Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 09:00:22 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   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 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][LTC][Pool][PPLNS][STRATUM] - ltc.kattare.com - burnside's Mining Pool  (Read 110282 times)
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile
March 11, 2013, 09:36:10 PM
 #401

I'm sorry but I had to move to litecoinpool.org until you can figure out what is wrong. Sad I don't like switching teams in the middle of the game but the 40% average stale rate is killing me. I get <1% there.

Come to ltcmine.ru and get 0.27% stales, that's what I'm getting right now.  Grin

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
1480971622
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480971622

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480971622
Reply with quote  #2

1480971622
Report to moderator
1480971622
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480971622

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480971622
Reply with quote  #2

1480971622
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Bogart
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
March 11, 2013, 09:43:11 PM
 #402

I'm sorry but I had to move to litecoinpool.org until you can figure out what is wrong. Sad I don't like switching teams in the middle of the game but the 40% average stale rate is killing me. I get <1% there.

Just did the same.  So far I'm getting maybe 3-4% stales on my well-connected workers, and 6-10% on my bad-internet ones.

Sure beats 40%.

I'd come back if the situation changes.

"All safe deposit boxes in banks or financial institutions have been sealed... and may only be opened in the presence of an agent of the I.R.S." - President F.D. Roosevelt, 1933
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile
March 11, 2013, 09:47:12 PM
 #403

Yeah, I switched about 3 months ago.  I know burnside works really hard to keep the place running, but he needs to implement stratum and vardiff at this point because he can't compete with the larger pools. Sad  It will be more beneficial to him in the end to use stratum anyhow, more miners, more blocks, more fees for him (if he had vardiff and stratum at 1.5% fees PPLNS I'd be back in an instant).

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
burnside
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile WWW
March 12, 2013, 01:26:24 AM
 #404

Yeah, I switched about 3 months ago.  I know burnside works really hard to keep the place running, but he needs to implement stratum and vardiff at this point because he can't compete with the larger pools. Sad  It will be more beneficial to him in the end to use stratum anyhow, more miners, more blocks, more fees for him (if he had vardiff and stratum at 1.5% fees PPLNS I'd be back in an instant).

I'd love to get stratum going.  I was playing with the stratum-mining-proxy, got it all installed and running, did the ./mining-proxy.py --help and realized that it's for connecting getwork (old skool) miners to a stratum pool.  Cripes.  I need an scrypt version of stratum-mining.  Wink

Anyone aware of any LTC mining pool software that can do stratum?

I'm not a Coinbase fan -- I placed a buy order, they took the funds out of my account, then a week later the price went up and they canceled the buy and closed my account.  You've been warned.  Use a different exchange.
baggyp
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 12, 2013, 01:50:29 AM
 #405

https://github.com/CryptoManiac/stratum-mining-proxy  ??
burnside
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile WWW
March 12, 2013, 05:29:59 AM
 #406


Is not what you think it is.

It's for legacy mining software to be able to connect to a stratum pool.   Wink

I'm not a Coinbase fan -- I placed a buy order, they took the funds out of my account, then a week later the price went up and they canceled the buy and closed my account.  You've been warned.  Use a different exchange.
butjust41day
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 132


View Profile
March 12, 2013, 03:36:51 PM
 #407

Hello Burnside

Hopefully this information is helpful.

Something I've noticed is that most of the rejected shares I receive on your pool are not stales as everyone seems to be claiming. They may be listed as round stales under My Stats; but they are not. I have 4 rigs and I run both cgminer and bfgminer. When running on your pool all four rigs are seeing an increased unknown work rejection. I have tried running theses rigs on several different pools and never see this error. On your pool my unknown work rejects have hit as high as 25 percent in a round.

I don't claim to be knowlegable of any of these systems and software; but, I am a capable troubleshooter in my day job. As a trouble shooter I try to break problems down into sections to solve them. The fact that my rigs work else where eliminates one of the sections and puts the problem at your end.

Dividing your end into two sections to start:

1- Your server is sending my rigs work that is not legitamate work. My miner solves and sends the work back and it is rejected as unknown work as it should be. It shows up as a stale under My Stats and is rejected.

or

2- The work your server sends is legitimate work. My end solves correctly and sends in the work. Your server rejects this legitimate work. Maybe its the DDos filters. Maybe some other error. It shows up as a stale under My Stats and is rejected.

I hope the above information somehow points you in the right direction. If it was legitimate stales it wouldn't be much of an issue. I'm running on a  Stratum pool right now and get some stales there too. Spending time working on Stratum when the problem may lay elsewhere will gain very little for the time being. I'm looking forward to this problem being solved. I like the excellent work you've put into your pool.
Zedster
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
March 12, 2013, 04:56:18 PM
 #408

Yeah, I switched about 3 months ago.  I know burnside works really hard to keep the place running, but he needs to implement stratum and vardiff at this point because he can't compete with the larger pools. Sad  It will be more beneficial to him in the end to use stratum anyhow, more miners, more blocks, more fees for him (if he had vardiff and stratum at 1.5% fees PPLNS I'd be back in an instant).

I'd love to get stratum going.  I was playing with the stratum-mining-proxy, got it all installed and running, did the ./mining-proxy.py --help and realized that it's for connecting getwork (old skool) miners to a stratum pool.  Cripes.  I need an scrypt version of stratum-mining.  Wink

Anyone aware of any LTC mining pool software that can do stratum?

I don't know if this helps but Coinotron uses stratum on his LTC pool.  Ask them maybe?

burnside
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile WWW
March 12, 2013, 07:09:52 PM
 #409

Hello Burnside

Hopefully this information is helpful.

Something I've noticed is that most of the rejected shares I receive on your pool are not stales as everyone seems to be claiming. They may be listed as round stales under My Stats; but they are not. I have 4 rigs and I run both cgminer and bfgminer. When running on your pool all four rigs are seeing an increased unknown work rejection. I have tried running theses rigs on several different pools and never see this error. On your pool my unknown work rejects have hit as high as 25 percent in a round.

I don't claim to be knowlegable of any of these systems and software; but, I am a capable troubleshooter in my day job. As a trouble shooter I try to break problems down into sections to solve them. The fact that my rigs work else where eliminates one of the sections and puts the problem at your end.

Dividing your end into two sections to start:

1- Your server is sending my rigs work that is not legitamate work. My miner solves and sends the work back and it is rejected as unknown work as it should be. It shows up as a stale under My Stats and is rejected.

or

2- The work your server sends is legitimate work. My end solves correctly and sends in the work. Your server rejects this legitimate work. Maybe its the DDos filters. Maybe some other error. It shows up as a stale under My Stats and is rejected.

I hope the above information somehow points you in the right direction. If it was legitimate stales it wouldn't be much of an issue. I'm running on a  Stratum pool right now and get some stales there too. Spending time working on Stratum when the problem may lay elsewhere will gain very little for the time being. I'm looking forward to this problem being solved. I like the excellent work you've put into your pool.

Thank you for that, it got me thinking about the block boundary issues we've seen in the past and I realized that the litecoind process that is supposed to send a HUP to pushpool might only be reading the PID file at startup.

I restarted litecoind, which caused it to re-read the PID file, and the stales have dropped significantly now.  I thought it would just pick up changes to the PID file as they occur.  So now I know that anytime pushpoold is restarted... I have to also restart litecoind.  At least until I can alter the custom patch to re-read it on each block boundary.

We still have other issues.  Now that I've found this one I need to set the difficulty back where it was.  I'd changed the difficulty thinking it'd help matters, but I think in reality it made them a percent or two worse than they were before.

The other thing I can do is I can change the values around for how long work is considered current.  Right now you only get two minutes from the time you get the work to when you submit it.  If I make that 3-5 minutes then some of the cpu miners will probably see lower stales.

Cheers.



I'm not a Coinbase fan -- I placed a buy order, they took the funds out of my account, then a week later the price went up and they canceled the buy and closed my account.  You've been warned.  Use a different exchange.
baggyp
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 12, 2013, 07:17:40 PM
 #410

great work guys. glad to see some progress! I loved mining at your pool and I look forward to returning!

That said. 83 difficulty in 3333min? WHAT IN THE SEVEN HELLZ!

We need FPGA. Power is quickly drawing closer to profit :\
butjust41day
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 132


View Profile
March 12, 2013, 08:24:01 PM
 #411

Glad to be able to help.

I'm working right now but will check things out at my end this evening. I'll watch for a while and see if the problem is still there. One more thing that I didn't mention was that the error seems almost random. It's not always at the end of a round. Sometimes I'll get 10 to 40 rejects in a row all saying unknown work. Then right back to accepted shares.

I wish I was more knowledgeable about this so I could be more help on my end. I think bgminer might come with a logging option. If it does I'll try and record something for you.
burnside
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile WWW
March 12, 2013, 08:36:48 PM
 #412

Glad to be able to help.

I'm working right now but will check things out at my end this evening. I'll watch for a while and see if the problem is still there. One more thing that I didn't mention was that the error seems almost random. It's not always at the end of a round. Sometimes I'll get it 10 to 40 rejects in a row all saying unknown work. Then right back to accepted shares.

I wish I was more knowledgeable about this so I could be more help on my end. I think bgminer might come with a logging option. If it does I'll try and record something for you.

You're definitely right, there is another ongoing issue.  That is that pushpool gets overloaded periodically.  (a few seconds every few minutes.)  I've expanded file descriptors and every single restriction I can think of to work around this, but have been unsuccessful.

So, unable to expand pushpool I ended up spinning up two pushpools and load balance them using nginx.  I made that change ~6 months ago.  Now we're back to one pushpool or the other getting overloaded periodically, and with the load balancing what happens is the overloaded pushpool gets removed from the balancing and you get sent to the pushpool that is still answering.  If you're making a request to submit work, and that work came from the other pushpool, then the current pushpool doesn't recognize it and it gets flagged as invalid.

Oddly enough, pushpool has memcache functionality and both pushpools are pointed at the same memcache.  I thought initially this was so that you could run a bunch of them and have them share the work between them, but clearly that is not the case.  I'm not really sure what pushpool is using memcache for.

As you digest all this you're probably wondering why then can't I just add a third pushpool to the balancing.  The problem is that in order to make sure that you always get sent to the same backend pushpool (because of the issue where your work is invalid if you don't) I had to configure the balancing to be by IP address.  And, naturally, since we're behind a DDoS service, 80% of our traffic comes from... the same IP address.  Ugh.  So even with the two pushpools, one takes like 80% of the traffic and I have no way to split it out beyond that.  I need like 3 DDoS services with each one running a pushpool behind 'em.  Wink



I'm not a Coinbase fan -- I placed a buy order, they took the funds out of my account, then a week later the price went up and they canceled the buy and closed my account.  You've been warned.  Use a different exchange.
Tranz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


May the force bit with you.


View Profile
March 13, 2013, 04:08:42 AM
 #413

Network Hash Rate   -2,147.484 GH/s

An Int over run obv. But this is just reporting right?

HBN: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303749.0
hobonickels.info HBN F1TranzWqFGZyFeTMu6iLbtTQgdXuJPsiL
baggyp
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 13, 2013, 05:11:02 AM
 #414

Glad to be able to help.

I'm working right now but will check things out at my end this evening. I'll watch for a while and see if the problem is still there. One more thing that I didn't mention was that the error seems almost random. It's not always at the end of a round. Sometimes I'll get it 10 to 40 rejects in a row all saying unknown work. Then right back to accepted shares.

I wish I was more knowledgeable about this so I could be more help on my end. I think bgminer might come with a logging option. If it does I'll try and record something for you.

You're definitely right, there is another ongoing issue.  That is that pushpool gets overloaded periodically.  (a few seconds every few minutes.)  I've expanded file descriptors and every single restriction I can think of to work around this, but have been unsuccessful.

So, unable to expand pushpool I ended up spinning up two pushpools and load balance them using nginx.  I made that change ~6 months ago.  Now we're back to one pushpool or the other getting overloaded periodically, and with the load balancing what happens is the overloaded pushpool gets removed from the balancing and you get sent to the pushpool that is still answering.  If you're making a request to submit work, and that work came from the other pushpool, then the current pushpool doesn't recognize it and it gets flagged as invalid.

Oddly enough, pushpool has memcache functionality and both pushpools are pointed at the same memcache.  I thought initially this was so that you could run a bunch of them and have them share the work between them, but clearly that is not the case.  I'm not really sure what pushpool is using memcache for.

As you digest all this you're probably wondering why then can't I just add a third pushpool to the balancing.  The problem is that in order to make sure that you always get sent to the same backend pushpool (because of the issue where your work is invalid if you don't) I had to configure the balancing to be by IP address.  And, naturally, since we're behind a DDoS service, 80% of our traffic comes from... the same IP address.  Ugh.  So even with the two pushpools, one takes like 80% of the traffic and I have no way to split it out beyond that.  I need like 3 DDoS services with each one running a pushpool behind 'em.  Wink




fairly new to litecoin, been a bitcoin fanboi since I heard about it right after the crash in '11. I'm no developer so I often just talk out of my ass, but it is in an attempt to lend my problem solving skills to the effort... I just don't always succeed! Smiley

I know CGMiner has a failswitch configuration, you can change it to round robin, etc. Maybe if you had several pools set up behind the ddos and just had people config to round robin between them?
baggyp
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 13, 2013, 05:14:28 AM
 #415

Also, this is for bitcoin, so I'm not sure how much work it would take to implement it into scrypt mining, but here:

http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stratum-mining
https://github.com/slush0/stratum-mining
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17zHy1SUlhgtCMbypO8cHgpWH73V5iUQKk_0rWvMqSNs/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1
https://github.com/slush0/stratum
http://webchat.freenode.net/?randomnick=0&channels=#stratum&prompt=1
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55842
burnside
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile WWW
March 13, 2013, 05:37:15 AM
 #416

Network Hash Rate   -2,147.484 GH/s

An Int over run obv. But this is just reporting right?

Hah, that's awesome.  Whatever it is, that's how it's coming out of litecoind:

# litecoind getmininginfo
{
    "blocks" : 312928,
    "currentblocksize" : 1225,
    "currentblocktx" : 1,
    "difficulty" : 54.19159781,
    "errors" : "",
    "generate" : false,
    "genproclimit" : -1,
    "hashespersec" : 0,
    "networkhashps" : -2147483648,
    "pooledtx" : 3,
    "testnet" : false
}


I'm not a Coinbase fan -- I placed a buy order, they took the funds out of my account, then a week later the price went up and they canceled the buy and closed my account.  You've been warned.  Use a different exchange.
butjust41day
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 132


View Profile
March 13, 2013, 02:09:32 PM
 #417


You're definitely right, there is another ongoing issue.  That is that pushpool gets overloaded periodically.  (a few seconds every few minutes.)  I've expanded file descriptors and every single restriction I can think of to work around this, but have been unsuccessful.

So, unable to expand pushpool I ended up spinning up two pushpools and load balance them using nginx.  I made that change ~6 months ago.  Now we're back to one pushpool or the other getting overloaded periodically, and with the load balancing what happens is the overloaded pushpool gets removed from the balancing and you get sent to the pushpool that is still answering.  If you're making a request to submit work, and that work came from the other pushpool, then the current pushpool doesn't recognize it and it gets flagged as invalid.

Oddly enough, pushpool has memcache functionality and both pushpools are pointed at the same memcache.  I thought initially this was so that you could run a bunch of them and have them share the work between them, but clearly that is not the case.  I'm not really sure what pushpool is using memcache for.

As you digest all this you're probably wondering why then can't I just add a third pushpool to the balancing.  The problem is that in order to make sure that you always get sent to the same backend pushpool (because of the issue where your work is invalid if you don't) I had to configure the balancing to be by IP address.  And, naturally, since we're behind a DDoS service, 80% of our traffic comes from... the same IP address.  Ugh.  So even with the two pushpools, one takes like 80% of the traffic and I have no way to split it out beyond that.  I need like 3 DDoS services with each one running a pushpool behind 'em.  Wink



Firstly things do seem to be running much smoother this morning.

Thank you for your explanation above. I have to admit I had to read it twice; but, your explanation is very clear. If pushpool keeps a running log of what work it has issued and that log is not being shared in the memcache where is it? Do both running pushpools share a common database where information about each workers contributing shares ect. are maintained? And is the log of work issued also apart of that database? If it was might this be a database issue?

One other thing if the memcache is not for sharing of information of what work has been issued should both pushpools be pointing at the same cache or should they have seperate memory blocks?

Forgive my ignorance here because I really don't know. I've just found in my line of work it's good to bounce ideas off each other and sometimes even a wrong idea triggers a right solution.


Edit: I don't know if this really means much; but, I notice something today when I was monitoring the situation. When I went to the My Stats tab it seemed to hang up. While it was hanging I checked one of my rigs and the unknown work rejects we're happening. I had been running at below 0.5 percent stales up to that point (suddenly I was at 20 percent; although my miner calls them unknown work). The My Stats tab has to access the database to display. Interesting coincidence?
baggyp
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 13, 2013, 10:19:05 PM
 #418

Edit: I don't know if this really means much; but, I notice something today when I was monitoring the situation. When I went to the My Stats tab it seemed to hang up. While it was hanging I checked one of my rigs and the unknown work rejects we're happening. I had been running at below 0.5 percent stales up to that point (suddenly I was at 20 percent; although my miner calls them unknown work). The My Stats tab has to access the database to display. Interesting coincidence?

this seems right to me. perhaps the stats are autoupdating on the page and its causing conflict?
burnside
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882



View Profile WWW
March 14, 2013, 12:54:27 AM
 #419


You're definitely right, there is another ongoing issue.  That is that pushpool gets overloaded periodically.  (a few seconds every few minutes.)  I've expanded file descriptors and every single restriction I can think of to work around this, but have been unsuccessful.

So, unable to expand pushpool I ended up spinning up two pushpools and load balance them using nginx.  I made that change ~6 months ago.  Now we're back to one pushpool or the other getting overloaded periodically, and with the load balancing what happens is the overloaded pushpool gets removed from the balancing and you get sent to the pushpool that is still answering.  If you're making a request to submit work, and that work came from the other pushpool, then the current pushpool doesn't recognize it and it gets flagged as invalid.

Oddly enough, pushpool has memcache functionality and both pushpools are pointed at the same memcache.  I thought initially this was so that you could run a bunch of them and have them share the work between them, but clearly that is not the case.  I'm not really sure what pushpool is using memcache for.

As you digest all this you're probably wondering why then can't I just add a third pushpool to the balancing.  The problem is that in order to make sure that you always get sent to the same backend pushpool (because of the issue where your work is invalid if you don't) I had to configure the balancing to be by IP address.  And, naturally, since we're behind a DDoS service, 80% of our traffic comes from... the same IP address.  Ugh.  So even with the two pushpools, one takes like 80% of the traffic and I have no way to split it out beyond that.  I need like 3 DDoS services with each one running a pushpool behind 'em.  Wink



Firstly things do seem to be running much smoother this morning.

Thank you for your explanation above. I have to admit I had to read it twice; but, your explanation is very clear. If pushpool keeps a running log of what work it has issued and that log is not being shared in the memcache where is it? Do both running pushpools share a common database where information about each workers contributing shares ect. are maintained? And is the log of work issued also apart of that database? If it was might this be a database issue?

One other thing if the memcache is not for sharing of information of what work has been issued should both pushpools be pointing at the same cache or should they have seperate memory blocks?

Forgive my ignorance here because I really don't know. I've just found in my line of work it's good to bounce ideas off each other and sometimes even a wrong idea triggers a right solution.


Edit: I don't know if this really means much; but, I notice something today when I was monitoring the situation. When I went to the My Stats tab it seemed to hang up. While it was hanging I checked one of my rigs and the unknown work rejects we're happening. I had been running at below 0.5 percent stales up to that point (suddenly I was at 20 percent; although my miner calls them unknown work). The My Stats tab has to access the database to display. Interesting coincidence?

The work is stored in pushpool's memory I'm pretty sure.  It's all internal until a share is submitted, then the result of that share (stale or not) plus the username submitting the share is submitted to the db as an insert.  I use insert delayed even, so the db would have to be completely down for it to impact work submissions.  Edit... probably worth noting here too that the db server is a different box.  We have three servers right now, the webserver, db server, and pushpool/litecoind server.

The other possibility though is that there are network issues or rate limiting going on at the DDoS provider level.  Eg, if you can't load the site and the shares delay on submission, then your requests might not even be getting to us.

I'm tempted to just turn off the DDoS protection, but I know as soon as I do we're gonna get caught with our pants down again.  Wink   (for those of you new to LTC, we have been one of the few pools that have been up through most of the DDoS attacks, though it does impact us too.)


I'm not a Coinbase fan -- I placed a buy order, they took the funds out of my account, then a week later the price went up and they canceled the buy and closed my account.  You've been warned.  Use a different exchange.
Internet151
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 174



View Profile
March 15, 2013, 06:54:54 PM
 #420

Right now I have automatic payouts set up on my account. Is there any way to disable the email notifications that come with these payouts?

Also, is there an IRC channel for this pool?
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 »
  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!