SoloMining with CGMiner against Bitcoind / Bitcoin Core v0.18.1 - page 4.

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: kano on May 18, 2022, 07:44:44 PM

Due to the many reasons I've explained - I consider this a bad idea.
Many people I discuss anything about bitcoin with seem to not even understand the issues.

Some time when I get around to doing the next gekko driver I'll probably fix the solo code, but helping people lose blocks always sounds like a bad idea to me.

People are going to do it anyway. Better they do it in at least a working environment that you wrote.
If not, there is someone out there who will hack it together and kind of sorta get it working and if they don't have anything better to use they will use what they have.

-Dave

kano

legendary

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Due to the many reasons I've explained - I consider this a bad idea.
Many people I discuss anything about bitcoin with seem to not even understand the issues.

Some time when I get around to doing the next gekko driver I'll probably fix the solo code, but helping people lose blocks always sounds like a bad idea to me.

Sledge0001

full member

Activity: 633

Merit: 159

Quote from: wihug on April 25, 2022, 07:36:07 PM

Hi @Sledge0001 I'm interested in doing something similar using a raspiblitz node (https://github.com/rootzoll/raspiblitz) and an Antminer S9k currently mining with ckpool (https://solo.ckpool.org/), however, everything @kano says makes sense.

Decentralization and trustlessness are wanted in the bitcoin BTC community. Considering that ckpool have the infrastructure with these nodes connected to big pools it is possible to solo-self-miners to connect directly and fast with ckpool to improve the odds? I really want to use my old s9k with the local full node and do the lotto mining but most importantly learn about the experience.

I'm a volunteer if you help me to achieve this, we can try to measure latency between nodes or find a list of the biggest pools and nodes and do nice research for the community. I don't think that I'm the only one interested in achieving this. What do you think?

I am going to dive back into this further as well.

My initial thoughts are simply to keep my larger miners pointed at a pool (4 x S19A Pro's at the moment) but revisit this with my USB miners and also in the mean time try adding a few Futurebit Apollo BTC miners as well.

I believe that given the modest amount of data that is included in every block transaction the speed of most internet services should be fine assuming that the node is well connected to other fast nodes.

I'm game to try this!

@Kano how hard would it be to add the ability to solomine using CGMiner to the newest Bitcoin Core? I for one and I bet others would be willing to donate to that development!

wihug

newbie

Activity: 1

Merit: 0

Hi @Sledge0001 I'm interested in doing something similar using a raspiblitz node (https://github.com/rootzoll/raspiblitz) and an Antminer S9k currently mining with ckpool (https://solo.ckpool.org/), however, everything @kano says makes sense.

Decentralization and trustlessness are wanted in the bitcoin BTC community. Considering that ckpool have the infrastructure with these nodes connected to big pools it is possible to solo-self-miners to connect directly and fast with ckpool to improve the odds? I really want to use my old s9k with the local full node and do the lotto mining but most importantly learn about the experience.

I'm a volunteer if you help me to achieve this, we can try to measure latency between nodes or find a list of the biggest pools and nodes and do nice research for the community. I don't think that I'm the only one interested in achieving this. What do you think?

SebsFintech

newbie

Activity: 4

Merit: 8

Hi Sledge0001!

My name is Seb and I have a mining channel called Sebs FinTech Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/SebsFinTechChannel

I'm super interested in your story of hitting a block mining on the USB miners.

I recently made a video on setting up the Compac Fs to mine and I have another video planned on how to set them up to mine solo.

I'd love to ask you a few questions about your farm, your experience hitting a block and any advice you might have for people wanting to try something similar.

Please let me know if you'd be open to this. We could do it either here through text, do a voice call or video call, whatever you feel most comfortable with and you can remain as anonymous as you like

Please send me a DM if you're interested.

Best regards,
Seb

jack1cryptotalk007

member

Activity: 60

Merit: 20

getblocktemplate and submitblock cmd in bitcoin core seem not affected by taproot stuff. bitcoin core code has no modified.

I wonder if cgminer can work without using midstate in its work->data with BM1387 or 1389 Huh

driver.gekko.c use midstate in init_task(). Has anybody tried before?

If don't use midstate, what is the cmd sent to usb? now, it is 0x21. (info->task[0] = 0x21)

In gbt_solo mode, it is better not use midstate. There is a problem in data flip or big endian order byte issue.
It seem different using midstate to meet data from bitcoin core.

100knot2dae

member

Activity: 100

Merit: 29

Did you read it? That's what I got from my readings:
There is no such thing like a taproot block, since taproot is applied on transaction level. Legacy and segwit transactions will always continue to be supported - only a hard fork could change that. And as such, a miner that is mining these legacy and segwit transactions - like cgminer in its current state - will continue to be supported. At least up until the very day when everybody has switched to taproot, leaving only taproot transactions in the mempool.

I might be utterly wrong here, so please tell me. But I want proof then

NotFuzzyWarm

legendary

Activity: 3822

Merit: 2703

Evil beware: We have waffles!

Perhaps if you read about what Taproot is and does you'll understand the implications. AFAIK non-taproot blocks will be rejected by the majority of nodes as they have all updated to the latest version of Core that triggered it.

100knot2dae

member

Activity: 100

Merit: 29

Quote from: o_solo_miner on November 28, 2021, 05:13:33 AM

ok, thanks for the info.

Did you modify cgminer any further then adding golden-guys comit?
I now sync the testnet and try it, just to confirm it.

I was thinking that taproot has to be implemented as segwit was.
My concern was, that the version bits have to be valid for taproot.

I just updated cgminer 4.11.1 with the golden-guy patches, fired up bitcoind 22 and synced testnet3. So even without any change on the version bit (in regards to signalling taproot support) the solo-mined blocks are accepted and confirmed on the blockchain just fine. I have yet to find any implication on the mining software that might have been introduced by the taproot changes.

EDIT: According to the getblocktemplate response as returned by bitcoind 22, the client (i.e. cgminer) may just disregard the "taproot" rule and can continue using the existing blocktemplate as-is. Which basically means as long as there are non-taproot transactions added to the mempool, it will just continue to create valid blocks. As can be seen and verified on testnet.

o_solo_miner

legendary

Activity: 2483

Merit: 1482

-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-

Quote from: 100knot2dae on November 27, 2021, 08:15:09 PM

Quote from: Sledge0001 on November 27, 2021, 07:51:30 PM

Quote from: o_solo_miner on November 27, 2021, 06:30:35 AM

Solomining with cgminer is not possible yet.

Kano is working on it:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58276516

Quote

I'll look into solo working with 0.21 when I get to doing that - give it a little while Smiley
But no, it's far from ideal to use a version of bitcoin prior to 0.21, since when taproot activates next month, you must be running 0.21 or later.

Using a non taproot activated bitcoind (even with the fix in cgminer from golden-guy) will not produce a valid block.
Using a taproot activated bitcoind will also not produce a valid block due to the lack of taproot support in cgminer.

That's the info that I needed to hear!
I have moved my miners back to Kano's solo pool.

Thank you.

That info is just plain wrong though... Solo mining on bitcoind 22.0 with cgminer indeed produces valid blocks. I have just mined 2 blocks on testnet3 (which has taproot enabled) : https://www.blockchain.com/btc-testnet/address/miFe5wH65oHbLsp8hXzahyPe4aqtwcCMaK

ok, thanks for the info.

Did you modify cgminer any further then adding golden-guys comit?
I now sync the testnet and try it, just to confirm it.

I was thinking that taproot has to be implemented as segwit was.
My concern was, that the version bits have to be valid for taproot.

100knot2dae

member

Activity: 100

Merit: 29

Quote from: Sledge0001 on November 27, 2021, 07:51:30 PM

Quote from: o_solo_miner on November 27, 2021, 06:30:35 AM

Solomining with cgminer is not possible yet.

Kano is working on it:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58276516

Quote

I'll look into solo working with 0.21 when I get to doing that - give it a little while Smiley
But no, it's far from ideal to use a version of bitcoin prior to 0.21, since when taproot activates next month, you must be running 0.21 or later.

Using a non taproot activated bitcoind (even with the fix in cgminer from golden-guy) will not produce a valid block.
Using a taproot activated bitcoind will also not produce a valid block due to the lack of taproot support in cgminer.

That's the info that I needed to hear!

I have moved my miners back to Kano's solo pool.

Thank you.

That info is just plain wrong though... Solo mining on bitcoind 22.0 with cgminer indeed produces valid blocks. I have just mined 2 blocks on testnet3 (which has taproot enabled) : https://www.blockchain.com/btc-testnet/address/miFe5wH65oHbLsp8hXzahyPe4aqtwcCMaK

Sledge0001

full member

Activity: 633

Merit: 159

Quote from: o_solo_miner on November 27, 2021, 06:30:35 AM

Solomining with cgminer is not possible yet.

Kano is working on it:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58276516

Quote

I'll look into solo working with 0.21 when I get to doing that - give it a little while Smiley
But no, it's far from ideal to use a version of bitcoin prior to 0.21, since when taproot activates next month, you must be running 0.21 or later.

Using a non taproot activated bitcoind (even with the fix in cgminer from golden-guy) will not produce a valid block.
Using a taproot activated bitcoind will also not produce a valid block due to the lack of taproot support in cgminer.

That's the info that I needed to hear!

I have moved my miners back to Kano's solo pool.

Thank you.

o_solo_miner

legendary

Activity: 2483

Merit: 1482

-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-

Solomining with cgminer is not possible yet.

Kano is working on it:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58276516

Quote

I'll look into solo working with 0.21 when I get to doing that - give it a little while Smiley
But no, it's far from ideal to use a version of bitcoin prior to 0.21, since when taproot activates next month, you must be running 0.21 or later.

Using a non taproot activated bitcoind (even with the fix in cgminer from golden-guy) will not produce a valid block.
Using a taproot activated bitcoind will also not produce a valid block due to the lack of taproot support in cgminer.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: Sledge0001 on November 26, 2021, 07:20:08 PM

...
Kano,

I was mining to your solo pool to begin with. I chose to go this route is because I kept getting logged out of your pool and with me gifting 2 co-workers Compaq F sticks we all couldn't login from the same network without getting locked out.

Any chance you can whitelist a static IP for me so we can all login simultaneously? If so I will come back!

IP address sent in a PM..

Miners don't get locked out that way.

You may get locked out of viewing the web site if you like pounding the refresh button, or keep accessing the API with invalid information, though that doesn't affect mining.
The IP you sent me doesn't show up anywhere.
You'd need to PM me a username (or tell me in discord)
There are no 'whitelisted' IP addresses on the pool at all.

Sledge0001

full member

Activity: 633

Merit: 159

Quote from: kano on November 26, 2021, 06:57:40 PM

Quote from: Sledge0001 on November 25, 2021, 11:50:13 PM

...

Quote from: Biffa on November 25, 2021, 04:18:16 PM

I guess the true test will be if you find a block, hopefully no-one else finds it at the same time and you can propogate the results out the rest of the network fast enough so that it recognizes your result before anyone elses.

Dedicated Fiber internet so I think I would be good on the network side.
...

Alas a "Dedicated Fiber internet" doesn't mean your block gets out to the rest of the world fast.
(even I don't consider my home Gbit fiber internet to help me much in that respect)
You need to get it to all the large pools fast, since while they don't have your block, they are mining something else.
You need nodes around the world and a faster way to distribute blocks.
e.g. on my pool it takes a tiny network packet of around 200 bytes to distribute (only) my pool's blocks all over the world, and that starts at the node you (must be) mining directly to.

Kano,

I was mining to your solo pool to begin with. I chose to go this route is because I kept getting logged out of your pool and with me gifting 2 co-workers Compaq F sticks we all couldn't login from the same network without getting locked out.

Any chance you can whitelist a static IP for me so we can all login simultaneously? If so I will come back!

IP address sent in a PM..

kano

legendary

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: Sledge0001 on November 25, 2021, 11:50:13 PM

...

Quote from: Biffa on November 25, 2021, 04:18:16 PM

I guess the true test will be if you find a block, hopefully no-one else finds it at the same time and you can propogate the results out the rest of the network fast enough so that it recognizes your result before anyone elses.

Dedicated Fiber internet so I think I would be good on the network side.
...

Alas a "Dedicated Fiber internet" doesn't mean your block gets out to the rest of the world fast.
(even I don't consider my home Gbit fiber internet to help me much in that respect)
You need to get it to all the large pools fast, since while they don't have your block, they are mining something else.
You need nodes around the world and a faster way to distribute blocks.
e.g. on my pool it takes a tiny network packet of around 200 bytes to distribute (only) my pool's blocks all over the world, and that starts at the node you (must be) mining directly to.

Sledge0001

full member

Activity: 633

Merit: 159

By the end of next week I should have a total of 25 x Compaq F's and 6 x 2Pac Miners chewing away. Grin

To be perfectly clear I have no expectations on a financial return with my current setup or hitting a block. My ETH mining has already left me very well positioned so figured time to expand!

It would be incredibleto hit a block don't get me wrong but since my hash power is small when you compare it to the network hashpower and those 110TH (and soon to be 140TH) commerical miners.

This is truly a learning experience mixed in with yeah a lottery ticket.

I figured might as well learn as much as I can over the next month or so before I migrate my gear to a new place and then look to scale up once i'm more confident with my knowledge base with much more expensive gear.

Biffa

legendary

Activity: 3234

Merit: 1221

What you're doing is fine as long as its a learning experience and you don't expect any returns.

None of us know your background, Phil is just letting you know that if you are doing it with the expectation of making it rich, well thems the odds Cheesy

Otherwise, carry on brother, looks like you are having fun and learning along the way.

Sledge0001

full member

Activity: 633

Merit: 159

Quote from: philipma1957 on November 26, 2021, 12:52:15 AM

The odds of finding a block with 22 th are about 1 in 144 years.

Assuming we stay flat.

It would be funny if the op beats those odds and gets orphaned , but the likely hood of hitting the block and getting orphaned

would be once every 1440 to 7220 years.

Assuming 10 to one up to 50 to one for the Orphan. x the 1 time in 144 years for the block.

Come on Philipma that's bad mojo and hopefully that won't happen!!! Tongue

I have been in IT for years and have successfully been mining Eth, RVN and Zil for quite some time. Currently I have 48 GPU's pushing over 3.5Gh/s and fully understand that with solo mining BTC the odds are against me.

The idea behind this is not only to run sidehacks USB miners but also to expand to actually mine BTC going forward. However the USB miners are a great way for me to hopefully show a solid proof of concept.

I'm litterally looking at commercial warehouse spaces in Nevada for this next phase of my expansion.

So try to help a brother out with encouraging words!

100knot2dae

member

Activity: 100

Merit: 29

Quote from: Sledge0001 on November 25, 2021, 11:50:13 PM

Quote from: 100knot2dae on November 25, 2021, 04:06:24 PM

Your setup looks quite good. Cool

But note that cgminer does not support BECH (bc1...) addresses for solo mining, so stick to legacy addresses p2pkh (1...) here.

In general, I would suggest to first mine some low diff bitcoin-forked altcoin (for example Bitflate or Widecoin) for testing purposes. So that you can verify your setup and make sure that you actually find blocks.

To avoid having the rpc password stored in plaintext in the bitcoin.conf config file, you can use rpcauth.py to generate a salted password hash, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/share/rpcauth/rpcauth.py

Noted and changed the BTC address. Thank you for this!

I'm not overly concerend with the RPC call showing the password in plain text as the LAN is isolated from the WAN and world so the plain text password doesn't concern me too much but I will look into modifying this in the future.

Quote from: Biffa on November 25, 2021, 04:18:16 PM

I guess the true test will be if you find a block, hopefully no-one else finds it at the same time and you can propogate the results out the rest of the network fast enough so that it recognizes your result before anyone elses.

Dedicated Fiber internet so I think I would be good on the network side.

I am most concerned if I have my setup correct!

Probably the easiest way to verify your setup is to run testnet (testnet=1). But use a different BTC address then and backup your synced mainnet blockchain first, not sure if this wouldn't get overwritten by the testnet sync.
In regards to the shares, the "Accepted" value will only increase when a block was found. On solo, it's all or nothing

Last but not least, you can also try to run a more recent version of the bitcoind with cgminer, using my coinbaseaux flag patches (which include some display optimizations for solo mining): https://github.com/vthoang/cgminer/pull/12
Haven't tried yet if these patches apply cleanly also on the lastest cgminer code with GSF support, but probably it will work just fine.

Topic: SoloMining with CGMiner against Bitcoind / Bitcoin Core v0.18.1 - page 4. (Read 2596 times)