Yes, my miners disconnected 50min before block end, and my score probably went down...
But I'm asking what happend for reward for skipped blocks 199709, 199724 my miners worked for those blocks?
Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 884. (Read 4382653 times)
September 21, 2012, 04:10:23 AM
September 21, 2012, 02:55:47 AM
I worked on this long round almost 14h with 19.5 Ghs and I got only 0.00000606 BTC, is that my 3x reward??? 
My reward is usually 0.52 BTC per block.
My reward is usually 0.52 BTC per block.
maxi75, I'm sorry for hear this. But it looks like you had connection issues near the end of that long round. Can you check proxy log for any connection errors?
Although I restarted backends on the old pool, Stratum has been stable all the time. I also see that other running miners got the expected reward for this round, so there no reason to think that your lower reward was caused by any pool issue.
VeeMiner - same for you.
September 21, 2012, 02:49:31 AM
I worked on this long round almost 14h with 19.5 Ghs and I got only 0.00000606 BTC, is that my 3x reward???
My reward is usually 0.52 BTC per block.
Edit: Using stratum.
My reward is usually 0.52 BTC per block.
Edit: Using stratum.
I got my usual reward, it also doesn't look like it's 3x as much as I was supposed to get, but my main miner wasn't running in the night so I guess the score system would make my reward lower...
September 21, 2012, 01:08:07 AM
I worked on this long round almost 14h with 19.5 Ghs and I got only 0.00000606 BTC, is that my 3x reward???
My reward is usually 0.52 BTC per block.
Edit: Using stratum.
My reward is usually 0.52 BTC per block.
Edit: Using stratum.
September 20, 2012, 08:20:16 PM
Users mining for the last super-extra long round has been credited for 3x their standard block reward.
September 20, 2012, 04:44:23 PM
Ok, looks like I found something. One backend didn't restart succesfully on last update and it has been running on older pool source code. All "skipped" blocks were generated by him and I also found some related errors in the log. Backend is now restarted and running on latest pool sources. I'll keep eyes on him, but I expect it will be fine now. Of course I'll add skipped rewards to some following rounds.
September 20, 2012, 04:04:36 PM
I see. Looks like I'm going to have a nice debugging session now. Looks like mysql issue...
September 20, 2012, 01:42:14 PM
Hi slush, I guess there is once again a missed block (199709).
Edit: ... and block 199724 is missing too.
Edit: ... and block 199724 is missing too.
September 20, 2012, 11:37:04 AM
pekv2, I didn't tested it myself, but replacing old binary with new one should work nicely.
Edit: I tested it and it don't work. Newest poclbm has slightly different parameters, so it requires small change in GUIminer...
Edit: I tested it and it don't work. Newest poclbm has slightly different parameters, so it requires small change in GUIminer...
kk, I will leave guiminer as is, and I updated the proxyprogram.
thanks.
September 20, 2012, 11:26:14 AM
pekv2, I didn't tested it myself, but replacing old binary with new one should work nicely.
Could u point me to the right place for a howto do this?
All i see on github is .py files.
September 20, 2012, 11:22:27 AM
pekv2, I didn't tested it myself, but replacing old binary with new one should work nicely.
Edit: I tested it and it don't work. Newest poclbm has slightly different parameters, so it requires small change in GUIminer...
Edit: I tested it and it don't work. Newest poclbm has slightly different parameters, so it requires small change in GUIminer...
September 20, 2012, 11:20:08 AM
K, I will update it.
Also, for this new poclbm, I use guiminer on windows7, can I insert this new poclbm somewhere into a directory of guiminer to have the newest version of poclbm?
Also, for this new poclbm, I use guiminer on windows7, can I insert this new poclbm somewhere into a directory of guiminer to have the newest version of poclbm?
September 20, 2012, 10:07:32 AM
Yes, now poclbm has native (and tested) stratum support... September 20, 2012, 10:04:58 AM
New version of poclbm just released. It fixes one bug with Stratum and I strongly recommend you the update.
No kidding, it even qualified for bold on the news sidebar!
September 20, 2012, 09:55:15 AM
New version of poclbm just released. It fixes one bug with Stratum and I strongly recommend you the update.
September 20, 2012, 09:49:34 AM
Hm, without a proxy log I cannot debug this more. It would be useful if you will be able to store proxy log when this happen next time. Btw I just relased 0.8.2 and I recommend to update the proxy.
September 20, 2012, 09:42:16 AM
Found this, this morning. This is from yesterday.
For about an hour it did this. To big to post an hour of these, it was like 2 or 3 of these a second for an hour + Problems communicating with bitcoin RPC errors.
I couldn't grab anything from the proxymining program as the cmd console only goes so far back.
For about an hour it did this. To big to post an hour of these, it was like 2 or 3 of these a second for an hour + Problems communicating with bitcoin RPC errors.
Code:
2012-09-19 03:14:30: Listener for "Anonymous883.WorkerTwo": localhost:8332 19/09/2012 03:14:30, Unexpected error during authorization
I couldn't grab anything from the proxymining program as the cmd console only goes so far back.
September 20, 2012, 06:25:21 AM
Can you tell us more about the democratic mining you propose? Would that give miners the ability to select which transactions go into a block?
Well, it's just more like a future concept than something what I'm working on right now. The very basic idea is that miners will be able to propose their own merkle trees, so they'll be able to pick transactions, but there are many open questions, mostly about pool performance. It's even not clear if this will have any significant benefits over p2pool (except that you'll be able to propose your own transactions and use PPS rewarding system, which is not possible on P2Pool now). Right now I'm not working on it, I'm more focused to giving a support for miners and miner developers for current Stratum specification, because it has huge benefits for pooled mining and it is ready for use right now.
September 20, 2012, 12:00:50 AM
Hi Slush,
Can you tell us more about the democratic mining you propose? Would that give miners the ability to select which transactions go into a block?
Re: "I already have some ideas for Stratum mining protocol extension, where miners will be able to suggest their own merkle branch (I call it internally “democratic mining”), which will solve such issues as centralized selection of transactions. For now I decided to focus on such a solution, which will fit to majority of miners and do some extensions later."
Thanks!
Can you tell us more about the democratic mining you propose? Would that give miners the ability to select which transactions go into a block?
Re: "I already have some ideas for Stratum mining protocol extension, where miners will be able to suggest their own merkle branch (I call it internally “democratic mining”), which will solve such issues as centralized selection of transactions. For now I decided to focus on such a solution, which will fit to majority of miners and do some extensions later."
Thanks!
September 19, 2012, 12:57:30 PM
digital, please PM me with some logs if you'll see such bug again. I understand it's quite annoying, but I need some log or error message to debug&fix it.
No problem, I'm happy to help. If it pops up again i'll definitely send you over the logs...
Jump to: