Also playing with the diff10 server. cgminer says it's all OK... stats on the website... not working yet?
Opps! I put the wrong username in! How come it accepeted a wrong username/password?
Topic: [1200 TH] EMC: 0 Fee DGM. Anonymous PPS. US & EU servers. No Registration! - page 72. (Read 499602 times)
August 24, 2012, 01:54:07 PM
Opps! I put the wrong username in! How come it accepeted a wrong username/password?
August 24, 2012, 01:49:36 PM
I'm also having issues, on all 3 servers.
edit: it seems to have been narrowed down to us2.
edit: it seems to have been narrowed down to us2.
August 24, 2012, 01:48:34 PM
Also playing with the diff10 server. cgminer says it's all OK... stats on the website... not working yet?
August 24, 2012, 01:48:11 PM
August 24, 2012, 01:45:48 PM
On what server?
August 24, 2012, 01:43:11 PM
I'm still getting service on and off :/
August 24, 2012, 12:45:13 PM
Oh, also, the emails are not diff10 aware, so they are not sending back the right hashrate. They are doing a simple shares submitted / total shares calculation type of thing.
I will try to get that fixed asap.
I will try to get that fixed asap.
August 24, 2012, 12:13:19 PM
I just kicked the servers.. .specifically US1 was behaving poorly, it should be working now.
The DC last night was suppose to deploy two more servers, but they are still not available to me. They are suppose to be available today, and as soon as they are, I will move US2 and US3 over to those servers to lessen the load on everything, including the network.
With regards to 1diff and 10diff, no, only one server accepts one type of difficulty share, so you can't send a share from diff10.eclipsemc.com to us3.eclipsemc.com for example, it would just be rejected (and vice versa).
LazyOtto - let me get the new server(s) online and I will be curious as to see if the problem fixes itself. The servers are pretty overloaded at the moment, but they should be relieved of the stress by the end of the day.
The DC last night was suppose to deploy two more servers, but they are still not available to me. They are suppose to be available today, and as soon as they are, I will move US2 and US3 over to those servers to lessen the load on everything, including the network.
With regards to 1diff and 10diff, no, only one server accepts one type of difficulty share, so you can't send a share from diff10.eclipsemc.com to us3.eclipsemc.com for example, it would just be rejected (and vice versa).
LazyOtto - let me get the new server(s) online and I will be curious as to see if the problem fixes itself. The servers are pretty overloaded at the moment, but they should be relieved of the stress by the end of the day.
August 24, 2012, 09:30:13 AM
Now to the topic of 'reliability'. 
Glitch in progress.
Time for Inaba to go kick the servers again to solve their constipation.
None of my shares shown as submitted by the web server for a while and the top level GH/s rating for all three servers has plummeted.
Glitch in progress.
Time for Inaba to go kick the servers again to solve their constipation.
None of my shares shown as submitted by the web server for a while and the top level GH/s rating for all three servers has plummeted.
August 24, 2012, 09:25:50 AM
Going back to my issue of 'rejects'.
1) I'm using MPBM.
2) Sending tens of thousands of shares to MaxBTC, MPBM report zero to 0.03% rejects. (Similar results previously seen with Ozcoin.)
3) MPBM is currently reporting 6.38%, 5.15% and 1.83%, to Eclipse us1, 2, 3 after about a hundred shares sent to each server
4) The Eclipse "My Workers" page currently shows xxx (0) for all three workers/servers where xxx == total number of shares submitted. I.e., what MPBM is counting as a 'rejected' share EMC is showing as valid.
So, it appears that I'm not seeing a 'true' higher reject rate with EMC than with other pools, but for whatever reason the mining software, MPBM, 'thinks' the pool has rejected shares. Which pretty much never happens on MaxBTC or Ozcoin.
Thoughts?
1) I'm using MPBM.
2) Sending tens of thousands of shares to MaxBTC, MPBM report zero to 0.03% rejects. (Similar results previously seen with Ozcoin.)
3) MPBM is currently reporting 6.38%, 5.15% and 1.83%, to Eclipse us1, 2, 3 after about a hundred shares sent to each server
4) The Eclipse "My Workers" page currently shows xxx (0) for all three workers/servers where xxx == total number of shares submitted. I.e., what MPBM is counting as a 'rejected' share EMC is showing as valid.
So, it appears that I'm not seeing a 'true' higher reject rate with EMC than with other pools, but for whatever reason the mining software, MPBM, 'thinks' the pool has rejected shares. Which pretty much never happens on MaxBTC or Ozcoin.
Thoughts?
August 24, 2012, 08:31:16 AM
Just thought of this now ... but I'm sure you have already ... but just in case ...
Do the diff1 pools accept shares from the diff10 pool?
i.e. is each pool clearly independent handling getwork?
If not, then you need to intercept that, coz someone could mine 10diff and then send 9 out of 10 to 1diff and thus get paid 190% ...
I don't expect that is the case, but thought I should mention it anyway.
Do the diff1 pools accept shares from the diff10 pool?
i.e. is each pool clearly independent handling getwork?
If not, then you need to intercept that, coz someone could mine 10diff and then send 9 out of 10 to 1diff and thus get paid 190% ...
I don't expect that is the case, but thought I should mention it anyway.
August 24, 2012, 07:35:45 AM
The pool seems a bit wonky today. All 3 mining portals (us1, us2 and us3) were experiencing outages intermittently over the last coupla hours.
August 24, 2012, 06:03:34 AM
That all looks about right. Your work utility is about 10 times higher than your utility and variance will be much greater at difficulty 10 which is why it isn't exact. Furthermore your efficiency is at 86% despite the 10x difficulty, which would be about 860% at normal difficulty. All in all you're getting a lot less work from the server since it supports rolltime, and submitting a lot less shares since it's diff10. Assuming the calculations for rewards are correct, this is good news for the server. The efficiency with cgminer will go up the faster the rig is.
Yep, it's looking good as long as the rewards are really correct. Hopefully it's just an issue with the reporting in the email alert.
August 24, 2012, 03:35:08 AM
Usually my 2 cm1's using the hashvoodoo175 bitsteam (very stable) give a combined U rating (cgminer) of 19.1-19.2
So I figured moving to diff10 at best will give me 1.9 and put less pressure on EMC servers, overall it's a win, even if not for me.
I've been mining for a while and it's bouncing between 2.0 and 2.1, so I consider this to be a nice win-win.
So moving to diff10, has given me a nice boost in average hashing power per minute and theoretically diff10 should be less strain on the server than diff1. I won't be trying diff1 on my laptop, It only just manages u rating of 1.
There is no boost in hashing power. Utility has always been proportional to hashrate x luck. If it's high at the moment, that's luck.So I figured moving to diff10 at best will give me 1.9 and put less pressure on EMC servers, overall it's a win, even if not for me.
I've been mining for a while and it's bouncing between 2.0 and 2.1, so I consider this to be a nice win-win.
So moving to diff10, has given me a nice boost in average hashing power per minute and theoretically diff10 should be less strain on the server than diff1. I won't be trying diff1 on my laptop, It only just manages u rating of 1.
If it's just luck that is keeping it there, I must be very lucky.
August 24, 2012, 03:25:15 AM
Usually my 2 cm1's using the hashvoodoo175 bitsteam (very stable) give a combined U rating (cgminer) of 19.1-19.2
So I figured moving to diff10 at best will give me 1.9 and put less pressure on EMC servers, overall it's a win, even if not for me.
I've been mining for a while and it's bouncing between 2.0 and 2.1, so I consider this to be a nice win-win.
So moving to diff10, has given me a nice boost in average hashing power per minute and theoretically diff10 should be less strain on the server than diff1. I won't be trying diff1 on my laptop, It only just manages u rating of 1.
There is no boost in hashing power. Utility has always been proportional to hashrate x luck. If it's high at the moment, that's luck. So I figured moving to diff10 at best will give me 1.9 and put less pressure on EMC servers, overall it's a win, even if not for me.
I've been mining for a while and it's bouncing between 2.0 and 2.1, so I consider this to be a nice win-win.
So moving to diff10, has given me a nice boost in average hashing power per minute and theoretically diff10 should be less strain on the server than diff1. I won't be trying diff1 on my laptop, It only just manages u rating of 1.
August 24, 2012, 03:20:20 AM
If anyone wants to play around with 10Diff shares: diff10.eclipsemc.com port 8337
Give it a shot and see if anything breaks!
Give it a shot and see if anything breaks!
Thought I'd give it a shot.
Usually my 2 cm1's using the hashvoodoo175 bitsteam (very stable) give a combined U rating (cgminer) of 19.1-19.2
So I figured moving to diff10 at best will give me 1.9 and put less pressure on EMC servers, overall it's a win, even if not for me.
I've been mining for a while and it's bouncing between 2.0 and 2.1, so I consider this to be a nice win-win.
So moving to diff10, has given me a nice boost in average hashing power per minute and theoretically diff10 should be less strain on the server than diff1. I won't be trying diff1 on my laptop, It only just manages u rating of 1.
August 24, 2012, 02:51:24 AM
If anyone wants to play around with 10Diff shares: diff10.eclipsemc.com port 8337
Give it a shot and see if anything breaks!
Give it a shot and see if anything breaks!
I'm running two BFL singles with cgminer 2.7.4 on the diff10 server.
Here's what it looks like:
Code:
cgminer version 2.7.4 - Started: [2012-08-24 12:31:53]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):1612.6 (avg):1588.3 Mh/s | Q:225 A:194 R:1 HW:0 E:86% U:1.9/m
TQ: 0 ST: 3 SS: 0 DW: 65 NB: 17 LW: 3719 GF: 12 RF: 0 WU: 21.2
August 24, 2012, 02:20:08 AM
If anyone wants to play around with 10Diff shares: diff10.eclipsemc.com port 8337
Give it a shot and see if anything breaks!
Give it a shot and see if anything breaks!
I'm running two BFL singles with cgminer 2.7.4 on the diff10 server.
Here's what it looks like:
Code:
cgminer version 2.7.4 - Started: [2012-08-24 12:31:53]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):1612.6 (avg):1588.3 Mh/s | Q:225 A:194 R:1 HW:0 E:86% U:1.9/m
TQ: 0 ST: 3 SS: 0 DW: 65 NB: 17 LW: 3719 GF: 12 RF: 0 WU: 21.2
Connected to http://diff10.eclipsemc.com:8337 with LP as user ---
Block: 000002f346b847a618efe61cb84ec75c... Started: [14:10:55]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
BFL 0: 59.0C | 784.8/793.8Mh/s | A:96 R:0 HW:0 U:0.96/m
BFL 1: 60.0C | 784.7/795.2Mh/s | A:98 R:1 HW:0 U:0.98/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2012-08-24 13:59:15] LONGPOLL from pool 0 requested work restart
[2012-08-24 13:59:47] Accepted 0468dc76.6918ba2e BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:00:24] Accepted 0f0995a3.8ec76c34 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:00:30] Accepted 04d4b7d7.7973a973 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:00:46] Accepted 0077c6f6.ad2bb8db BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:01:17] Accepted 130abc3c.026aa08e BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:01:28] Accepted 1901dde8.7314fde0 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:01:31] LONGPOLL from pool 0 detected new block
[2012-08-24 14:01:42] Accepted 18185600.a5114ffc BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:01:47] LONGPOLL from pool 0 requested work restart
[2012-08-24 14:02:34] Accepted 10a1e54c.b7ab1f80 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:03:07] Accepted 1623a516.0dba7514 BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:03:27] Accepted 17117aaa.093518b7 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:03:38] Accepted 1347dc8a.290d97da BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:03:49] Accepted 052b50c6.c2566113 BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:03:54] Accepted 0eb4ffa1.949ade3d BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:03:59] Accepted 160ca666.402eabdc BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:04:05] Accepted 16daadb6.f5bcdf68 BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:04:58] Accepted 0e5583b5.4e51df01 BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:04:58] Accepted 024a9f48.d1b0ae0d BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:06:43] Accepted 10ee5d72.bc3eaf67 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:07:26] Accepted 121a8790.1a258887 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:07:47] LONGPOLL from pool 0 detected new block
[2012-08-24 14:07:47] Pool 0 not providing work fast enough
[2012-08-24 14:07:47] Rejected 015a5884.743a5776 BFL 1 pool 0 (stale-prevblk)
[2012-08-24 14:08:03] LONGPOLL from pool 0 requested work restart
[2012-08-24 14:08:14] Accepted 0e4a1964.b1f04456 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:08:35] Accepted 0828cc24.6575ea7f BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:09:07] Accepted 0a37e90f.7ba1b83b BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:09:12] Accepted 02d8a861.52fa1c47 BFL 1 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:09:39] Accepted 0043451a.7a8acc26 BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:10:10] Accepted 16b32c24.3096b00d BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:10:42] Accepted 05850b2d.e5743430 BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:10:55] LONGPOLL from pool 0 detected new block
[2012-08-24 14:11:07] Accepted 1989b964.e25d4471 BFL 0 pool 0
[2012-08-24 14:11:11] LONGPOLL from pool 0 requested work restart
[2012-08-24 14:11:17] Accepted 03350052.93b582df BFL 0 pool 0
The current speed reported on the Workers page is 1.53 GH/s.
There's something funny about the Solved Block Alert email, though.
Quote
Our helper monkeys have determined that BTC block number 195429 has been solved with 1259740 shares at 2012-08-24 13:46:55.
The overall hashrate for this block was 1878.66 GH/s.
The overall hashrate for this block was 1878.66 GH/s.
Quote
Your overall hashrate for the round was 138.69 MH/s, with 93 shares submitted.
I can't tell if the reward is correct or not. It's a bit less than the previous blocks, but it would take awhile to adjust anyway.
August 24, 2012, 01:39:57 AM
Are email alerts functioning? I haven't received any since the most recent break down.
August 23, 2012, 11:14:48 PM
traceroutes sent via a PM.
I see nothing notable in them.
My testing was done on us1 and us2 using a single BFL single as the hash generator.
As a comparison, I've since done 24,000 shares on MaxBTC with zero rejects.
I see nothing notable in them.
My testing was done on us1 and us2 using a single BFL single as the hash generator.
As a comparison, I've since done 24,000 shares on MaxBTC with zero rejects.
Jump to: