Did a restart happen? as my S9 failover kicked in for quite a while.
Not that I can tell on my equipment...everything looks normal.
Topic: KanoPool kano.is lowest 0.9% fee 🐈 since 2014 - Worldwide - 2432 blocks - page 1121. (Read 5352229 times)
December 21, 2016, 11:47:36 AM
Not that I can tell on my equipment...everything looks normal.
December 21, 2016, 11:13:53 AM
Did a restart happen? as my S9 failover kicked in for quite a while.
December 21, 2016, 10:22:26 AM
Well I'll add regarding HW errors.
As long as the miner isn't failing due to overheating/pushing it too hard/whatever, what you actually want to compare is the accepted hash rate.
The Workers->Shifts statistics and Workers->Shift Graph will show that.
HW errors, stales, etc don't count in what you get rewarded.
Your rewarded hash rate is purely just accepted valid shares.
If that goes down (or up) after a few days then you'll know if it was better or worse due to the update.
Though, finding a block is certainly gonna reward better than not finding one
As long as the miner isn't failing due to overheating/pushing it too hard/whatever, what you actually want to compare is the accepted hash rate.
The Workers->Shifts statistics and Workers->Shift Graph will show that.
HW errors, stales, etc don't count in what you get rewarded.
Your rewarded hash rate is purely just accepted valid shares.
If that goes down (or up) after a few days then you'll know if it was better or worse due to the update.
Though, finding a block is certainly gonna reward better than not finding one
December 21, 2016, 10:13:07 AM
Those of you that have updated s9 to bmv2. Can you say whether or not hw errors are down? My 550 batch shows 10's of thousands of errors. I ran an s4 for 6 months straight with less than thousand errors. These miners really are a piece of work
BR
I updated 3 S9's--a B2, B5 and B9. They are now (after 48 hrs) showing .0039%, .0006%, and .009%. Comparing number of HW errors is pretty meaningless because it depends on how long the miner has been hashing--to say nothing about how the number of errors in a given time depends on the hash rate--so comparison of number of errors between an S9 and an S4 ought to be adjusted to reflect the different hash rates, even when run for equal times. The error percentages I am seeing are quite good I think and comparable to those I got with S3's, S5's, S7's and SP20's. There was a slight improvement with the upgrade to v2.0 but what I notice most is less fan speed hunting, more consistent chip temps (around 90 degrees F) which are well within spec for the chips. Yes, these miners will get failed boards--one of my S9 B2 boards was just sent for repair (the failure occurred before the upgrade). That said, I really like my A721's as well.
JFB
December 21, 2016, 08:37:17 AM
...
BR
I've no idea what you are going on about.BR
As for orphans - lulz yep you've just been confirmed a conspiracy theorist who makes up shit.
The last orphan was 262 blocks ago, then one 11 blocks ago - geez what the fuck are you smoking.
Edit: go check with BlueMatt - 15 minutes before our orphan, the old relay in china stopped working.
Some time (hours) before the orphan, the fibre relay network stopped working.
There was no relay network into china working when we got that orphan - that was 2 of the 3 causes.
Then just to completely screw us over, the ckpool transfer of the block to the CN node was delayed 99seconds by the GFW.
You will find that some non-chinese sites saw (and accepted) our block first also.
... above as I've already posted.
Edit2: and it's listed here: https://blockchain.info/block-height/442979
They probably even got our block before the BWPool block
You can't have an invalid block as an orphan.
There's (still) no segshit code running in the ckpool version I'm using to generate work.
Only the nodes have been updated (OS and bitcoin) and they don't generate work.
I'm still running the ckpool version from back in august before the segwit code was added there by a core developer and was then changed and untested and broken.
December 21, 2016, 08:31:04 AM
Bottom line is that the s9 is a pile of crap, high HW, bad code, high failure rate of PCB, etc. Kano's stats have proved the bad performance of the s9 as well.
Luckily bitfury chips are starting to hit the streets
Luckily bitfury chips are starting to hit the streets
December 21, 2016, 08:20:55 AM
Well mixed results with the move to 2.0
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
yep
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17237291
good luck on restarting
i will not bother with this "upgrayedd" again until... maybe never
heh, well its worth it if it helps find more blocks here imho I've got them running as well as they were before the upgrade now. Temps back to normal.
These are all hosted, so gotta wait till remote hands do the reboot of the problem one.
Those of you that have updated s9 to bmv2. Can you say whether or not hw errors are down? My 550 batch shows 10's of thousands of errors. I ran an s4 for 6 months straight with less than thousand errors. These miners really are a piece of work
BR
I have updated to V2 on all my S9s first and second batch. i do see improvements less HW error as before i was hitting very high numbers on HW errors a one week run would be 15k+ 12 days 30K+
I will check later and update this post as i should have sufficient amount of HW for 24hour run
December 21, 2016, 07:35:49 AM
Well mixed results with the move to 2.0
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
yep
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17237291
good luck on restarting
i will not bother with this "upgrayedd" again until... maybe never
heh, well its worth it if it helps find more blocks here imho I've got them running as well as they were before the upgrade now. Temps back to normal.
These are all hosted, so gotta wait till remote hands do the reboot of the problem one.
Those of you that have updated s9 to bmv2. Can you say whether or not hw errors are down? My 550 batch shows 10's of thousands of errors. I ran an s4 for 6 months straight with less than thousand errors. These miners really are a piece of work
BR
December 21, 2016, 07:25:50 AM
I wasn't, I have been mining for months to just stratum8080.kano.is:8080 which is the setup on pool website page. I never realised the pool had geo nodes, may be an idea Kano to add geo nodes to home page at pool website.
Thanks for all the help and guidance you provide, its is really appreciated. Top man.
Thanks for all the help and guidance you provide, its is really appreciated. Top man.
December 21, 2016, 07:02:25 AM
stratum+tcp://de.kano.is:8080
If you are mining to fr.kano.is then you are already mining to de.kano.is
fr.kano.is simply points to de.kano.is, ever since I announced that
If you are mining to fr.kano.is then you are already mining to de.kano.is
fr.kano.is simply points to de.kano.is, ever since I announced that
December 21, 2016, 06:39:05 AM
Yeah, nya cut my ping time more than half! Which makes sense because I'm in NY. 
Just tested it myself (im in the UK) and the nya has cut mine from 139ms to 85ms. Not sure how much of an improvement it will make to worker figures but its worth the change and restart I suppose.
EDIT: I have just realised you have a node in france.
Ill be changing to that one seeing as its 26ms.I assume fro manother members previous post it would be
fr.kano.is:3333 or 80,81 etc etc??
Ok, so, I have read that the france one is no longer available. I am also in the UK, I have been mining for months to...
stratum8080.kano.is:8080
I am wondering now if I should be mining to
stratum8080.kano.de:8080
Please confirm ? Thanks
December 21, 2016, 05:27:27 AM
BTClock by Rdawg! with 577.53THs ) First Block Today! Go Go Kano!!!
Go Go Kano!!! 
December 20, 2016, 11:41:17 PM
... one has locked up or exploded or something...
Good technical reply. 
December 20, 2016, 10:47:03 PM
Yes, I was referring to you.
If I am replying to a post directly above mine I do not quote it, I usually only use quotes if it is a few posts back.
I think this keeps the threads a little cleaner.
Yeah, I thought that Nevada would be better, but like you said distance isn't everything, so you never now until you try it.
If I am replying to a post directly above mine I do not quote it, I usually only use quotes if it is a few posts back.
I think this keeps the threads a little cleaner.
Yeah, I thought that Nevada would be better, but like you said distance isn't everything, so you never now until you try it.
December 20, 2016, 10:20:32 PM
I would think the one in Nevada would be faster for you based on distance. But I guess it depends on how the connections are routed.
If you were referring to me, it is. Nevada is the ~70ms; NY is the ~140ms. NY is 2.500 mi further than NV from me (HI). Sometimes physical distance isn't everything, though. Thought I'd try it. 
December 20, 2016, 08:05:19 PM
Well mixed results with the move to 2.0
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
yep
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17237291
good luck on restarting
i will not bother with this "upgrayedd" again until... maybe never
heh, well its worth it if it helps find more blocks here imho I've got them running as well as they were before the upgrade now. Temps back to normal.
These are all hosted, so gotta wait till remote hands do the reboot of the problem one.
December 20, 2016, 07:54:33 PM
Well mixed results with the move to 2.0
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
yep
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17237291
good luck on restarting
i will not bother with this "upgrayedd" again until... maybe never
December 20, 2016, 07:44:03 PM
Well mixed results with the move to 2.0
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
I have a backup of 20160715-550M fw for my batch 8ish. You can file a support ticket to BM and they should provide you a link to download it.
Thanks, but I've got a copy of the old firmware, the other two are happy with one at 550 and one at 556Mhz for now, so if I can get the third one rebooted I'll set it to 556Mhz and see if its stable.
December 20, 2016, 07:36:51 PM
Well mixed results with the move to 2.0
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
Had to clock two back to 550Mhz and one has locked up or exploded or something, gotta wait till someone reboots it then catch it before it overheats again.
New firmware seems to run a bit hotter than the original B13 firmware.
Wish there was a way to keep the existing firmware and just copy the miner binary over. hmm.
I have a backup of 20160715-550M fw for my batch 8ish. You can file a support ticket to BM and they should provide you a link to download it.
December 20, 2016, 07:27:13 PM
Anybody Kano miners in China other than Canaan? I was thinking about hosting some gear over there and pointing to the pool
Not a lot.The main issue is the GFW for miners.
Also, since a node requires a reliable always on connection, running a node across the GFW is inadvisable.
Some days it would be OK and other days you'd get regular disconnects.
I do run 2 nodes inside the GFW for block distribution (but no mining) and they do exactly that, randomly lose connection - and the way a node works they kick off the miners when that happens.
That was the top of my todo list - distributing ckdb, but all this messing around with segwit (and some other diversions
...) has meant I've not really touched ckdb code for a while and wont until it's all sorted - though all but the last bit of the segwit related stuff is done now and that will be completed shortly. Jump to: