Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22] - page 77.

hexafraction

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 268

Tips welcomed: 1CF4GhXX1RhCaGzWztgE1YZZUcSpoqTbsJ

Quote from: tspacepilot on August 03, 2015, 05:14:18 PM

Quote from: hexafraction on August 03, 2015, 04:52:42 PM

Quote from: tspacepilot on August 03, 2015, 04:42:59 PM

I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel? I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

Thanks, I'll look at the Makefile that I downloaded from github and see what's going on in there with respect to CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.

EDIT:

This is the top of the default Makefile, looks like I'm okay if that's the only optimizations they're referring to in the wiki:

Code:

LIBS=-lpcre -lcrypto -lm -lpthread
CFLAGS=-ggdb -O3 -Wall

Yep, it looks like it's being fully optimized. I'm not sure why -ggdb is included; debug builds usually have poorer performance. -ggdb should be removed and the final executable tested.

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1081

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

Quote from: hexafraction on August 03, 2015, 04:52:42 PM

Quote from: tspacepilot on August 03, 2015, 04:42:59 PM

I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel? I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

Thanks, I'll look at the Makefile that I downloaded from github and see what's going on in there with respect to CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.

EDIT:

This is the top of the default Makefile, looks like I'm okay if that's the only optimizations they're referring to in the wiki:

Code:

LIBS=-lpcre -lcrypto -lm -lpthread
CFLAGS=-ggdb -O3 -Wall

hexafraction

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 268

Tips welcomed: 1CF4GhXX1RhCaGzWztgE1YZZUcSpoqTbsJ

Quote from: tspacepilot on August 03, 2015, 04:42:59 PM

I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel? I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1081

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

Quote from: hexafraction on August 03, 2015, 04:36:40 PM

Quote from: tspacepilot on August 03, 2015, 04:16:11 PM

I guess I finally noticed this paragraph on the wiki page for vanitygen:

Quote

As vanitygen performs a lot of large integer arithmetic, running it in 64-bit mode makes a huge difference in key search rate, easily a 50% improvement over 32-bit mode. If you are using a 64-bit edition of Windows, and not using a GPU, be sure to use vanitygen64.exe.

So that made me double-check and it turned out that my binary of vanitygen was:

Code:

tspacepilot@computer:~/src/vanitygen$ file vanitygen
vanitygen: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=36407df1ab36b5bef2906e418394ec750806c884, not stripped

Whoops!

So I rebuilt it and now Ihave a 64-bit executable and things are faster. Okay, so I continue reading on the same page:

Quote

In custom builds, CPU performance will be less than expected if the OpenSSL library is an older version (<1.0.0d) or is not built with the appropriate optimizations enabled.

Well, I had built by just saying "make", so this makes me wonder what are the appropriate optimizations (are they Makefile options I should be passing?). That's the point of this question then, should I just say "make" or should I be passing some kind of optimization parameters?

You might need to set CFLAGS and/or CXXFLAGS to include -O3 when running configure if you don't see -O3 in the command lines shown when running make. However, -O3 might be already set most likely. I'd need to double check.

I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel? I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

hexafraction

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 268

Tips welcomed: 1CF4GhXX1RhCaGzWztgE1YZZUcSpoqTbsJ

Quote from: tspacepilot on August 03, 2015, 04:16:11 PM

I guess I finally noticed this paragraph on the wiki page for vanitygen:

Quote

As vanitygen performs a lot of large integer arithmetic, running it in 64-bit mode makes a huge difference in key search rate, easily a 50% improvement over 32-bit mode. If you are using a 64-bit edition of Windows, and not using a GPU, be sure to use vanitygen64.exe.

So that made me double-check and it turned out that my binary of vanitygen was:

Code:

tspacepilot@computer:~/src/vanitygen$ file vanitygen
vanitygen: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=36407df1ab36b5bef2906e418394ec750806c884, not stripped

Whoops!

So I rebuilt it and now Ihave a 64-bit executable and things are faster. Okay, so I continue reading on the same page:

Quote

In custom builds, CPU performance will be less than expected if the OpenSSL library is an older version (<1.0.0d) or is not built with the appropriate optimizations enabled.

Well, I had built by just saying "make", so this makes me wonder what are the appropriate optimizations (are they Makefile options I should be passing?). That's the point of this question then, should I just say "make" or should I be passing some kind of optimization parameters?

You might need to set CFLAGS and/or CXXFLAGS to include -O3 when running configure if you don't see -O3 in the command lines shown when running make. However, -O3 might be already set most likely. I'd need to double check.

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1081

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

I guess I finally noticed this paragraph on the wiki page for vanitygen:

Quote

As vanitygen performs a lot of large integer arithmetic, running it in 64-bit mode makes a huge difference in key search rate, easily a 50% improvement over 32-bit mode. If you are using a 64-bit edition of Windows, and not using a GPU, be sure to use vanitygen64.exe.

So that made me double-check and it turned out that my binary of vanitygen was:

Code:

tspacepilot@computer:~/src/vanitygen$ file vanitygen
vanitygen: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=36407df1ab36b5bef2906e418394ec750806c884, not stripped

Whoops!

So I rebuilt it and now Ihave a 64-bit executable and things are faster. Okay, so I continue reading on the same page:

Quote

In custom builds, CPU performance will be less than expected if the OpenSSL library is an older version (<1.0.0d) or is not built with the appropriate optimizations enabled.

Well, I had built by just saying "make", so this makes me wonder what are the appropriate optimizations (are they Makefile options I should be passing?). That's the point of this question then, should I just say "make" or should I be passing some kind of optimization parameters?

bitcreditscc

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 501

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 02, 2015, 06:57:56 AM

Quote from: bitcreditscc on August 01, 2015, 10:50:47 PM

Been wondering how to go about creating a vanity multi-sig address anyone ever attempted ? Fail/Succeed?

See this discussion for some pointers:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/202ka5/is_it_possible_to_make_a_vanity_multisig_address/

I'm pretty sure I've seen a multisig vanity out there used either by a pool or an exchange, but don't recall any details.

great thanks!!!

TheRealSteve

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

FUN > ROI

Quote from: bitcreditscc on August 01, 2015, 10:50:47 PM

Been wondering how to go about creating a vanity multi-sig address anyone ever attempted ? Fail/Succeed?

See this discussion for some pointers:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/202ka5/is_it_possible_to_make_a_vanity_multisig_address/

I'm pretty sure I've seen a multisig vanity out there used either by a pool or an exchange, but don't recall any details.

bitcreditscc

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 501

Been wondering how to go about creating a vanity multi-sig address anyone ever attempted ? Fail/Succeed?

Jude Austin

legendary

Activity: 1140

Merit: 1000

The Real Jude Austin

Quote from: foodstamps on July 28, 2015, 11:40:50 AM

So I can only get oclvanitygen to recognize 2 GPUs at a time on same rig....even if I have 5 connected. Is this normal?

Did you try using -D argument?

oclvanitygen64 -D 0:0 -D 0:1 -D 0:2 -D 0:3 -D 0:4 12manyGPUs

foodstamps

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 502

So I can only get oclvanitygen to recognize 2 GPUs at a time on same rig....even if I have 5 connected. Is this normal?

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1081

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

Quote from: jacktheking on July 26, 2015, 10:48:09 PM

Hey guys (and girls). I have been trying to use the keyconv utility as stated in first post. However, my machine dont seem to understand. When I run ./keyconv -G it gave me the following error.

Code:

Invalid character '-' in prefix './keyconv'

Code:

Invalid character 'G' in prefix '-G'

How can I fix it?

Edit: Found out that I dont have keyconv.exe installed. Not sure why. Downloaded the latest version and it's working now.

Glad you figured it out. For the record it's nicer if you can put the entire comand line (including your invocation, not just the error message). I was looking at your error message thinking, there must be some syntax error in the command he wrote, but since I couldn't see the command you wrote ...

jacktheking

legendary

Activity: 1484

Merit: 1001

Personal Text Space Not For Sale

Hey guys (and girls). I have been trying to use the keyconv utility as stated in first post. However, my machine dont seem to understand. When I run ./keyconv -G it gave me the following error.

Code:

Invalid character '-' in prefix './keyconv'

Code:

Invalid character 'G' in prefix '-G'

How can I fix it?

Edit: Found out that I dont have keyconv.exe installed. Not sure why. Downloaded the latest version and it's working now.

ezeminer

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 1118

Lie down. Have a cookie

Quote from: TrueBeliever on July 25, 2015, 08:26:29 AM

Quote from: ezeminer on July 22, 2015, 12:20:55 PM

Quote from: TheRealSteve on July 20, 2015, 11:05:16 AM

Yep, added - thanks

I also recently updated the Vanitygen article in general with some general info on pattern difficulty and any delusions of trying to use Vanitygen to attack addresses

I would like to say a gtx 780ti does 50-60Mkey/s highest was 62Mkey/s

just for documenting purposes.

which version is your card? I assume it is the faster 3GB RAM, DDR5, 384bit bus version?

Yea
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487001

TrueBeliever

member

Activity: 78

Merit: 11

Quote from: ezeminer on July 22, 2015, 12:20:55 PM

Quote from: TheRealSteve on July 20, 2015, 11:05:16 AM

Yep, added - thanks

I also recently updated the Vanitygen article in general with some general info on pattern difficulty and any delusions of trying to use Vanitygen to attack addresses

I would like to say a gtx 780ti does 50-60Mkey/s highest was 62Mkey/s

just for documenting purposes.

which version is your card? I assume it is the faster 3GB RAM, DDR5, 384bit bus version?

TheRealSteve

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

FUN > ROI

Quote from: jrmg on July 24, 2015, 02:32:47 PM

How I can make custom wallet address where I don't have privatekey but have choose long address like 1Bitcoineater address?

You reverse the last few steps that are part of a regular address generation;
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Technical_background_of_version_1_Bitcoin_addresses
So you base58 decode your input, (1WhateverEtc), take the first section, double-sha256 that, take the first 4 bytes of that result as the CRC, and append that to your 1WhateverEtc.

There might be services that do this for you - if not, just run a bit of python code (can do that online, too): https://gist.github.com/CoinWhisperer/6d673f1f3d13da1611cd

In general, google 'bitcoin "burn address"' and then 'generator' or 'maker' or somesuch - bound to find more results

jrmg

full member

Activity: 134

Merit: 100

How I can make custom wallet address where I don't have privatekey but have choose long address like 1Bitcoineater address?

TrueBeliever

member

Activity: 78

Merit: 11

Quote from: TheRealSteve on July 23, 2015, 06:22:33 AM

Quote from: TrueBeliever on July 23, 2015, 04:29:29 AM

I saw in another thread that someone is able to get 5+ Mkey/s out of their laptop with oclvanitygen. I am sure I am doing something wrong with the parameters trying to get it working, still only getting about 100 Kkey/s using these parameters:

I think you may have been referring to my results. The 5Mkey/s is off of a GeForce GT750M that's in the laptop. I've never gotten it to work with the also built-in Intel HD 4600, with exactly the same error you're seeing, and an issue is open in the original vanitygen repo about this as well: https://github.com/samr7/vanitygen/issues/38

Thanks for the info, after reviewing a pull request to fix the bug I modified the calc_addrs.cl directly. I also updated the device driver. All this got me a bit further but i am getting a CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE error. From reviewing the online information it seems unlikely I will get the program working on this Intel GPU, although I would like to hear from anyone who has managed to do it.

foodstamps

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 502

Quote from: TrueBeliever on July 23, 2015, 04:29:29 AM

I saw in another thread that someone is able to get 5+ Mkey/s out of their laptop with oclvanitygen. I am sure I am doing something wrong with the parameters trying to get it working, still only getting about 100 Kkey/s using these parameters:

oclvanitygen -f list.txt -D 0:0 -w 512

on a Lenovo laptop with 64bit Win7. According to oclvanitygen I have:
0: i5-3320M CPU @ 2.60GHz
1: Intel HD Graphics 4000

Can anyone share what are your typical input parameters or provide pointers?

I get better rates for my CPU using vanitygen as opposed to oclvanitygen.

With an AMD Athlon II X3 I get 1 Mkey/s but with oclvanitygen I get half that.

I use oclvanitygen for GPUs only.

TheRealSteve

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

FUN > ROI

Quote from: TrueBeliever on July 23, 2015, 04:29:29 AM

I saw in another thread that someone is able to get 5+ Mkey/s out of their laptop with oclvanitygen. I am sure I am doing something wrong with the parameters trying to get it working, still only getting about 100 Kkey/s using these parameters:

I think you may have been referring to my results. The 5Mkey/s is off of a GeForce GT750M that's in the laptop. I've never gotten it to work with the also built-in Intel HD 4600, with exactly the same error you're seeing, and an issue is open in the original vanitygen repo about this as well: https://github.com/samr7/vanitygen/issues/38

Topic: Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22] - page 77. (Read 1153678 times)