Stupid question time, How do I exit a cmd window in Windows 7? the only way I know how is by closing said window.
Ctrl + C 
Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.0 - page 841. (Read 5805998 times)
July 15, 2011, 05:17:49 PM
July 15, 2011, 04:47:38 PM
July 15, 2011, 03:59:00 PM
conman, a small reminder for the fixme in the fulltest function in util.c
July 15, 2011, 02:50:00 PM
Just to say, that's not gigahashes. It's called nonces really or whatever, but i am pretty much sure it's not GH/s. It's just numbers which the GPU can go over very quickly, where the CPU(my phenom 955) can do around 3 million hashes per second, or 3 million nonces per second.
Each nonce gives a hash/second. You can start over the nonce range every second with new hashes. So your 3 MH/s only covers less than 0.1% of the nonce range before it can start over from the beginning. July 15, 2011, 02:30:29 PM
Just to say, that's not gigahashes. It's called nonces really or whatever, but i am pretty much sure it's not GH/s. It's just numbers which the GPU can go over very quickly, where the CPU(my phenom 955) can do around 3 million hashes per second, or 3 million nonces per second.
Each nonce gives a hash/second. You can start over the nonce range every second with new hashes. So your 3 MH/s only covers less than 0.1% of the nonce range before it can start over from the beginning. July 15, 2011, 02:16:18 PM
After i installed the ati amd sdk i get another error:
July 15, 2011, 02:11:52 PM
Just to say, that's not gigahashes. It's called nonces really or whatever, but i am pretty much sure it's not GH/s. It's just numbers which the GPU can go over very quickly, where the CPU(my phenom 955) can do around 3 million hashes per second, or 3 million nonces per second.
Each nonce gives a hash/second. You can start over the nonce range every second with new hashes. So your 3 MH/s only covers less than 0.1% of the nonce range before it can start over from the beginning. July 15, 2011, 02:03:13 PM
Just to say, that's not gigahashes. It's called nonces really or whatever, but i am pretty much sure it's not GH/s. It's just numbers which the GPU can go over very quickly, where the CPU(my phenom 955) can do around 3 million hashes per second, or 3 million nonces per second.
July 15, 2011, 01:49:43 PM
Honestly luke, that looks like the exact ripoff of my suggestion for splitting a single work across multiple threads on a CPU miner with a given noncerange. So the 2^32 range is divided by the number of threads.
No number of threads on a single cost-effective machine (CPU or GPU) will ever max out 4 GH/s. Putting this in the protocol (though it could be done in the miner additionally) allows the work to be split among multiple unrelated miners. Anyhow, I don't see your "suggestion" anywhere, much less before I wrote up mine. "Ripoff" doesn't apply to independent research. July 15, 2011, 01:29:18 PM
Honestly luke, that looks like the exact ripoff of my suggestion for splitting a single work across multiple threads on a CPU miner with a given noncerange. So the 2^32 range is divided by the number of threads.
No number of threads on a single cost-effective machine (CPU or GPU) will ever max out 4 GH/s. Putting this in the protocol (though it could be done in the miner additionally) allows the work to be split among multiple unrelated miners. Anyhow, I don't see your "suggestion" anywhere, much less before I wrote up mine. "Ripoff" doesn't apply to independent research. July 15, 2011, 01:22:22 PM
Honestly luke, that looks like the exact ripoff of my suggestion for splitting a single work across multiple threads on a CPU miner with a given noncerange. So the 2^32 range is divided by the number of threads.
No number of threads on a single cost-effective machine (CPU or GPU) will ever max out 4 GH/s. Putting this in the protocol (though it could be done in the miner additionally) allows the work to be split among multiple unrelated miners. Anyhow, I don't see your "suggestion" anywhere, much less before I wrote up mine. "Ripoff" doesn't apply to independent research. July 15, 2011, 01:14:50 PM
Honestly luke, that looks like the exact ripoff of my suggestion for splitting a single work across multiple threads on a CPU miner with a given noncerange. So the 2^32 range is divided by the number of threads.
July 15, 2011, 12:55:09 PM
Feature request: Support for X-Roll-Ntime (with expire extension and noncerange
This can allow clusters of many CPUs/GPUs to process the same work up to ~4 GH/s.
x-roll-ntime is supported, but indirectly. The "local generation of work" cgminer does is rolling ntime, and is only done when network connectivity cannot keep up with demand for work. I'm not sure how much I'll be expanding on this feature in the future. I'd be surprised if cgminer couldn't keep massive hashes busy already given how the work is gathered for the worker threads at the moment.This can allow clusters of many CPUs/GPUs to process the same work up to ~4 GH/s.
July 15, 2011, 12:04:53 PM
Feature request: Support for X-Roll-Ntime (with expire extension and noncerange
This can allow clusters of many CPUs/GPUs to process the same work up to ~4 GH/s.
x-roll-ntime is supported, but indirectly. The "local generation of work" cgminer does is rolling ntime, and is only done when network connectivity cannot keep up with demand for work. I'm not sure how much I'll be expanding on this feature in the future. I'd be surprised if cgminer couldn't keep massive hashes busy already given how the work is gathered for the worker threads at the moment. This can allow clusters of many CPUs/GPUs to process the same work up to ~4 GH/s.
July 15, 2011, 11:58:49 AM
Updated git tree:
- Disable restarting of CPU mining threads pending further investigation.
- Update longpoll messages.
- Add new block data to status line.
- Fix opencl tests for osx.
- Only do local generation of work if the work item is not stale itself.
- Check for stale work within the mining threads and grab new work if
positive.
- Test for idle network conditions and prevent threads from being restarted
by the watchdog thread under those circumstances.
- Make sure that local work generation does not continue indefinitely by
stopping it after 10 minutes.
- Tweak the kernel to have a shorter path using a 4k buffer and a mask on the
nonce value instead of a compare and loop for a shorter code path.
- Allow queue of zero and make that default again now that we can track how
work is being queued versus staged. This can decrease reject rates.
- Queue precisely the number of mining threads as longpoll_staged after a
new block to not generate local work.
- Disable restarting of CPU mining threads pending further investigation.
- Update longpoll messages.
- Add new block data to status line.
- Fix opencl tests for osx.
- Only do local generation of work if the work item is not stale itself.
- Check for stale work within the mining threads and grab new work if
positive.
- Test for idle network conditions and prevent threads from being restarted
by the watchdog thread under those circumstances.
- Make sure that local work generation does not continue indefinitely by
stopping it after 10 minutes.
- Tweak the kernel to have a shorter path using a 4k buffer and a mask on the
nonce value instead of a compare and loop for a shorter code path.
- Allow queue of zero and make that default again now that we can track how
work is being queued versus staged. This can decrease reject rates.
- Queue precisely the number of mining threads as longpoll_staged after a
new block to not generate local work.
July 15, 2011, 10:27:20 AM
Feature request: Support for X-Roll-Ntime (with expire extension and noncerange
This can allow clusters of many CPUs/GPUs to process the same work up to ~4 GH/s.
This can allow clusters of many CPUs/GPUs to process the same work up to ~4 GH/s.
July 15, 2011, 08:52:39 AM
win32 v1.2.6 still has problem with combined gpu+cpu mining and with cpu mining.
radeon 5550 + core i3 (should be 60+Mh/s + ~8Mh/s - both overclocked)
"-g 0 -t 4" - cpu threads keep getting restarted every 60 seconds and don't complete any work.
as someone suggested in the previous topic, it would be much more efficient to make all cpu threads work on a single share because otherwise they complete no work at all.
"-g 2 -t 4" - gpu threads are for some reason hogged by cpu and both cpu and gpu don't complete any work.
checked with gpu-z - gpu load stays at 0
also, intensity on dynamic setting stays 0-1 no matter how long i leave the pc running with all other apps closed. are there any specific conditions for increasing the intensity dynamically?
radeon 5550 + core i3 (should be 60+Mh/s + ~8Mh/s - both overclocked)
"-g 0 -t 4" - cpu threads keep getting restarted every 60 seconds and don't complete any work.
as someone suggested in the previous topic, it would be much more efficient to make all cpu threads work on a single share because otherwise they complete no work at all.
"-g 2 -t 4" - gpu threads are for some reason hogged by cpu and both cpu and gpu don't complete any work.
checked with gpu-z - gpu load stays at 0
Code:
cgminer version 1.2.6 - Started: [2011-07-15 16:55:35]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(5s):114.6 (avg):230.8 Mh/s] [Q:20 A:0 R:0 HW:0 E:0% U:0.00/m]
TQ: 1 ST: 1 LS: 0 SS: 0 DW: 3 LW: 0 LO: 0 RF: 0 I: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPU 0: [1.7 Mh/s] [Q:4 A:0 R:0 HW:0 E:0% U:0.00/m]
CPU 0: [229.1 Mh/s] [Q:12 A:0 R:0 HW:0 E:0% U:0.00/m]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2011-07-15 16:57:08] Attempting to restart thread 2, idle for more than 60 seconds
[2011-07-15 16:57:08] Thread 2 restarted
[2011-07-15 16:57:10] Attempting to restart thread 3, idle for more than 60 seconds
[2011-07-15 16:57:10] Thread 3 restarted
[2011-07-15 16:57:12] Attempting to restart thread 4, idle for more than 60 seconds
[2011-07-15 16:57:12] Thread 4 restarted
[2011-07-15 16:57:14] Attempting to restart thread 5, idle for more than 60 seconds
[2011-07-15 16:57:14] Thread 5 restarted
[2011-07-15 16:57:27] LONGPOLL detected new block on network, flushing work queue
also, intensity on dynamic setting stays 0-1 no matter how long i leave the pc running with all other apps closed. are there any specific conditions for increasing the intensity dynamically?
July 15, 2011, 07:28:21 AM
Every time i try to run it on my pc(under windows XP SP3 x32) i just get the following error:
http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/1565/screenshot0dq.png
Install the ati amd sdk:http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/1565/screenshot0dq.png
http://developer.amd.com/sdks/AMDAPPSDK/downloads/Pages/default.aspx
July 15, 2011, 04:10:24 AM
ckolivas i still get that error when i'm starting cgminer, any idea on how to fix it?
July 15, 2011, 02:42:13 AM
I get a ton of messages that look like this:
If I kill cgminer and restart, the problem goes away, so likely not a poolside problem ...
Why is that, I wonder ?
Code:
[2011-07-15 07:36:36] JSON-RPC call failed: {
"message": "Deepbit.lib.InfoException: Wrong data: checkWork: this nonce already completedpostWork user:XXXXXXXXXX worker: XXXXXX ip:XXXXXXX d
ata=00000001f781eaf6bec739630c886694a7fe9707717795b0debee5470000026a00000000bd1084c92487046be3d5cfdee3ae7ed69ac16d588111f5a796d9bcfdcd23a0ee4e1fed491a0abbcf20f97809000000800000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000",
"code": -1
}
If I kill cgminer and restart, the problem goes away, so likely not a poolside problem ...
Why is that, I wonder ?
Looks like a stale share. No idea why it's coming out like that, though.
Jump to: