Pages:
Author

Topic: Join a pooled bitcoin mining effort (Read 53323 times)

newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
May 28, 2011, 12:02:41 PM
I'm trying to get into this pool mining but I cant find an easy way to set one up. Im in win7, is there a GUI that makes this easier for people like me? This client seems easy to use, but theres no server. Other clients are a little too complex for me.

Bitjet,

I knew nothing about pool mining, until last night, and I am also running Windows 7 with an ATI 5770.

Following the instructions (see the section titled "How to Start") on https://deepbit.net/, I was up and running in about 30 minutes.

I had to download the OpenCL drivers from ATI's website, before I could use my GPU, and I used the GUIMiner to handle all the command line options for me. I found the GUIminer by following the link, on this post: http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=1334.0, under the heading "GUI."

I'm certainly no expert, but having been successful so recently, you're welcome to ask any specific questions you might have while setting it up.

Good luck!

P.S. By the way, I used the Geeks3D GPU Caps Viewer at http://www.geeks3d.com/20090414/gpu-caps-viewer-170-available-with-cuda-support/ to monitor the temperature of my GPU while I set it up. I found that adding "-s0.01" to the "Extra flags" field, gave me a little peace of mind, at a cost of about 10Mh/s. I may remove that, as it seems the GPUs fan is doing a good job of keeping up with the temperature. (Despite my signature, it seems I'm averaging about 120Mh/s... don't know why the signature shows less.)
hero member
Activity: 696
Merit: 500
February 13, 2011, 06:08:01 PM
I'm trying to get into this pool mining but I cant find an easy way to set one up. Im in win7, is there a GUI that makes this easier for people like me? This client seems easy to use, but theres no server. Other clients are a little too complex for me.
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1014
Strength in numbers
January 03, 2011, 05:24:53 PM
Anyone knows what's wrong with 91.121.29.91? Had been offline for 3 days now. :/

I'd like to know too. Time is money here. There's no excuse for this.

No excuse needed. Feel free to give us a server to connect to yourself.
sr. member
Activity: 1344
Merit: 264
bit.ly/3QXp3oh | Ultimate Launchpad on TON
full member
Activity: 175
Merit: 101
January 03, 2011, 06:05:53 AM
Could anyone volunteer to run a new server?
full member
Activity: 128
Merit: 100
December 29, 2010, 11:01:04 PM
Anyone knows what's wrong with 91.121.29.91? Had been offline for 3 days now. :/

I'd like to know too. Time is money here. There's no excuse for this.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
Do The Evolution
December 28, 2010, 12:59:00 AM
Anyone knows what's wrong with 91.121.29.91? Had been offline for 3 days now. :/
member
Activity: 103
Merit: 17
December 27, 2010, 11:18:24 AM
The 0.01 fee is for entire transactions less than 0.01, correct?

No. It applies if any output is less than 0.01.

Bitcoin could choose coins intelligently to reduce the number of bitcoins thrown away, but it doesn't, so sub-cent amounts are nearly worthless currently.

Alright, so there really is no reason why the current client couldn't determine the best inputs so that <0.01 wouldn't happen unless there are no other better transactions available.

Help needed for rpcminer

Questions about the RPC miners should go in the RPC miners thread.
sr. member
Activity: 373
Merit: 250
December 27, 2010, 12:21:17 AM
Honestly, given the current exchange rates, I could care less about the sub-cents issue.  There isn't a USD coin small enough to represent the maximum possible loss you can get from using one generation method over the other at this point.  It would take 4 instances of generating 0.00999999 BTC (and thus actually getting 0.00) to equal a penny that you should have gotten but didn't.  The most I've ever seen one penny buy is 12 minutes at a parking meter in a small town.  It's a non-issue.

If (and probably when) Bitcoins become worth more per unit of local currency, then perhaps that argument will be a bit more valid.  Until that happens, people need to find better arguments to support their side of the issue.  Nothing wrong with people using the method they happen to like better, or whichever server happens to be up at the moment, etc.
administrator
Activity: 5166
Merit: 12850
December 26, 2010, 10:11:44 PM
The 0.01 fee is for entire transactions less than 0.01, correct?

No. It applies if any output is less than 0.01.

Bitcoin could choose coins intelligently to reduce the number of bitcoins thrown away, but it doesn't, so sub-cent amounts are nearly worthless currently.
member
Activity: 103
Merit: 17
December 26, 2010, 02:31:00 PM
Bitcoin as a protocol can handle sub cents perfectly fine.  In fact, the generation of such blocks demonstrates that capability.  The issue is with the GUI when selecting which transactions to include in new transactions and then ignoring the sub cents left over.  The 0.01 fee is for entire transactions less than 0.01, correct?  So you should be able to include as many sub 0.01 inputs as needed to get over the 0.01, or use a larger input transaction with sub cents, and get the correct sub cent change back.

Anyway, since the source of the pooled server is open, you can easily change the generation behavior if it doesn't suit you.
sr. member
Activity: 407
Merit: 250
December 26, 2010, 01:25:50 PM
Good point BitLex.
sr. member
Activity: 407
Merit: 250
December 26, 2010, 01:23:32 PM
and i wouldn't be as sure as you are about puddinpop's miner being the fastest possible on CPUs,
maybe it's your setup.


CPU mining became pretty worthless today, so this discussion is becoming irrelevant, but anyway:

Inter Core Duo, 2.66, and Core Quad 2.66, Win7-64, I get those speeds per core:

Bitcoin client 0.3.19:  1200 khash/sec
Puddinpop's remoteminer-cpu.exe:  1200 khash/sec
Garzik's minerd.exe, default 'c' algo:  1020 khash/sec

also:
minerd.exe, -a 4way:  670 khash/sec
minerd.exe, -a via:  crashes
minedr.exe, -a cyrptopp: 750 khash/sec
minerd.exe, -a cryptopp_asm32: 1200 khash/sec, but all work is rejected by the server.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 505
December 26, 2010, 01:15:32 PM
that's correct, but you're also losing sub-cents.

let's say you contribute and generate 0.05436279 bitcoins.
the GUI tells you "Generated 0.05btc.." and as soon as you send those 0.05btc to another address, you've lost 0.00436279 bitcoins.
that's even worse if you just contribute very little CPU power and only generate 0.00999999btc or less per block,
you'll see that you "Generated 0.00btc...", but you will not be able to spend/send them, without losing them.

i can't see how this is "better", can you?
sr. member
Activity: 407
Merit: 250
December 26, 2010, 01:04:24 PM
please explain in which way this is "better".

It is better because you see your mined share right away, and it is listed as "Generated" in the standard Bitcoin client.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 505
December 26, 2010, 12:55:04 PM
The first server has a better way of paying out, your address gets listed in the actual block that was generated.   
please explain in which way this is "better".

Quote
Slash will first take it all, then give 10% to the one who found the block
untrue,
he has got "an idea" about it, he didn't even ask what his users think about it and i guess i'm not the only one who doesn't like that idea.

and i wouldn't be as sure as you are about puddinpop's miner being the fastest possible on CPUs,
maybe it's your setup.






sr. member
Activity: 407
Merit: 250
December 26, 2010, 12:13:11 PM
So, for now we have two incompatible protocols and two different sets of clients for pooled mining.

Also, we have only two servers, one for each protocol. The first one is "open sourced pooling server", clients listed at the first page of this thread.  The address of the server is 91.121.29.91, and sometimes the server is down.

example command lines:
remoteminer-cuda.exe -server=91.121.29.91 -address=19nYw...
remoteminer-cpu.exe -server=91.121.29.91 -address=19nYw...


Other is "shash's" server that uses RPC protocol. The server address is http://mining.bitcoin.cz:8332, and also you have to register trough his web page.

example command lines:
minerd -t 4 --url http://mining.bitcoin.cz:8332 --userpass username.workername:passwd
poclbm.exe  -u username.workername --pass=passwd -o mining.bitcoin.cz -p 8332 -d 0


The first server has a better way of paying out, your address gets listed in the actual block that was generated.   Slash will first take it all, then give 10% to the one who found the block, then wait for the block to mature then send it.

The other issue is that of performance on Core Duo and Quad processors, the client for the first server has 20% better performance, and there is no way to get that performance on Intel cpu for Shash's server.




LZ
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1072
P2P Cryptocurrency
December 25, 2010, 02:06:49 PM
Yes, but it seems that 91.121.29.91 is down. So miners may join some other
pool. Your clients successfully connect to the server http://mining.bitcoin.cz/
through RPC and compute hashes using a valid worker's login and password.

If it really works with pool, I'll add them to homepage.
member
Activity: 103
Merit: 17
December 25, 2010, 10:01:00 AM
Now we should use puddinpop's RPC Miners.

No.  Those clients are only for those miners using the RPC method.  This thread is about the open source pooled mining, which uses different miners.  People should continue using whatever miners they've been using for this pool.
LZ
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1072
P2P Cryptocurrency
December 25, 2010, 09:01:31 AM
Now we should can use new puddinpop's RPC Miners.

Register workers at http://mining.bitcoin.cz/ and use -url, -user and -password instead of -server and -address.

It will be something like...
Code:
@echo off
cls
:reconnect
rpcminer-cuda -gpu -url=http://mining.bitcoin.cz:8332 -user=worker_login -password=worker_password
goto reconnect
Pages:
Jump to: