Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 1102. (Read 4382648 times)
February 22, 2011, 09:25:16 AM
Slush was actually very nice in the handling of disabled accounts. I had accumulated about 0.45 BTC and once the blocks are verified, it will be transferred to my account. No one was screwed out of anything, and hopefully once this is all back up and running, we can all generate more BTC.
February 22, 2011, 09:08:45 AM
So you just fucked my out of the the last 5 hours of work my computer was doing.
I'm curious... How did he do that?
February 22, 2011, 08:54:00 AM
I set up send threshold to 0.01 for all blocked accounts, so when your rewards will be confirmed, you receive them into your wallets.
February 22, 2011, 08:46:36 AM
So you just fucked my out of the the last 5 hours of work my computer was doing.
February 22, 2011, 08:28:40 AM
Can I still add workers? Or do I have to substitute an old cpu worker if I manage to get a gpu working?
February 22, 2011, 08:14:06 AM
Thanks to little mistake, registration was accidentaly open for last few hours. I fixed it now and disabled all user accounts registered inside this window. Please understand that server capacity is full for now.
February 21, 2011, 09:58:33 PM
Yikes, the server acting crazy weird right now, just got about 15 of these in the last 10 min.
Because I had to restart main server.
February 21, 2011, 09:55:40 PM
Yikes, the server acting crazy weird right now, just got about 15 of these in the last 10 min.
Code:
21/02/2011 21:49:29, Unexpected error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
21/02/2011 21:49:55, 3052a2a7, accepted
21/02/2011 21:50:23, 950c5d4f, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:50:25, f7f557b1, accepted
21/02/2011 21:50:29, ac1e7026, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:16, e7052a63, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:21, da0487cf, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:22, 9148ba5b, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:26, Unexpected error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 231, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
21/02/2011 21:51:32, ce1775f4, invalid or stale
Unhandled exception (2003, "Can't connect to MySQL server on '127.0.0.1' (111)")
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
21/02/2011 21:49:55, 3052a2a7, accepted
21/02/2011 21:50:23, 950c5d4f, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:50:25, f7f557b1, accepted
21/02/2011 21:50:29, ac1e7026, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:16, e7052a63, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:21, da0487cf, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:22, 9148ba5b, invalid or stale
21/02/2011 21:51:26, Unexpected error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 231, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
21/02/2011 21:51:32, ce1775f4, invalid or stale
Unhandled exception (2003, "Can't connect to MySQL server on '127.0.0.1' (111)")
February 21, 2011, 05:51:49 PM
How does this work with 3 servers
Think i got the new method part
smaller payout but more of them = the same daily profit
Think i got the new method part
smaller payout but more of them = the same daily profit
There is one main server with Nginx reverse proxy on it. Using "upstream" module to handle traffic to more backend pool instances.
February 21, 2011, 04:44:46 PM
Yes your right, but you can change it to whatever you need, all ideas are welcome for next version
February 21, 2011, 04:37:34 PM
February 21, 2011, 04:33:37 PM
How do reboots of your puter, restarts of mining effect ?
You disconnect from the pool. When your computer starts again, you can reconnect. You take the risk of submitting work at the time when the pool finds a block, thereby reducing your payout via the score system.
Thought that was the case
been working on one puter
guess i just take the loss with all the reboots
At least I got it starting on reboots now
February 21, 2011, 04:24:08 PM
How do reboots of your puter, restarts of mining effect ?
You disconnect from the pool. When your computer starts again, you can reconnect. You take the risk of submitting work at the time when the pool finds a block, thereby reducing your payout via the score system.
February 21, 2011, 03:35:13 PM
How do reboots of your puter, restarts of mining effect ?
February 21, 2011, 03:27:32 PM
Any news on when registration will be open again? I have a friend that wants to get in on the action.
When the pushwork will be in production.
February 21, 2011, 03:15:17 PM
Any news on when registration will be open again? I have a friend that wants to get in on the action.
February 21, 2011, 03:08:07 PM
Not sure if this is relevant or important:
I just answered your question in poclbm thread. This is just cosmetic bug of poclbm and is related mainly to today's server upgrade; this should appear much less often in normal pool condition.
February 21, 2011, 03:01:17 PM
Not sure if this is relevant or important:
I am getting intermittent errors while using m0mchil's miner with the pool on win7-64:
Those are both from approximately around the same time, but each one occurred on its own graphics card (I am running 2 nvidia gtx 275 cards). It seems that they occur very chronologically close to one another. Further, it either occurs on only one card, or it happens on both of them, one within a few seconds of the other.
Here is another example, each paste is from a miner running on its own gpu:
I am getting intermittent errors while using m0mchil's miner with the pool on win7-64:
Code:
21/02/2011 13:34:44, Unexpected error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
Code:
21/02/2011 13:34:45, Unexpected error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
Those are both from approximately around the same time, but each one occurred on its own graphics card (I am running 2 nvidia gtx 275 cards). It seems that they occur very chronologically close to one another. Further, it either occurs on only one card, or it happens on both of them, one within a few seconds of the other.
Here is another example, each paste is from a miner running on its own gpu:
Code:
21/02/2011 13:53:46, Unexpected error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
Code:
21/02/2011 13:53:44, Unexpected error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 210, in mine
File "BitcoinMiner.pyc", line 187, in getwork
File "httplib.pyc", line 974, in getresponse
File "httplib.pyc", line 391, in begin
File "httplib.pyc", line 355, in _read_status
BadStatusLine
February 21, 2011, 02:59:00 PM
I mean from a practical view, I think I understand that the push will tell your miner to stop working on a block and get a new piece of work. Will the miners need to be modified to take advantage of the change?
There will be two possibilities how to use push:
a) Use miner which will understand the push protocol
b) Use getwork proxy, small script running on localhost, which will communicate with pool on push protocol and with miner on getwork protocol.
February 21, 2011, 02:50:06 PM
Slush, I'm in UTC -6
Not to add another question for you to answer slush, but how will the push update change things? I mean from a practical view, I think I understand that the push will tell your miner to stop working on a block and get a new piece of work. Will the miners need to be modified to take advantage of the change?
Not to add another question for you to answer slush, but how will the push update change things? I mean from a practical view, I think I understand that the push will tell your miner to stop working on a block and get a new piece of work. Will the miners need to be modified to take advantage of the change?
Jump to: