bitHopper: Python Pool Hopper Proxy - page 118.

msb8r

member

Activity: 78

Merit: 10

Quote from: muyoso on July 30, 2011, 05:25:58 PM

Quote from: msb8r on July 30, 2011, 04:43:34 PM

My guess is that pool op did some maintenance. I had no updates on shares for about an hour, but things look fine now. Also after the no-update period the invalid block has been removed from unconfirmed balance..

MtRed had an invalid block too? Thats like the third invalid block in the last couple of days for the various pools I mine.

This was an invalid block from 5-6 days (?) ago, that stayed in the unconfirmed payout..

Edit: Invalid block was from 2011-07-21

muyoso

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 10

Quote from: msb8r on July 30, 2011, 04:43:34 PM

My guess is that pool op did some maintenance. I had no updates on shares for about an hour, but things look fine now. Also after the no-update period the invalid block has been removed from unconfirmed balance..

MtRed had an invalid block too? Thats like the third invalid block in the last couple of days for the various pools I mine.

c00w

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Um, I can see scraping the btc exchange rate and the nmc exchange rate to deal with the fact that difficulty doesn't match the price exchange, we already use the nmcdifficulty/btcdifficulty ratio. The website doesn't reflect that however.

So yeah we should scrape that and only use namepools if the two prices make sense. I agree completely.

EDIT: However I don't use namepools and I added in the capability for those who wish to. If you are using namepools you should check the exchange rates and make an informed decision. If you modify bitHopper to do it for you I welcome the pull request.

EDIT2: basically as long as nmc_price/nmc_difficulty > bitcoin_price/bitcoin_difficulty you should be mining namecoins. However if there are no pools to hop with bitcoin then if nmc_price/nmc_difficulty > .77 * bitcoin_price/bitcoin_difficulty you should hop them.

And now that I've though about it I might just code it in...

EDIT3: And if nmc price/difficulty > btc price/diff but there are no pools to hop then hop btc pools if nmc price/diff *.77 < btc price/diff

Clipse

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 502

Quote from: c00w on July 30, 2011, 05:02:46 PM

Just make the pull request. I'll merge it in and if it breaks I'll fix it. Its minor.

Can you have a look at my namecoin mining suggestion few posts up.

c00w

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Just make the pull request. I'll merge it in and if it breaks I'll fix it. Its minor.

Sukrim

legendary

Activity: 2618

Merit: 1007

Quote from: paraipan on July 30, 2011, 04:22:39 PM

yo have it tested sukrim ? I'll make a pull req if you know it works for the purpose

At least it throws no errors on my system but now works fine when built with PyInstaller. Dunno what'll happen exactly if these "except:" blocks are hit (but that's anyways not what I changed) but the change itself had no effect on both "from source" and "with runtime included" versions that I could observe.

msb8r

member

Activity: 78

Merit: 10

Quote from: paraipan on July 30, 2011, 03:51:37 PM

Quote from: muyoso on July 30, 2011, 03:39:25 PM

Also had Mt.Red Api disabled. Restart fixed it.

seems like mtred slowed down their api update Sad

My guess is that pool op did some maintenance. I had no updates on shares for about an hour, but things look fine now. Also after the no-update period the invalid block has been removed from unconfirmed balance..

c00w

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Errors with role:
Um check you pool.cfg and make sure very pool has its role specified. Thats the error. Some pool doesn't have a role.

paraipan

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1004

Firstbits: 1pirata

yo have it tested sukrim ? I'll make a pull req if you know it works for the purpose

Sukrim

legendary

Activity: 2618

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Sukrim on July 30, 2011, 02:32:45 PM

Currently I'm researching autobuild mechanisms...

Alright, I'm runnning into issues with paths.

Could you please change references to index.html, stats.db and pool.cfg from:

Code:

try:
    read = parser.read(os.path.join(os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(__file__)), 'pool.cfg'))

to (taken partially from http://en.w3support.net/index.php?db=so&id=404744)

Code:

try:
    # determine if application is a script file or frozen exe
    if hasattr(sys, 'frozen'):
        application_path = os.path.dirname(sys.executable)
    elif __file__:
        application_path = os.path.dirname(__file__)

    read = parser.read(os.path.join(application_path, 'pool.cfg'))

?

This one above goes in pool.py and for website.py there's something very similar:

Code:

try:
    # determine if application is a script file or frozen exe
    if hasattr(sys, 'frozen'):
        application_path = os.path.dirname(sys.executable)
    elif __file__:
        application_path = os.path.dirname(__file__)

    index = parser.read(os.path.join(application_path, 'index.html'))

database.py is written a bit differently - here you need:

Code:

try:
    # determine if application is a script file or frozen exe
    if hasattr(sys, 'frozen'):
        DB_DIR = os.path.dirname(sys.executable)
    elif __file__:
        DB_DIR = os.path.dirname(__file__)
    DB_DIR = os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(__file__))

and I you also need to import sys there it seems.

Would be a great thing to have and shouldn't really impact anything.

joulesbeef

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

moOo

have a question.

Playing with the new phatk 2.0 kernel.. it doesnt work well right now.. doesnt work with linux or the guiminer.

It does appear to work somewhat with AOCLBF 1.75, and does report a higher mhash for me by 2% and this is over the diablo's latest modded kernel.(check it out)

Ok i havent really ever used this miner...but it seems to be reporting a much higher rejection rate than what i see reported on the web stats page and am wondering if this is just due to how the miner works now and AOCLBF is just wrong about the rejects?

Clipse

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 502

Regarding namecoin mining.

I think the approach used to mine up to 40*nmc_difficulty is wrong.

The correct approach to atleast get profitibility out of the time spend mining namecoins should be like this:

- scrape nmc/btc exchange rate, use the daily low here : https://exchange.bitparking.com/main
- scrape required difference required to be 1:1 to BTC(atleast for the purpose of mining time spend on shares) here : http://dot-bit.org/tools/nextDifficulty.php
- follow conventional 0.43*difficulty thus in this case (0.43*nmc_difficulty) * (nmc daily low / nmc required for 1:1 with btc) ie. ( 0.43 * 94037.96 ) * ( 0.02721001 / 0.0556 ) = 19789.0781969645 (we could simplify and use only the whole numbers for difficulty to make it less messy)

What we would get in this case is relatively the same outcome as what we have atm with hopping 0.43*btc_difficulty, it would obviously happen less often but while we apply this we should know that atleast whatever coins we earn we would not end up mining at higher cost than what the exchange offers. The approach works best to sell as soon as you clear any coins, at the available market price for safety.

Im sure c00w or ryo or someone would be able to apply something like this faster than me since I am no python expert other than tweaking what they allready provide "_"

paraipan

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1004

Firstbits: 1pirata

Quote from: muyoso on July 30, 2011, 03:39:25 PM

Also had Mt.Red Api disabled. Restart fixed it.

seems like mtred slowed down their api update Sad

paraipan

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1004

Firstbits: 1pirata

Quote from: ewibit on July 30, 2011, 03:29:49 PM

Quote from: paraipan on July 30, 2011, 10:14:25 AM

#and for every update run
git pull

now I have done the latest update:
.................................................
the same as before... Huh

run with --debug like c00w said

xxx@yyy:~/bitHopper$ python bitHopper.py --debug

and post output here or in pastebin

iopq

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

why is btcworld set to info? what does that even mean? should I try enabling it?

muyoso

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 10

Also had Mt.Red Api disabled. Restart fixed it.

Tmoney

newbie

Activity: 40

Merit: 0

Djex, latest from c00w.

ewibit

legendary

Activity: 2955

Merit: 1049

Quote from: paraipan on July 30, 2011, 10:14:25 AM

#and for every update run
git pull

now I have done the latest update:
--------------------------------------
xxx@yyy:~/bitHopper$ git pull https://github.com/c00w/bitHopper.git
remote: Counting objects: 5, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (1/1), done.
remote: Total 3 (delta 2), reused 3 (delta 2)
Unpacking objects: 100% (3/3), done
From https://github.com/c00w/bitHopper
* branch HEAD -> FETCH_HEAD
Updating 73e3015..dfa8302
Fast-forward
index.html | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
--------------------------------------
and when I start:
--------------------------------------
xxx@yyy:~/bitHopper$ python bitHopper.py
[22:24:18] Updating Difficulty
[22:24:18] 1690895.8030524
[22:24:18] Updating NameCoin Difficulty
[22:24:19] 94037.96
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "bitHopper.py", line 227, in
   bithopper_global = BitHopper()
  File "bitHopper.py", line 43, in __init__
   self.pool = pool.Pool(self)
  File "/home/xxx/bitHopper/pool.py", line 27, in __init__
   self.servers[pool]['default_role'] = self.servers[pool]['role']
KeyError: 'role'
---------------------------------------
the same as before... Huh

djex

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

tmoney: whos version of bitHopper are you using?

iopq

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

should I use mineco.in as a backup pool? it doesn't punish hopping

also, why is it mining slush like crazy? aren't you supposed to hop away from slush earlier than other pools due to the decay factor? it's still mining slush at 37% instead of a backup
it stopped mining slush at 41.48%

Topic: bitHopper: Python Pool Hopper Proxy - page 118. (Read 355816 times)