is there a changelog for mining proxy somewhere? 1.0.0 the latest version?
https://github.com/slush0/stratum-mining-proxy/commits/master
But as I said, don't use proxy 1.0 + latest cgminer right now.
Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 880. (Read 4382653 times)
October 08, 2012, 06:40:56 PM
https://github.com/slush0/stratum-mining-proxy/commits/master
But as I said, don't use proxy 1.0 + latest cgminer right now.
October 08, 2012, 06:39:02 PM
i'm using bfgminer 2.8.2 , ah only source available
October 08, 2012, 06:34:38 PM
is there a changelog for mining proxy somewhere? 1.0.0 the latest version?
https://github.com/slush0/stratum-mining-proxy/commits/master
But as I said, don't use proxy 1.0 + latest cgminer right now.
October 08, 2012, 06:21:48 PM
is there a changelog for mining proxy somewhere? 1.0.0 the latest version?
October 08, 2012, 06:17:59 PM
If somebody is using latest stratum proxy (git sources/1.0.0) together with latest cgminer (2.8.1), please check your miners. They most likely crashed during recent pool restart. I'm working on bugfix right now, should be available on github in few minutes.
October 08, 2012, 06:14:11 PM
I just finished database maintenance and some code optimizations. I had to restart pool application so I'm sorry for bunch of rejected shares. However problems in reward calculations should be fixed now.
October 08, 2012, 03:19:43 PM
CGminer 2.8.0 with native Stratum support has been released today, but please DO NOT UPDATE. There's serious bug inside, hopefully it will be resolved soon in next release.
This is resolved now in 2.8.1. 
October 08, 2012, 02:48:38 PM
I got a reward considerably lower than normal (roughly half) on block 202299 after 2 hours+ full steam hashing. It did not correct in your update, was it supposed to be that low or is possible there was another lockup or event that caused it?
Unfortunately there's no way how to recalculate already confirmed rounds, because these rewards has been already paid out. For now I cannot say if your lower reward for 202299 was the same issue like hour ago, but I'm optimizing some code to prevent current issue to happen next time.
Not a problem - thanks for being on top of this!
October 08, 2012, 02:42:55 PM
Thanks for the quick response slush. One of the reasons why I will never leave your pool...
+1
October 08, 2012, 02:25:04 PM
I got a reward considerably lower than normal (roughly half) on block 202299 after 2 hours+ full steam hashing. It did not correct in your update, was it supposed to be that low or is possible there was another lockup or event that caused it?
Unfortunately there's no way how to recalculate already confirmed rounds, because these rewards has been already paid out. For now I cannot say if your lower reward for 202299 was the same issue like hour ago, but I'm optimizing some code to prevent current issue to happen next time.
October 08, 2012, 02:05:47 PM
There was lockup in database, I recalculated rewards and it should be fine now. Now I'm watching logs for some indices what happen.
I got a reward considerably lower than normal (roughly half) on block 202299 after 2 hours+ full steam hashing. It did not correct in your update, was it supposed to be that low or is possible there was another lockup or event that caused it?
RoboCoder
October 08, 2012, 01:59:16 PM
Thanks for the quick response slush. One of the reasons why I will never leave your pool...
October 08, 2012, 01:42:56 PM
However I strongly recommend to switch back to Stratum, it has nothing with protocol.
October 08, 2012, 01:42:11 PM
There was lockup in database, I recalculated rewards and it should be fine now. Now I'm watching logs for some indices what happen.
October 08, 2012, 01:40:50 PM
> dietwice, how do you remove the comments in the extra fields in the worker stats?
Take the Greasemonkey script from the 1st message of this thread.
Take the Greasemonkey script from the 1st message of this thread.
October 08, 2012, 01:38:08 PM
dietwice, how do you remove the comments in the extra fields in the worker stats?
October 08, 2012, 01:36:24 PM
Looks like the estimated reward is back on track...
:EDIT:
and the reward for block 202383 is fixed too.
:EDIT:
and the reward for block 202383 is fixed too.
October 08, 2012, 01:34:04 PM
Slush is on it peeps...
October 08, 2012, 01:27:36 PM
Getting something strange...
I have a stable total hashrate being a bit more than 4 GH/s and almost stable block payout about 0.10 BTC.
But the 14206th block payout suddenly dropped to ~0.02
Next one was normal so I left it to network problems.
But now I'm observing a zero-like estimated reward whilst all others pool and my rig parameters are stable and fits theirs default ranges.
Please see below the screenshot - split into 2 parts just for not wasting space and being easy to read.
The estimate reward
http://pix.rulezz.com.ua/some/Untitled-9.png
Workers' stats
http://pix.rulezz.com.ua/some/Untitled-10.png
I wonder if it can be an issue of scoring algorithm?
Edit: Ok, all are already aware of an issue.
Hope it'll be resolved quickly and easily, as Slush always has logs of everything
Edit 2: Looks like it is fixed
I have a stable total hashrate being a bit more than 4 GH/s and almost stable block payout about 0.10 BTC.
But the 14206th block payout suddenly dropped to ~0.02
Next one was normal so I left it to network problems.
But now I'm observing a zero-like estimated reward whilst all others pool and my rig parameters are stable and fits theirs default ranges.
Please see below the screenshot - split into 2 parts just for not wasting space and being easy to read.
The estimate reward
http://pix.rulezz.com.ua/some/Untitled-9.png
Workers' stats
http://pix.rulezz.com.ua/some/Untitled-10.png
I wonder if it can be an issue of scoring algorithm?
Edit: Ok, all are already aware of an issue.
Hope it'll be resolved quickly and easily, as Slush always has logs of everything
Edit 2: Looks like it is fixed
October 08, 2012, 01:24:01 PM
Just switched back to pre-statum version and current shares seem to be updating fine but estimate is not. Block 202383 seems to be not calculated correctly.
Jump to: