Viz, I'm noticing an issue with block rate / difficulty / supply rate...
I took some measurements earlier today... From block 4904 to 5016 took approx 200 minutes, but only 112 blocks were mined (0.56 blocks/min). This indicates that block rate is well below the 1-minute target and difficulty is too high correct? However difficulty increased from 4.68776710 to 4.71060300, where I would have expected it to decrease.
Furthermore, during this time, 6275 new coins were minted (31.3/min, 56 per block average) which is well above the target of 25 per block/minute.
Between blocks 5016 and 5055 took 85 minutes to produce 39 blocks (0.46 blocks/min), 2585 coins were minted (30.4 /min, 66.28/block), and difficulty rose to 4.76775650
So what's going on? Why is difficulty rising even though blocks are not being mined fast enough, and why are more coins being minted than there should be?
Topic: Nexus - Pure SHA3 + CPU/GPU + nPoS + 15 Active Innovations + More to Come - page 334. (Read 785514 times)
September 28, 2014, 11:55:51 PM
September 28, 2014, 10:25:56 PM
any pool? 
September 28, 2014, 08:46:21 PM
Supercomputing,
Sounds good, GPU miner isn't necessary as the GPU channel launch is on 10/7. Either way though, I'm not going to stop innovation.
I'll approach this as it comes.
Post your update here [and we'll add it to the OP]; e-mail me if you want the code for the miner crash fix. So far I haven't experienced it in 20 hours, and Bitslapper compiled a x64 and didn't experience it either when it happened usually within 30 seconds. This is last I heard though, so we will see if it still holds true.
edit: Bitslapper reports miner has been running for 8+ hours. I am seeing PPS go from 40 PPS to 55 PPS, Bitslapper saw 110 PPS go to 150 PPS. I'm currently working on improving this more.
Thank You,
Viz.
Sounds good, GPU miner isn't necessary as the GPU channel launch is on 10/7. Either way though, I'm not going to stop innovation.
I'll approach this as it comes.Post your update here [and we'll add it to the OP]; e-mail me if you want the code for the miner crash fix. So far I haven't experienced it in 20 hours, and Bitslapper compiled a x64 and didn't experience it either when it happened usually within 30 seconds. This is last I heard though, so we will see if it still holds true.
edit: Bitslapper reports miner has been running for 8+ hours. I am seeing PPS go from 40 PPS to 55 PPS, Bitslapper saw 110 PPS go to 150 PPS. I'm currently working on improving this more.
Thank You,
Viz.
September 28, 2014, 08:37:19 PM
Good input here,
As to you Supercomputing, I would recommend starting a Github and releasing your miner as "Experimental Coinshield HP Prime Miner" similar to Primecoin. This will help you get the credit you deserve for mining optimizations, and ensure that I can take care of the regular miner. We will post a link to your source and binaries on the OP if you choose to go this road. Mining for only 4 chains, and a small subset of the capabilities of Coinshield is not what I will include in the Coinshield Miner release, I will only include a fully functional miner as stable as I can make it. The Experimental miner can be for those that want to experiment, while my miner can bridge the time it takes for you to fine tune all your optimizations.
On another note, I'm releasing a new miner today with a fix to the crashing issues. I found out that on faster computers the mutex locks weren't fast enough, so added a little delay on the connection threads and it seems fixed. I'm working on some other optimizations not as qualified as Supercomputing's optimizations, but one that will work on all difficulty levels. I cannot release a new miner that only handles difficulty 4.x when difficulty is currently 4.64.
Keep Posted,
Viz.
edit: added more words to clarify
As to you Supercomputing, I would recommend starting a Github and releasing your miner as "Experimental Coinshield HP Prime Miner" similar to Primecoin. This will help you get the credit you deserve for mining optimizations, and ensure that I can take care of the regular miner. We will post a link to your source and binaries on the OP if you choose to go this road. Mining for only 4 chains, and a small subset of the capabilities of Coinshield is not what I will include in the Coinshield Miner release, I will only include a fully functional miner as stable as I can make it. The Experimental miner can be for those that want to experiment, while my miner can bridge the time it takes for you to fine tune all your optimizations.
On another note, I'm releasing a new miner today with a fix to the crashing issues. I found out that on faster computers the mutex locks weren't fast enough, so added a little delay on the connection threads and it seems fixed. I'm working on some other optimizations not as qualified as Supercomputing's optimizations, but one that will work on all difficulty levels. I cannot release a new miner that only handles difficulty 4.x when difficulty is currently 4.64.
Keep Posted,
Viz.
edit: added more words to clarify
Sounds good, I will release the source code in a few hours after I return home. Also, after your wallet code is released, I will begin work on an open source GPU miner for the CPU channel - Botnet Shield
September 28, 2014, 08:17:28 PM
Superman, nice person. I love your work, your decision
Good input here,
As to you Supercomputing, I would recommend starting a Github and releasing your miner as "Experimental Coinshield HP Prime Miner" similar to Primecoin. This will help you get the credit you deserve for mining optimizations, and ensure that I can take care of the regular miner. We will post a link to your source and binaries on the OP if you choose to go this road. Mining for only 4 chains, and a small subset of the capabilities of Coinshield is not what I will include in the Coinshield Miner release, I will only include a fully functional miner as stable as I can make it. The Experimental miner can be for those that want to experiment, while my miner can bridge the time it takes for you to fine tune all your optimizations.
On another note, I'm releasing a new miner today with a fix to the crashing issues. I found out that on faster computers the mutex locks weren't fast enough, so added a little delay on the connection threads and it seems fixed. I'm working on some other optimizations not as qualified as Supercomputing's optimizations, but one that will work on all difficulty levels. I cannot release a new miner that only handles difficulty 4.x when difficulty is currently 4.64.
Keep Posted,
Viz.
edit: added more words to clarify
As to you Supercomputing, I would recommend starting a Github and releasing your miner as "Experimental Coinshield HP Prime Miner" similar to Primecoin. This will help you get the credit you deserve for mining optimizations, and ensure that I can take care of the regular miner. We will post a link to your source and binaries on the OP if you choose to go this road. Mining for only 4 chains, and a small subset of the capabilities of Coinshield is not what I will include in the Coinshield Miner release, I will only include a fully functional miner as stable as I can make it. The Experimental miner can be for those that want to experiment, while my miner can bridge the time it takes for you to fine tune all your optimizations.
On another note, I'm releasing a new miner today with a fix to the crashing issues. I found out that on faster computers the mutex locks weren't fast enough, so added a little delay on the connection threads and it seems fixed. I'm working on some other optimizations not as qualified as Supercomputing's optimizations, but one that will work on all difficulty levels. I cannot release a new miner that only handles difficulty 4.x when difficulty is currently 4.64.
Keep Posted,
Viz.
edit: added more words to clarify
September 28, 2014, 07:48:51 PM
Good input here,
As to you Supercomputing, I would recommend starting a Github and releasing your miner as "Experimental Coinshield HP Prime Miner" similar to Primecoin. This will help you get the credit you deserve for mining optimizations, and ensure that I can take care of the regular miner. We will post a link to your source and binaries on the OP if you choose to go this road. Mining for only 4 chains, and a small subset of the capabilities of Coinshield is not what I will include in the Coinshield Miner release, I will only include a fully functional miner as stable as I can make it. The Experimental miner can be for those that want to experiment, while my miner can bridge the time it takes for you to fine tune all your optimizations.
On another note, I'm releasing a new miner today with a fix to the crashing issues. I found out that on faster computers the mutex locks weren't fast enough, so added a little delay on the connection threads and it seems fixed. I'm working on some other optimizations not as qualified as Supercomputing's optimizations, but one that will work on all difficulty levels. I cannot release a new miner that only handles difficulty 4.x when difficulty is currently 4.64.
Keep Posted,
Viz.
edit: added more words to clarify
As to you Supercomputing, I would recommend starting a Github and releasing your miner as "Experimental Coinshield HP Prime Miner" similar to Primecoin. This will help you get the credit you deserve for mining optimizations, and ensure that I can take care of the regular miner. We will post a link to your source and binaries on the OP if you choose to go this road. Mining for only 4 chains, and a small subset of the capabilities of Coinshield is not what I will include in the Coinshield Miner release, I will only include a fully functional miner as stable as I can make it. The Experimental miner can be for those that want to experiment, while my miner can bridge the time it takes for you to fine tune all your optimizations.
On another note, I'm releasing a new miner today with a fix to the crashing issues. I found out that on faster computers the mutex locks weren't fast enough, so added a little delay on the connection threads and it seems fixed. I'm working on some other optimizations not as qualified as Supercomputing's optimizations, but one that will work on all difficulty levels. I cannot release a new miner that only handles difficulty 4.x when difficulty is currently 4.64.
Keep Posted,
Viz.
edit: added more words to clarify
September 28, 2014, 07:08:19 PM
As for forking and relaunching, why on earth would we do that? Because one smart person worked out how to mine more efficiently and did so for ~1 day before sharing the code? And we don't even know IF he mined heavily.
Remember that this coin has a constant minting rate, so the reward for early adopters is greatly reduced, allowing time for these teething problems to be resolved. What this coin needs now more than anything, is a pool.
+1Remember that this coin has a constant minting rate, so the reward for early adopters is greatly reduced, allowing time for these teething problems to be resolved. What this coin needs now more than anything, is a pool.
If you don't think that every other PoW common algorithm has private optimizations available, you're delusional.
---
This said, it isn't the best thing for the coin that the miner was so un-optimized at start.
I had talked about this before the launch, and strongly suggested that the miner and source be available for some time before the coin launched.
September 28, 2014, 05:42:42 PM
This is really making less and less sense! With a coin requiring specialized mining, it should NEVER have been released without a better tested and vetted miner! You have essentially had a single person who understands how to code and has ENORMOUS CPU power acquiring most of the coins the past few days while most everyone else has not been able to earn much at all. I have not been able to mine more than 10 minutes without crashing and have been able to earn ZERO coins.
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
I agree with you.
If anyone else agrees this needs a relaunch just quote this and we (see note below) will make arrangements to fork from block 0 when optimised miner is released.
Note: When I said we, I meant everyone that wants a relaunch.I am not speaking for Coinshield officially but still whats a cryptocurrency without every single of it's users.
Whilst I agree that the miner has bugs, a workaround for the crash has been provided. The fact that SuperComputing understands the logic required to enhance the miner is no surprise, he's a fucking smart guy. It's great that he has enhanced the miner for the community, it will benefit everyone in the long term. Until his enhancements are released, why shouldn't he get extra coins for his work? He's already given the source to Viz, it won't be king until it is released. Besides, with a fixed minting rate of only 36k coins a day, he's not going to end up with a huge amount of the overall coins even if he did mine every block for a day. So just be thankful that he has released the code and not destroyed this project. I for one thank him for his efforts.
As for forking and relaunching, why on earth would we do that? Because one smart person worked out how to mine more efficiently and did so for ~1 day before sharing the code? And we don't even know IF he mined heavily.
Remember that this coin has a constant minting rate, so the reward for early adopters is greatly reduced, allowing time for these teething problems to be resolved. What this coin needs now more than anything, is a pool.
September 28, 2014, 05:35:48 PM
This is really making less and less sense! With a coin requiring specialized mining, it should NEVER have been released without a better tested and vetted miner! You have essentially had a single person who understands how to code and has ENORMOUS CPU power acquiring most of the coins the past few days while most everyone else has not been able to earn much at all. I have not been able to mine more than 10 minutes without crashing and have been able to earn ZERO coins.
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
I agree with you.
If anyone else agrees this needs a relaunch just quote this and we (see note below) will make arrangements to fork from block 0 when optimised miner is released.
Note: When I said we, I meant everyone that wants a relaunch.I am not speaking for Coinshield officially but still whats a cryptocurrency without every single of it's users.
With new mining algo optimized miners are a fact of life, the only difference here is we were told about it. Supercomputing could have just kept silent and happily mined away, instead he gave the code to Viz. And will release it on his own github so instead of complaining that supercomputing did everyone a favor taking his own time to optimize the miner and then share it we should be thanking him for sharing.
To that end, a big thanks to supercomputing for his work on the new miner and for his willingness to share the code, if you mine a stack of coins before your miner goes into the wild I say you deserve them!
September 28, 2014, 05:06:32 PM
This is really making less and less sense! With a coin requiring specialized mining, it should NEVER have been released without a better tested and vetted miner! You have essentially had a single person who understands how to code and has ENORMOUS CPU power acquiring most of the coins the past few days while most everyone else has not been able to earn much at all. I have not been able to mine more than 10 minutes without crashing and have been able to earn ZERO coins.
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
I agree with you.
If anyone else agrees this needs a relaunch just quote this and we (see note below) will make arrangements to fork from block 0 when optimised miner is released.
Note: When I said we, I meant everyone that wants a relaunch.I am not speaking for Coinshield officially but still whats a cryptocurrency without every single of it's users.
September 28, 2014, 05:02:22 PM
pool
September 28, 2014, 04:59:36 PM
it is not 100x faster now, but anyway, why release is delayed???
September 28, 2014, 04:57:25 PM
Let dev have some fun now with 100x faster miner 
September 28, 2014, 04:44:08 PM
This is really making less and less sense! With a coin requiring specialized mining, it should NEVER have been released without a better tested and vetted miner! You have essentially had a single person who understands how to code and has ENORMOUS CPU power acquiring most of the coins the past few days while most everyone else has not been able to earn much at all. I have not been able to mine more than 10 minutes without crashing and have been able to earn ZERO coins.
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
Fair distribution is very missing here and it gets worse with each passing day that this one person can mine the vast majority of the coins!! Personally I think the only fair thing to do is to pause this project until a fully functioning miner can be given to EVERYBODY.......this should be relaunched at that point!
September 28, 2014, 04:32:54 PM
@Videlicet
You are missing one important fact which is smaller prime constellations are always embedded within larger prime constellations. So the code already finds constellations of all sizes but we are only interested in those which meet the minimum difficulty requirements. If you cannot follow this logic then it would be best if I host the code. Sometimes, seeing is believing.
You are missing one important fact which is smaller prime constellations are always embedded within larger prime constellations. So the code already finds constellations of all sizes but we are only interested in those which meet the minimum difficulty requirements. If you cannot follow this logic then it would be best if I host the code. Sometimes, seeing is believing.
September 28, 2014, 03:01:40 PM
Supercomputing,
I understand now - Thank You - this is a great idea. The problem I see though, is that you are searching for each cluster with a defined set of gaps instead of ambiguous set up to +12 for the prime gap. This miner will be useless when it breaks difficulty 5x and it won't find all specific prime clusters that are possible, just a defined set. It needs to be able to find at least 2.x, 3.x, 4.x, 5.x if you are to go this route, the difficulty is already getting very close to 5.x.
I developed this algorithm with the thought in mind to find constellations of any size. When they get very large they can be gapped as such:
+ 0, 6, 8, 12, 18, 20, 26, 32, 36, 38, 42, 48, 50, 56, 60, 62, 66.
+ 0, 2, 6, 12, 14, 20, 24, 26, 30, 36, 42, 44, 50, 54, 56, 60
This is not deterministic for the constellation of size X, for they follow random patterns. Sometimes +2, 6 other times +2, 4.
From a paper of constellation records, the largest gap I saw was +12 in very large constellations. This is what this is based from. Once your miner supports more difficulty sizes I will implement the update in my Github. Otherwise you are free to use / give your miner away, host your own github, etc.
If this is the case, let me know and we'll be sure to update the OP with links to your experimental optimized miner.
Viz.
I understand now - Thank You - this is a great idea. The problem I see though, is that you are searching for each cluster with a defined set of gaps instead of ambiguous set up to +12 for the prime gap. This miner will be useless when it breaks difficulty 5x and it won't find all specific prime clusters that are possible, just a defined set. It needs to be able to find at least 2.x, 3.x, 4.x, 5.x if you are to go this route, the difficulty is already getting very close to 5.x.
I developed this algorithm with the thought in mind to find constellations of any size. When they get very large they can be gapped as such:
+ 0, 6, 8, 12, 18, 20, 26, 32, 36, 38, 42, 48, 50, 56, 60, 62, 66.
+ 0, 2, 6, 12, 14, 20, 24, 26, 30, 36, 42, 44, 50, 54, 56, 60
This is not deterministic for the constellation of size X, for they follow random patterns. Sometimes +2, 6 other times +2, 4.
From a paper of constellation records, the largest gap I saw was +12 in very large constellations. This is what this is based from. Once your miner supports more difficulty sizes I will implement the update in my Github. Otherwise you are free to use / give your miner away, host your own github, etc.
If this is the case, let me know and we'll be sure to update the OP with links to your experimental optimized miner.
Viz.
September 28, 2014, 02:26:40 PM
@Videlicet
The source code contains an implementation of wheel factorization:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_factorization
Primorial = size of the wheel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primorial
PrimeLimit = factor base:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_base
BitArray_Size = size of the bit array:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_array
Then we apply the above method to search for prime quadruplets:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_quadruplet
Prime constellation of various lengths have different forms:
{30n + 11, 30n + 13, 30n + 17, 30n + 19} for prime quadruplets.
{30n + 7, 30n + 11, 30n + 13, 30n + 17, 30n + 19, 30n + 23} for prime sextuplets.
From WikipediaA: "A prime sextuplet contains two close pairs of twin primes, a prime quadruplet, four overlapping prime triplets, and two overlapping prime quintuplets."
So uncommenting portions of the source code should sustain a difficulty of 6.x for a while before we optimize for prime octuplets.
The source code contains an implementation of wheel factorization:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_factorization
Primorial = size of the wheel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primorial
PrimeLimit = factor base:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_base
BitArray_Size = size of the bit array:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_array
Then we apply the above method to search for prime quadruplets:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_quadruplet
Prime constellation of various lengths have different forms:
{30n + 11, 30n + 13, 30n + 17, 30n + 19} for prime quadruplets.
{30n + 7, 30n + 11, 30n + 13, 30n + 17, 30n + 19, 30n + 23} for prime sextuplets.
From WikipediaA: "A prime sextuplet contains two close pairs of twin primes, a prime quadruplet, four overlapping prime triplets, and two overlapping prime quintuplets."
So uncommenting portions of the source code should sustain a difficulty of 6.x for a while before we optimize for prime octuplets.
September 28, 2014, 12:33:00 PM
I get a block per day with the Windows x64 miner, maybe it's just luck?
I have a Core i7 3930k and I'm only using 4 threads.
I have a Core i7 3930k and I'm only using 4 threads.
How many PPS do you have with that i7?
With 4 threads I get about 70 pps. With 12 threads I get 120 pps but the miner constantly restarts. I can leave it on 4 overnight without it blue screening
I asked for comparison, I get around 70 pps with 7 threads with fx8350 and no blocks in last 24hrs with 2 of them.
September 28, 2014, 12:15:38 PM
I just checked my pc that has the wallet, looks like I found 4 more blocks since I posted. The CPUs I'm using are o/c'ed i7-4770K's.
Guess its just more people hopping on the network and I had bad luck last night. I also restarted the wallet after I posted. That could have had something to do with it.
Guess its just more people hopping on the network and I had bad luck last night. I also restarted the wallet after I posted. That could have had something to do with it.
September 28, 2014, 11:40:51 AM
I get a block per day with the Windows x64 miner, maybe it's just luck?
I have a Core i7 3930k and I'm only using 4 threads.
I have a Core i7 3930k and I'm only using 4 threads.
How many PPS do you have with that i7?
With 4 threads I get about 70 pps. With 12 threads I get 120 pps but the miner constantly restarts. I can leave it on 4 overnight without it blue screening
Jump to: