but it might be different. bensam ... i wake up and go through each post as i read them ... then i post ... i dont read the WHOLE thread then go back ... too much time wasted ... douchebag? ... well - i certainly dont go out of my way to do anything of the like to become something like that ... i realized after reading the rest that i had posted a little too early ... my mistake bensam - i didnt mean to offend you ... it was more constructive that it was an attack - as you so clearly took it ... so once again - my apologies ... im not here to attck anyone - just to be as constructive as i can ... you're aggression is uncalled for and certainly not welcome - but i wont take offense ... ill put my tail between my legs and take it on the chin ... there is no opposition on my part - nor am i trying to provoke ... as for you 'letting' me get the 'last word' in - geez tanx ... im appreciative of that ... :| it really DOES show how 'respectable' you really are ... nice one ... stop thinking that im against you and that im just spilling my 'shit' here - and instead work with me as well as the rest of the community to sort things ... and stop the aggression bensam ... im no genius - but it does not take one to work things out with the whole communities input ... SHEESH! ... in any case ( and more to the point ) - ccminer does not have anything built in - its been conversed many times over previously and in other threads ... it would be nice if it did like sgminer - but its not built that way ... maybe one day some dev will extend it to that ... apparently a batch file in windows consistently crashes on exit also - but that is of no real consequence IF the rotational batch works .. im looking for a working batch ( working by means of others opinions and experience here - i dont use windows ) - because i remember in one of the threads that someone had a WORKING version of the batch for windows ... minercontrol seems to be the one app that is always brought up ... maybe time to test with windows on a couple of machines on the farm and see ... sp - would it be that hard to add a --failover or --load-balance ( like in sgminer ) option to your ( sp-mod) fork? ... #crysx Fellas...fellows..FELLAS!!! Wow,.... Gentlemen! Everyone...OFF the high horse and down to biz. Stop the 'bitch-fest' and let's try to find a solution. Can we? So far, and no complaints about previous attempts, a solution has NOT been found. We all are aware of that. A once in a while, isn't a fix. Heads together...let's find a way! Thank You |
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
May 12, 2015, 06:20:27 AM |
|
Release 50 is hashing fine with few rejects at yaamp. Just let the miner run for a while and the rejects are gone. In the beginning of the hashing, the difficulty is low, and the pool will try to find the correct extranonce size and difficulty. When a extranounce is reset, or the difficulty is changed, the minersoftware needs to reset all the work, and not submitt results. I will add another switch to fix this. "Don't submit shares after disconnect or extranonce change." Similar to the switch in sgminer.  |
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
May 12, 2015, 06:39:16 AM |
|
There was a bug in the hashrate NIST5 in some of the .4x versions. But It is fixed in release 50.
Nist5 haven't been profitable for a long time, but now new coins have made this algo very profitable on NVIDIA with the latest SP-mod.
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
May 12, 2015, 06:40:34 AM |
|
This is a deviation from the Stratum specification and should be fixed poolside - diff changes are to be enforced on the next work message sent where the cleanjobs parameter is true.
Pools don't always follow protocol. |
|
|
|
d3former
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 48
Merit: 0
|
|
May 12, 2015, 06:44:46 AM |
|
There was a bug in the hashrate NIST5 in some of the .4x versions. But It is fixed in release 50.
Nist5 haven't been profitable for a long time, but now new coins have made this algo very profitable on NVIDIA with the latest SP-mod.
Great news |
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
May 12, 2015, 06:59:19 AM |
|
There was a bug in the hashrate NIST5 in some of the .4x versions. But It is fixed in release 50.
Nist5 haven't been profitable for a long time, but now new coins have made this algo very profitable on NVIDIA with the latest SP-mod.
Great news A NVIDIA gtx 970 should be around 100% faster than a AMD 280x when mining nist5 opensource ccminer(sp-mod release 50) vs opensource sgminer(5.1.1). |
|
|
|
|
CapnBDL
|
|
May 12, 2015, 07:02:22 AM |
|
This is a deviation from the Stratum specification and should be fixed poolside - diff changes are to be enforced on the next work message sent where the cleanjobs parameter is true.
Pools don't always follow protocol. Then they can get fucked. Chuckle...love it!! |
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
|
May 12, 2015, 07:07:32 AM |
|
@ bensam1231 In your bat file... if westhash goes down then nicehash takes over... but if nicehash then goes down does it go back to westhash? thx
ccminer.exe -q -a quark -o stratum+tcp://stratum.westhash.com:3345 -u -p x -o stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:3345 -u -p x
Yes, it's failover. When westhash comes back up it should switch back to it, unless failover in ccminer is different from sgminer. i thought ccminer had no form of failover bensam? ... in fact - ive tested your setup - and it seems ccminer only picks up the second pool that you input and mines there only ... sgminer has failover builtin ... we have both running in the farm - and only sgminer drops to failover when the pool drops ... miner control or other packages ( all windows which we cant use here due to linux - as far as i know anyway ) are the ones that do that 'for' ccminer ... would be nice if it was built in ... #crysx You didn't notice that till other people pointed it out, good catch on that one after the fact bro. Quit being a douche and move on already. I let you get the last word in and you went out of your way to do this again. You don't want to ruin the thread, don't start shit. Me not responding to your earlier 'spiel' and then you going 'oh I'm good enough to not say anything else' right after you did was not you winning. It was me being the respectable person and setting things down and moving on, because I actually care if this devolves into a two-three page long bitch fest. Don't assume a lack of a response is submission, rather restraint and self control. Exactly what you were preaching, but couldn't practice. In the batchfile I gave I had MM pools in front of the westhash pool and it fell over to the westhash pool, I didn't check to see if it picked up the MM pools after they cameback up. As per other people, apparently it wont swap back to other pools when they come up (although one person said it does on occasion). As I said I thought it was the same as sgminer, but it might be different. bensam ... i wake up and go through each post as i read them ... then i post ... i dont read the WHOLE thread then go back ... too much time wasted ... douchebag? ... well - i certainly dont go out of my way to do anything of the like to become something like that ... i realized after reading the rest that i had posted a little too early ... my mistake bensam - i didnt mean to offend you ... it was more constructive that it was an attack - as you so clearly took it ... so once again - my apologies ... im not here to attck anyone - just to be as constructive as i can ... you're aggression is uncalled for and certainly not welcome - but i wont take offense ... ill put my tail between my legs and take it on the chin ... there is no opposition on my part - nor am i trying to provoke ... as for you 'letting' me get the 'last word' in - geez tanx ... im appreciative of that ... :| it really DOES show how 'respectable' you really are ... nice one ... stop thinking that im against you and that im just spilling my 'shit' here - and instead work with me as well as the rest of the community to sort things ... and stop the aggression bensam ... im no genius - but it does not take one to work things out with the whole communities input ... SHEESH! ... in any case ( and more to the point ) - ccminer does not have anything built in - its been conversed many times over previously and in other threads ... it would be nice if it did like sgminer - but its not built that way ... maybe one day some dev will extend it to that ... apparently a batch file in windows consistently crashes on exit also - but that is of no real consequence IF the rotational batch works .. im looking for a working batch ( working by means of others opinions and experience here - i dont use windows ) - because i remember in one of the threads that someone had a WORKING version of the batch for windows ... minercontrol seems to be the one app that is always brought up ... maybe time to test with windows on a couple of machines on the farm and see ... sp - would it be that hard to add a --failover or --load-balance ( like in sgminer ) option to your ( sp-mod) fork? ... #crysx Fellas...fellows..FELLAS!!! Wow,.... Gentlemen! Everyone...OFF the high horse and down to biz. Stop the 'bitch-fest' and let's try to find a solution. Can we? So far, and no complaints about previous attempts, a solution has NOT been found. We all are aware of that. A once in a while, isn't a fix. Heads together...let's find a way! Thank You well aware of that mate ... and really - my history here would show you that im not about slanging matches ... just couldnt keep my big mouth shut this time ... so all is good on my end ... ill setup a few machines that are windows when i can find the time ... probably next week - to play around with the switching issue ... linux is in the same boat - but skunks / scryptr's script look very promising in this area ... tanx ... #crysx |
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
|
May 12, 2015, 07:21:17 AM |
|
This is a deviation from the Stratum specification and should be fixed poolside - diff changes are to be enforced on the next work message sent where the cleanjobs parameter is true.
Pools don't always follow protocol. Then they can get fucked. hehehe ... that fixes that ...  ... #crysx |
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
|
May 12, 2015, 07:24:35 AM |
|
btw - fyi sp ...
when the miners are going through another pool - like the farm at the moment through minsty - once you point the workers to yaamp or westhash / nicehash - ALL the hash disappears on the pools your are targeting ( ie - yaamp and westhash show NO hashrate ) BUT the miner shows accepted shares with almost NO rejects ...
strange ...
#crysx
|
|
|
|
swaghard
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
|
|
May 12, 2015, 07:33:35 AM |
|
Joes There was a bug in the hashrate NIST5 in some of the .4x versions. But It is fixed in release 50.
Nist5 haven't been profitable for a long time, but now new coins have made this algo very profitable on NVIDIA with the latest SP-mod.
Great news A NVIDIA gtx 970 should be around 100% faster than a AMD 280x when mining nist5 opensource ccminer(sp-mod release 50) vs opensource sgminer(5.1.1). updating! |
|
|
|
|
|
sambiohazard
|
|
May 12, 2015, 07:50:00 AM |
|
@crysx its good to know that pools are aware of the problem & working on it. I am now done donating to sp_, once again thanks so much man. For next 24 hours i will be mining for http://fullnode.coFeel free to donate to them. Regards Sam |
|
|
|
|
sp_ (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
|
|
May 12, 2015, 08:02:51 AM |
|
Thanks for your donation.
|
|
|
|
chrysophylax
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
|
|
May 12, 2015, 08:23:46 AM |
|
@crysx its good to know that pools are aware of the problem & working on it. I am now done donating to sp_, once again thanks so much man. For next 24 hours i will be mining for http://fullnode.coFeel free to donate to them. Regards Sam never knew this group existed ... will have a look at it now ... tanx mate ... #crysx |
|
|
|
|
