Topic: [ANN][POOL] ZERGPOOL.com - Multialgo, autoexchange, 0.5% fee, 250+ coins - page 3. (Read 57342 times)
September 10, 2022, 09:03:42 AM
Can BTC minimum payout balance be adjusted higher so payout isn't as frequent? What is the max and can we send payout manually after minimum?
September 06, 2022, 11:47:48 AM
UPDATE
1. $YERB enabled for mining at ghostrider, @Yerbas_Endeavor
2. $JGC enabled for mining at ghostrider
3. $KAW added to kawpow algorithm, @kawkawcoin
4. $MTBC added to scrypt for mining, @mateable
5. $ONX added to yespower mining
1. $YERB enabled for mining at ghostrider, @Yerbas_Endeavor
2. $JGC enabled for mining at ghostrider
3. $KAW added to kawpow algorithm, @kawkawcoin
4. $MTBC added to scrypt for mining, @mateable
5. $ONX added to yespower mining
September 06, 2022, 11:46:42 AM
kawpow.na.mine.zergpool.com:3638 (for NEOX) is acting up for few weeks now. Constant time outs, ping between 140-2000ms, stratum errors.
Issues have been resolved
August 28, 2022, 01:06:36 AM
kawpow.na.mine.zergpool.com:3638 (for NEOX) is acting up for few weeks now. Constant time outs, ping between 140-2000ms, stratum errors.
July 17, 2022, 02:08:26 PM
Thanks for detailed debug log. I think I have fixed this issue now on lyra2z. Could you please check it once again from your side now?
I immediately noticed the pool reporting diff = 6, the same as the miner. I'll let it run for a bit to confirm correct targetting.
Will follow up.
Edit: looks good, previously this share would have been rejected for low difficulty:
Code:
[2022-07-17 13:00:25] 15 Submitted Diff 0.024303, Block 2445941, Job 71
[2022-07-17 13:00:25] 15 Accepted 15 S0 R0 B1, 97.131 sec (162ms)
Will the fix solve it for all algos or will each algo need a fix once a problem is identified?
I am in process to analyse which algos were affected, and rolling out bug fix accordingly
July 17, 2022, 12:58:35 PM
Thanks for detailed debug log. I think I have fixed this issue now on lyra2z. Could you please check it once again from your side now?
I immediately noticed the pool reporting diff = 6, the same as the miner. I'll let it run for a bit to confirm correct targetting.
Will follow up.
Edit: looks good, previously this share would have been rejected for low difficulty:
Code:
[2022-07-17 13:00:25] 15 Submitted Diff 0.024303, Block 2445941, Job 71
[2022-07-17 13:00:25] 15 Accepted 15 S0 R0 B1, 97.131 sec (162ms)
Will the fix solve it for all algos or will each algo need a fix once a problem is identified?
July 17, 2022, 12:07:21 PM
July 17, 2022, 03:31:14 AM
Did some checks, findings are that pool has issued new difficulty(increased) after 2 submitted shares, but the miner has not yet processed it, sending another work in 3 seconds after the 2nd. Making it fail again newly anticipated difficulty at stratum server side.
We could confirm if you would be able to run the same miner in debug more, so it prints communication messages(must be JSON format).
And also send a bit of logged events after the Low difficulty share error. (e.g. I assume the next log should be about new stratum difficulty arriving from server)
We could confirm if you would be able to run the same miner in debug more, so it prints communication messages(must be JSON format).
And also send a bit of logged events after the Low difficulty share error. (e.g. I assume the next log should be about new stratum difficulty arriving from server)
Vardiff will change the difficulty based on the share rate. If that occurs the problem goes away. The problem only occurs on lyra2z with stratum diff 6. You can see in
the logs below the mining.set_difficulty specifies 6 but the web page says 6.4. Anything submitted between 6 & 6.4 is rejected. I've seen it with another
algo but I can't recall which one but it was a different difficulty. The problem is rare because it seems to only occur at one difficulty for each affected
algo. I don't know if any more than 2 algos are affected. You also need a hash rate that will cause vardiff to choose the difficulty that has the
problem.
It looks like 6 is the lowest diff for lyra2z, maybe the lowest diff doesn't match in the pool. I let it run for 20 minutes, one more reject, stratum
diff never changed.
Code:
./cpuminer -a lyra2z -o stratum+tcp://mine.zergpool.com:4553 -u XXX -p c27,c=btc,sd=1 -D -P
********** cpuminer-opt 3.19.9 ***********
A CPU miner with multi algo support and optimized for CPUs
with AVX512, SHA and VAES extensions by JayDDee.
BTC donation address: 12tdvfF7KmAsihBXQXynT6E6th2c2pByTT
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-9940X CPU @ 3.30GHz
SW built on Jul 12 2022 with GCC 9.3.0
CPU features: AVX512 AES
SW features: AVX512 AES
Algo features: AVX512
Starting miner with AVX512...
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] CPU affinity [!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] Creating stratum thread
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] Stratum connect stratum+tcp://mine.zergpool.com:4553
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] Threads restarted for new work.
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] Default miner thread priority 0 (nice 19)
* Trying 103.249.70.7:4553...
* TCP_NODELAY set
* Connected to mine.zergpool.com (103.249.70.7) port 4553 (#0)
* Connection #0 to host mine.zergpool.com left intact
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] > {"id": 1, "method": "mining.subscribe", "params": ["cpuminer-opt/3.19.9"]}
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] < {"id":1,"result":[[["mining.set_difficulty","64"],["mining.notify","16a6524c2c668b573c65f6a15f0343c3"]],"8101adb2",4],"error":null}
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] Stratum session id: 16a6524c2c668b573c65f6a15f0343c3
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] Stratum extranonce1 0x8101adb2, extranonce2 size 4
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] > {"id": 2, "method": "mining.authorize", "params": ["XXX", "X"]}
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] < {"id":2,"result":true,"error":null}
[2022-07-17 02:55:59] > {"id": 3, "method": "mining.extranonce.subscribe", "params": []}
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] < {"id":null,"method":"mining.set_difficulty","params":[6]}
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] Stratum connection established
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] < {"id":null,"method":"mining.notify","params":["31672","7210f86e98886f2ad5af03c27207f9d129c41cba4d4c6ba333169d0ec96cc14a","02000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffffffff1f03c64c0d0475b2d36208","7a657267706f6f6c2e636f6d0000000000020000000000000000266a24aa21a9ede2f61c3f71d1defd3fa999dfa36953755c690689799962b48bebd836974e8cf900f902950000000017a91459dd91ee761d256af824aba2229aaa94a3d7b8f58700000000",[],"60000000","1b5bb148","62d3b264",true]}
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] CPU temp: curr 40 C max 0, Freq: 1.200/1.509 GHz
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] Threads restarted for new work.
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] New Stratum Diff 6, Block 871622, Job 31672
Diff: Net 714.73, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 560.00 h/s: Block 173y173d, Share 2d01h
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] < {"id":3,"result":true,"error":null}
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] < {"id":null,"method":"mining.notify","params":["31674","8ff5b9bdb44be5d111d517f3cb9c66210eb05e14a1b0e5f95a19b918b089d3e4","02000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffffffff1f03664c25047db2d36208","7a657267706f6f6c2e636f6d000000000001c0496e0a000000001976a91490df51a56fd5a9fbe7ea3512de486c77c124b57688ac00000000",[],"20000000","1c2142c6","62d3b26c",true]}
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] Threads restarted for new work.
[2022-07-17 02:56:00] New Block 2444390, Net diff 7.6966, Job 31674
Diff: Net 7.6966, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 560.00 h/s: Block 1y1d, Share 2d01h
[2022-07-17 02:56:17] < {"id":null,"method":"mining.notify","params":["31676","6afe57fc8493efe1cc421b15e2cfaab91ddee8b2347ae3810ac159b7564cdc5e","02000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffffffff1f03674c250491b2d36208","7a657267706f6f6c2e636f6d000000000001c0496e0a000000001976a91490df51a56fd5a9fbe7ea3512de486c77c124b57688ac00000000",[],"20000000","1c2147ce","62d3b280",true]}
[2022-07-17 02:56:17] Threads restarted for new work.
[2022-07-17 02:56:17] New Block 2444391, Net diff 7.6921, Job 31676
Diff: Net 7.6921, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 4234.74 kh/s: Block 2h10m, Share 0m23s
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] 1 Submitted Diff 0.097783, Block 2444391, Job 31676
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] > {"method": "mining.submit", "params": ["XXX", "31676", "00000000", "62d3b280", "56eb4b52"], "id":4}
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] Thread 9, Nonce 524beb56, Xnonce2 00000000
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] Data[0:19]: 00000020 fc57fe6a e1ef9384 151b42cc b9aacfe2 b2e8de1d 81e37a34 b759c10a 5edc4c56 822f7b06
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] : c50cbcd9 ffc202b2 ff05298f e0e05a5a 43c98498 2ba8c440 d634cd75 80b2d362 ce47211c 524beb56
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] Hash[7:0]: 0000000a 3a0d1ef1 d767f69a c51fb4fb cdee6a46 244caedf 33e90ce9 a706f2eb
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] Targ[7:0]: 0000002a aaaaaaaa aaaa0000 00000000 ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] < {"id":4,"result":true,"error":null}
[2022-07-17 02:56:18] 1 Accepted 1 S0 R0 B0, 19.309 sec (166ms)
Diff 0.097783, Block 2444391, Job 31676
[2022-07-17 02:56:55] < {"id":null,"method":"mining.notify","params":["31677","231d9a1408114d11262e9cdd2d40e167384310e1d7f013eeffdc0277fb6c1a97","02000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffffffff1f03684c2504b7b2d36208","7a657267706f6f6c2e636f6d000000000001c0496e0a000000001976a91490df51a56fd5a9fbe7ea3512de486c77c124b57688ac00000000",[],"20000000","1c21491c","62d3b2a6",true]}
[2022-07-17 02:56:55] Threads restarted for new work.
[2022-07-17 02:56:55] New Block 2444392, Net diff 7.6909, Job 31677
Diff: Net 7.6909, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 4473.65 kh/s: Block 2h03m, Share 0m22s
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] > {"method": "mining.submit", "params": ["XXX", "31677", "00000000", "62d3b2a6", "a2346f12"], "id":4}
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] 2 Submitted Diff 0.024655, Block 2444392, Job 31677
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] Thread 2, Nonce 126f34a2, Xnonce2 00000000
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] Data[0:19]: 00000020 149a1d23 114d1108 dd9c2e26 67e1402d e1104338 ee13f0d7 7702dcff 971a6cfb ffc9a71a
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] : daa10652 8fda9673 454daeb4 85c82321 cbe29727 4fd90a69 45ba4d67 a6b2d362 1c49211c 126f34a2
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] Hash[7:0]: 00000028 8f1a0b53 00a8cb64 5560440f 7ba90cbe 5cfe280c 3d90646b fe49ecf7
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] Targ[7:0]: 0000002a aaaaaaaa aaaa0000 00000000 ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] < {"id":4,"result":false,"error":[26,"Low difficulty share",null]}
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] 2 A1 S0 Rejected 1 B0, 52.211 sec (164ms)
Diff 0.024655, Block 2444392, Job 31677
[2022-07-17 02:57:10] Reject reason: Low difficulty share
Hash: 000000288f1a0b5300aa000000000000ffffffffffffffff
Target: 0000002aaaaaaaaaaaaa000000000000ffffffffffffffff
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] > {"method": "mining.submit", "params": ["XXX", "31677", "00000000", "62d3b2a6", "15972f80"], "id":4}
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] 3 Submitted Diff 0.039369, Block 2444392, Job 31677
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] Thread 14, Nonce 802f9715, Xnonce2 00000000
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] Data[0:19]: 00000020 149a1d23 114d1108 dd9c2e26 67e1402d e1104338 ee13f0d7 7702dcff 971a6cfb ffc9a71a
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] : daa10652 8fda9673 454daeb4 85c82321 cbe29727 4fd90a69 45ba4d67 a6b2d362 1c49211c 802f9715
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] Hash[7:0]: 00000019 669e5188 dc9b1ce3 445a5404 c26590b4 fcbd197e 12918b98 1ef90dee
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] Targ[7:0]: 0000002a aaaaaaaa aaaa0000 00000000 ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] < {"id":4,"result":true,"error":null}
[2022-07-17 02:57:14] 3 Accepted 2 S0 R1 B0, 3.941 sec (164ms)
Diff 0.039369, Block 2444392, Job 31677
[2022-07-17 02:57:27] > {"method": "mining.submit", "params": ["1FXaRoufZC6LyPzjNrs7wS47tpgzEpBSiw", "31677", "00000000", "62d3b2a6", "f9f14dc0"], "id":4}
July 17, 2022, 02:03:04 AM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
Would like to investigate this issue more, if you could confirm above scenario was done on lyra2z? what miner did you use?
If possible reach me out in discord for more details. (e.g. wallet URL and time frame, so I can search in logs).
Sorry for coming with delay, not checking forum as frequently as other zergpool support channels
Didn't take long to reproduce. No discord, check PM for wallet details. Timezone is UTC-4.
Code:
./cpuminer -a lyra2z -o stratum+tcp://mine.zergpool.com:4553 -u x -p c=btc,sd=6
********** cpuminer-opt 3.19.9 ***********
A CPU miner with multi algo support and optimized for CPUs
with AVX512, SHA and VAES extensions by JayDDee.
BTC donation address: 12tdvfF7KmAsihBXQXynT6E6th2c2pByTT
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-9940X CPU @ 3.30GHz
SW built on Jul 12 2022 with GCC 9.3.0
CPU features: AVX512 AES
SW features: AVX512 AES
Algo features: AVX512
Starting miner with AVX512...
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] CPU affinity [!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] Stratum connect stratum+tcp://mine.zergpool.com:4553
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] 28 of 28 miner threads started using 'lyra2z' algorithm
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] Stratum extranonce1 0x8101aa9f, extranonce2 size 4
[2022-07-16 15:06:02] Stratum connection established
[2022-07-16 15:06:02] CPU temp: curr 43 C max 0, Freq: 1.200/1.201 GHz
[2022-07-16 15:06:02] New Stratum Diff 6, Block 871343, Job 30ed0
Diff: Net 815.85, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 560.00 h/s: Block 198y198d, Share 2d01h
[2022-07-16 15:06:04] New Block 2443568, Net diff 6.4418, Job 30ed2
Diff: Net 6.4418, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 2554.88 kh/s: Block 3h00m, Share 0m39s
[2022-07-16 15:06:45] 1 Submitted Diff 0.040106, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:45] 1 Accepted 1 S0 R0 B0, 43.750 sec (160ms)
[2022-07-16 15:06:54] 2 Submitted Diff 0.025962, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:54] 2 Accepted 2 S0 R0 B0, 9.543 sec (158ms)
[2022-07-16 15:06:57] 3 Submitted Diff 0.024287, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:57] 3 A2 S0 Rejected 1 B0, 2.446 sec (162ms)
Diff 0.024287, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:57] Reject reason: Low difficulty share
Hash: 000000292cbdd9322c0a000000000000ffffffffffffffff
Target: 0000002aaaaaaaaaaaaa000000000000ffffffffffffffff
[2022-07-16 15:07:11] New Work: Block 2443568, Net diff 6.4418, Job 30ed5
Did some checks, findings are that pool has issued new difficulty(increased) after 2 submitted shares, but the miner has not yet processed it, sending another work in 3 seconds after the 2nd. Making it fail again newly anticipated difficulty at stratum server side.
We could confirm if you would be able to run the same miner in debug more, so it prints communication messages(must be JSON format).
And also send a bit of logged events after the Low difficulty share error. (e.g. I assume the next log should be about new stratum difficulty arriving from server)
July 16, 2022, 03:15:06 PM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
Would like to investigate this issue more, if you could confirm above scenario was done on lyra2z? what miner did you use?
If possible reach me out in discord for more details. (e.g. wallet URL and time frame, so I can search in logs).
Sorry for coming with delay, not checking forum as frequently as other zergpool support channels
Didn't take long to reproduce. No discord, check PM for wallet details. Timezone is UTC-4.
Code:
./cpuminer -a lyra2z -o stratum+tcp://mine.zergpool.com:4553 -u x -p c=btc,sd=6
********** cpuminer-opt 3.19.9 ***********
A CPU miner with multi algo support and optimized for CPUs
with AVX512, SHA and VAES extensions by JayDDee.
BTC donation address: 12tdvfF7KmAsihBXQXynT6E6th2c2pByTT
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-9940X CPU @ 3.30GHz
SW built on Jul 12 2022 with GCC 9.3.0
CPU features: AVX512 AES
SW features: AVX512 AES
Algo features: AVX512
Starting miner with AVX512...
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] CPU affinity [!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] Stratum connect stratum+tcp://mine.zergpool.com:4553
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] 28 of 28 miner threads started using 'lyra2z' algorithm
[2022-07-16 15:06:01] Stratum extranonce1 0x8101aa9f, extranonce2 size 4
[2022-07-16 15:06:02] Stratum connection established
[2022-07-16 15:06:02] CPU temp: curr 43 C max 0, Freq: 1.200/1.201 GHz
[2022-07-16 15:06:02] New Stratum Diff 6, Block 871343, Job 30ed0
Diff: Net 815.85, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 560.00 h/s: Block 198y198d, Share 2d01h
[2022-07-16 15:06:04] New Block 2443568, Net diff 6.4418, Job 30ed2
Diff: Net 6.4418, Stratum 6, Target 0.023438
TTF @ 2554.88 kh/s: Block 3h00m, Share 0m39s
[2022-07-16 15:06:45] 1 Submitted Diff 0.040106, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:45] 1 Accepted 1 S0 R0 B0, 43.750 sec (160ms)
[2022-07-16 15:06:54] 2 Submitted Diff 0.025962, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:54] 2 Accepted 2 S0 R0 B0, 9.543 sec (158ms)
[2022-07-16 15:06:57] 3 Submitted Diff 0.024287, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:57] 3 A2 S0 Rejected 1 B0, 2.446 sec (162ms)
Diff 0.024287, Block 2443568, Job 30ed2
[2022-07-16 15:06:57] Reject reason: Low difficulty share
Hash: 000000292cbdd9322c0a000000000000ffffffffffffffff
Target: 0000002aaaaaaaaaaaaa000000000000ffffffffffffffff
[2022-07-16 15:07:11] New Work: Block 2443568, Net diff 6.4418, Job 30ed5
July 16, 2022, 08:45:13 AM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
Would like to investigate this issue more, if you could confirm above scenario was done on lyra2z? what miner did you use?
If possible reach me out in discord for more details. (e.g. wallet URL and time frame, so I can search in logs).
Sorry for coming with delay, not checking forum as frequently as other zergpool support channels
June 04, 2022, 06:49:50 AM
That's ll fine and good but the pool should be using the same difficulty it tells the miner to use.
May 31, 2022, 10:38:11 PM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
You're setting sd=8 correctly, but a lower difficulty, sd=6 fails. That looks to me that is related to the limit the pool has on this number.
Quote from: zergpool.com
sd=
You may want to use it in case of more powerful hardware so your miners bypass low starting difficulty provided by pool with first connection.
Or you may want to use it in case of less modern hardware so your miners get low difficulty job to work on from the start.(minimum start diff can be 20x smaller than default).
Use sd= to set starting difficulty setting for you miner. It will get adjusted during your mining to most appropriate value based on your hardware power.
You may want to use it in case of more powerful hardware so your miners bypass low starting difficulty provided by pool with first connection.
Or you may want to use it in case of less modern hardware so your miners get low difficulty job to work on from the start.(minimum start diff can be 20x smaller than default).
Use sd= to set starting difficulty setting for you miner. It will get adjusted during your mining to most appropriate value based on your hardware power.
Notice that the minimum sd has to be 20x less than default. My guess is that sd=6 is lower than this, but 8 is fine.
May 31, 2022, 11:05:34 AM
new version with very realistic data earnings
https://github.com/smilodon76/RXOS-amdOS-zergpool
https://github.com/smilodon76/RXOS-amdOS-zergpool
May 18, 2022, 05:57:02 AM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
I noticed this problem 6 months ago, but i thought this is normal. Pool did not response to the sd=* argument. So now i know it is not normal - i hope we get an information about that.
May 17, 2022, 02:29:34 PM
I have noticed on some occasions that the pool stratum difficulty doesn't match the miner.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
It seems to only happen for certain algos and certain difficulties.
I'm seeing it right now on lyra2z. The pool is operating at diff 6.2 but he miner says it's 6.
This result in some low difficulty shares when the submitted share diff is between 6 and 6.2.
The rejected shares are mostly noise and don't affect performance.
I have not noticed the pool difficulty being lower than the miner but that would be a silent error
not easilly noticed. This would result in lost performance because the miner would discard shares
that would be accepted by the pool.
Changing stratum difficulty sometimes resolves the issue unless vardiff changes it back.
I had used sd=1 on the command line, stratum responded with 6 but the pool used 6.2.
I tried with sd=6.2 but stratum still responed with 6.
I tried sd=8 and it was accepted, both the stratum response and the pool said 8 as they should.
But vardiff stepped in and lowered the diff and they mismatched again.
May 04, 2022, 01:52:25 AM
Note to cpuminer-opt users the syntax for secure stratum connections is stratum+tcps.
It's the same as stratum+ssl with other miners.
Edit: cpuminer-opt-3.19.8 now accepts stratum+ssl.
It's the same as stratum+ssl with other miners.
Edit: cpuminer-opt-3.19.8 now accepts stratum+ssl.
February 01, 2022, 01:50:30 AM
UPDATE
1. $FLUX Parallel asset mining was approved and is now available at zergpool.com, receive an extra 50% of reward by mining $FLUX coin at equihash125!
cheers, pinpin
1. $FLUX Parallel asset mining was approved and is now available at zergpool.com, receive an extra 50% of reward by mining $FLUX coin at equihash125!
cheers, pinpin
January 23, 2022, 03:25:27 PM
xmr-stak 2.10.8 is the most popular software for mining cryptonight_gpu. I DLed but I cannot get it to run.
Would someone please share an xmr-stak command line that works with ZergPool. TIA
Any plans to offer Autolykos (ERG), ProgPow (SERO) or Equihash (210,9) (AION) ?
BTW, I think allowing solo mining undermines the utility of your pool. Whether someone mines pooled or solo they will earn the same in the long run. But allowing solo means that ether in ZP is useless. Please eliminate solo mining.
Would someone please share an xmr-stak command line that works with ZergPool. TIA
Any plans to offer Autolykos (ERG), ProgPow (SERO) or Equihash (210,9) (AION) ?
BTW, I think allowing solo mining undermines the utility of your pool. Whether someone mines pooled or solo they will earn the same in the long run. But allowing solo means that ether in ZP is useless. Please eliminate solo mining.
January 10, 2022, 12:27:33 PM
Add ability to check transaction-hash in explorer!
Add ability to see block-hash by any block-number! There is limited number of blocks available.
Also, add addnodes-page for each coin, like here: https://murkapool.it/explorer
Add ability to see block-hash by any block-number! There is limited number of blocks available.
Also, add addnodes-page for each coin, like here: https://murkapool.it/explorer
Thanks will consider these improvements for sure!
pinpin
Jump to: