Topic: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.6.2 (Linux / Windows) - page 40. (Read 224961 times)
February 15, 2018, 03:11:53 PM
Woooohoooo! Hell Yeah DSTM! Will test it out right now.
February 15, 2018, 03:09:10 PM
New Version 0.6
changelog
- failover pool support
- introduce configuration file
- introduce intensity option
- support per gpu temp-target via cfg-file
- support per gpu intensity via cfg-file
- json-rpc report gpu_name, pci_bus_id, pci_device_id
gpu_uuid
- improve error reporting
- improve handling of invalid server resposes
- improve reconnection in cases where servers
become reachable but respond with malformed data
- ui: add colorized output
- web-ui: use dark colors
0.6 contains a huge amount of changes, there are especially quite a lot internal changes - so please test before deploying.
Most notable in this release is failover pool support and the addition of configuration files. You can setup multiple pools in the configuration file. Configured pools are ordered by priority. ZM connects to the highest priority pool which is reachable. If a pool gets unreachable a lower priority pool will be used. ZM reconnects to a higher priority pool automatically if it gets reachable again, accepts your login and responds properly. A bad behaving server (which oscillates between being responsive / unresponsive states) might cause zm to oscillate between the servers - I'll look for ways to improve this in future releases.
There is also a way to reduce the load which is put on the gpu now. It's configured by the intensity option. It takes some time (about 30sec) till it starts reducing the gpu load since it needs to gather performance data first. The intensity option accepts values in the range ]0.0 - 1.0[. A value of 0.5 will roughly put a load of 50%.
0.6 has also some ui changes. It supports colorized terminal output, webui uses dark colors now, since this was requested multiple times.
There are ofc multiple internal improvements all around the place, most notable better handling of invalid data and improved error reporting.
changelog
- failover pool support
- introduce configuration file
- introduce intensity option
- support per gpu temp-target via cfg-file
- support per gpu intensity via cfg-file
- json-rpc report gpu_name, pci_bus_id, pci_device_id
gpu_uuid
- improve error reporting
- improve handling of invalid server resposes
- improve reconnection in cases where servers
become reachable but respond with malformed data
- ui: add colorized output
- web-ui: use dark colors
0.6 contains a huge amount of changes, there are especially quite a lot internal changes - so please test before deploying.
Most notable in this release is failover pool support and the addition of configuration files. You can setup multiple pools in the configuration file. Configured pools are ordered by priority. ZM connects to the highest priority pool which is reachable. If a pool gets unreachable a lower priority pool will be used. ZM reconnects to a higher priority pool automatically if it gets reachable again, accepts your login and responds properly. A bad behaving server (which oscillates between being responsive / unresponsive states) might cause zm to oscillate between the servers - I'll look for ways to improve this in future releases.
There is also a way to reduce the load which is put on the gpu now. It's configured by the intensity option. It takes some time (about 30sec) till it starts reducing the gpu load since it needs to gather performance data first. The intensity option accepts values in the range ]0.0 - 1.0[. A value of 0.5 will roughly put a load of 50%.
0.6 has also some ui changes. It supports colorized terminal output, webui uses dark colors now, since this was requested multiple times.
There are ofc multiple internal improvements all around the place, most notable better handling of invalid data and improved error reporting.
February 15, 2018, 03:07:19 PM
Sorry for not having answered you recent questions - I was very busy working on 0.6. I'll got through them later.
February 15, 2018, 12:29:48 PM
Code:
2036-02-07 07:51:45 AM|# connected to: eu1-zcash.flypool.org:3333
2036-02-07 07:51:46 AM|SSL_connect failed r:2 error:1416F086:SSL routines:tls_process_server_certificate:certificate verify fail
ed
Other rigs are connected, one refuse and I had to reboot rig.
February 15, 2018, 10:57:25 AM
script for miner restart after gpu driver crash pls?
Code:
:start
zm --server hostname --port port_nr --user user_name [--pass password] [options]
ping 127.0.0.1 -n 10 > nul
goto start
Use a ping after the crash to give it a little time to cool off.
February 15, 2018, 09:56:27 AM
script for miner restart after gpu driver crash pls?
February 15, 2018, 09:54:56 AM
is there intensity parameter for gpu? some of my gpu not utilize full, so its a waste. but i couldn't find the parameter in dstm.
February 15, 2018, 09:40:52 AM
hello, how to delete this message please?
Message you posted here or the error in zm?
you cant delete the pop up error message, only you can stop it from happening by reducing your overclock.
Cheers!
February 15, 2018, 07:34:22 AM
hello, how to delete this message please?
February 14, 2018, 12:33:57 PM
Switched my GTX 1060 from dual mining and moved on dstm miner in Nicehash, 634 sol/s for 2 cards of 3 GB memory. Pretty impressive and it is paying more now than dual mining. Well done.
February 14, 2018, 12:31:19 PM
Hello, can we use this miner to mine other Equihash algo coins? For instance ZCL?
Sure you can. 
February 14, 2018, 12:30:33 PM
Hello, can we use this miner to mine other Equihash algo coins? For instance ZCL?
February 14, 2018, 08:33:43 AM
Hi, I try to use --dev option, but it never works for me, can some one give me a sample?
I have tried --dev 0 1 --dev 0,1 , but it doesn't work, it always using all the GPUs.
This command does not work for me, I have 4 GPUs.
zm --server us1-zcash.flypool.org --temp 65 --port 3333 --dev 0 1 --user t1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.wk1
Thanks!
Zder
I have tried --dev 0 1 --dev 0,1 , but it doesn't work, it always using all the GPUs.
This command does not work for me, I have 4 GPUs.
zm --server us1-zcash.flypool.org --temp 65 --port 3333 --dev 0 1 --user t1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.wk1
Thanks!
Zder
February 13, 2018, 11:49:19 PM
The moronic aspect here, which has nothing to do with capitalism, is not which rights the dev or consumer have, but the encouragement of the dev to put up the fees because you can take it (*) ... this is made worse when support for the service provided on a subscription basis is lacking.
(*) Thank god there aren't many believers like you when it comes to politicians and policy makers.
(*) Thank god there aren't many believers like you when it comes to politicians and policy makers.
+1
February 13, 2018, 10:57:25 PM
The moronic aspect here, which has nothing to do with capitalism, is not which rights the dev or consumer have, but the encouragement of the dev to put up the fees because you can take it (*) ... this is made worse when support for the service provided on a subscription basis is lacking.
(*) Thank god there aren't many believers like you when it comes to politicians and policy makers.
(*) Thank god there aren't many believers like you when it comes to politicians and policy makers.
February 13, 2018, 10:41:04 PM
The miner is now so stable and solid, I doubt there is much more that can be done to improve it. That being the case, he should probably increase the fee to say 2.5% as the software is well and truly out of beta. I get hashrates at least 4% better than the nearest competitor so I would accept a higher fee. Can't say I would like it but I wouldn't complain about it as I am a firm supporter of capitalism and fees should be set as high as the market will bear. Can't see any reason why he should lower the fee! Doesn't make any sense at all to do so.
What are you, his brother?
Naah, I'm just a firm believer in capitalism. Greed is good. Greed works! Without greed we would still be living in caves.
February 13, 2018, 10:40:09 PM
The miner is now so stable and solid, I doubt there is much more that can be done to improve it. That being the case, he should probably increase the fee to say 2.5% as the software is well and truly out of beta. I get hashrates at least 4% better than the nearest competitor so I would accept a higher fee. Can't say I would like it but I wouldn't complain about it as I am a firm supporter of capitalism and fees should be set as high as the market will bear. Can't see any reason why he should lower the fee! Doesn't make any sense at all to do so.
quite the opposite. the intent of a dev(eloper) fee is to develop and improve. if there is no more substantial improvements, then the fee should go down not up. we've been told dstm zm 6.0 would be out for a month now. its not here, why would the dev fee go up?
i'm all for projects removing dev fees from miners at this point. you are a moron if you think that a program author has rights to 2% (or more) of your hardware output without any regular updates/performance increases.
The sole purpose of a dev fee is to make the programmer as wealthy as possible. That is the "intent". That's it. It's not a charity or a public service, it's supply of a product for whatever price the seller deems adequate. The user has the sole option to use what is offered or not.
A program author has the absolute right to charge whatever fee he wants. Nobody is forcing anyone to use his software. You only have the right to use it or not use it. Only a "moron" would think they have any right to dictate how much the programmer wishes to charge.
February 13, 2018, 10:36:30 PM
The miner is now so stable and solid, I doubt there is much more that can be done to improve it. That being the case, he should probably increase the fee to say 2.5% as the software is well and truly out of beta. I get hashrates at least 4% better than the nearest competitor so I would accept a higher fee. Can't say I would like it but I wouldn't complain about it as I am a firm supporter of capitalism and fees should be set as high as the market will bear. Can't see any reason why he should lower the fee! Doesn't make any sense at all to do so.
What are you, his brother?
February 13, 2018, 08:47:00 PM
The miner is now so stable and solid, I doubt there is much more that can be done to improve it. That being the case, he should probably increase the fee to say 2.5% as the software is well and truly out of beta. I get hashrates at least 4% better than the nearest competitor so I would accept a higher fee. Can't say I would like it but I wouldn't complain about it as I am a firm supporter of capitalism and fees should be set as high as the market will bear. Can't see any reason why he should lower the fee! Doesn't make any sense at all to do so.
quite the opposite. the intent of a dev(eloper) fee is to develop and improve. if there is no more substantial improvements, then the fee should go down not up. we've been told dstm zm 6.0 would be out for a month now. its not here, why would the dev fee go up?
i'm all for projects removing dev fees from miners at this point. you are a moron if you think that a program author has rights to 2% (or more) of your hardware output without any regular updates/performance increases.
February 13, 2018, 06:00:45 PM
The miner is now so stable and solid, I doubt there is much more that can be done to improve it. That being the case, he should probably increase the fee to say 2.5% as the software is well and truly out of beta. I get hashrates at least 4% better than the nearest competitor so I would accept a higher fee. Can't say I would like it but I wouldn't complain about it as I am a firm supporter of capitalism and fees should be set as high as the market will bear. Can't see any reason why he should lower the fee! Doesn't make any sense at all to do so.
Jump to: