back in for some action
http://solo.ckpool.org/tube/users/1LnGSCuCkMEsTjFw6UgMLoqkMicHxjdCYR
c'mon few more blocks @ ckpool solo !
Topic: [∞ YH] solo.ckpool.org 2% fee solo mining USA/DE 255 blocks solved! - page 468. (Read 1514962 times)
October 12, 2014, 03:12:40 AM
October 10, 2014, 06:09:14 PM
I noticed on my miner that work was interrupted and message from pool 0: Authorised, welcome to solo.ckpool.org....
But since that time, there are no shares showing up just requested work updates and new block detection.
Edit: I noticed stratum diff updated to 1.02k, so I think that's the reason. Just pulled a 4.21k share. Is diff now fixed or will it vary back down again?
What hashrate are you running? When you first connect or reconnect it always resets your diff to 1024. If your hashrate is very low it can take ages before you find a share and the pool recognises your hashrate and lowers the diff for you. But since that time, there are no shares showing up just requested work updates and new block detection.
Edit: I noticed stratum diff updated to 1.02k, so I think that's the reason. Just pulled a 4.21k share. Is diff now fixed or will it vary back down again?
October 10, 2014, 06:01:29 PM
I noticed on my miner that work was interrupted and message from pool 0: Authorised, welcome to solo.ckpool.org....
But since that time, there are no shares showing up just requested work updates and new block detection.
Edit: I noticed stratum diff updated to 1.02k, so I think that's the reason. Just pulled a 4.21k share. Working as intended!! Thanks.
But since that time, there are no shares showing up just requested work updates and new block detection.
Edit: I noticed stratum diff updated to 1.02k, so I think that's the reason. Just pulled a 4.21k share. Working as intended!! Thanks.
October 10, 2014, 05:16:34 PM
Hi all, just a heads up that the testnet pool will be offline for a few hours whilst the host the vps runs on has its kernel upgraded. The solo pool will be unaffected, and the testnet pool is a not-for-profit service so I don't think anyone will really mind. If it was critical I'd try and minimise the downtime.
Back online. Turned out to only be a few minutes. Solo pool was not affected. 
October 10, 2014, 11:55:19 AM
This is amazing to see the share numbers on ckpool, just like my old miners have found another gear or something 
October 10, 2014, 05:27:07 AM
I wonder how would ant s2 and s4 perform if those are turned to diskless nodes and booted from network, much more power maybe? Im thinking booting those s1:s to gentoo, could that be possibleto get those mining that way?
You mean would their hashrate be higher? Absolutely not, at least not on this or any other ckpool. October 10, 2014, 05:07:31 AM
Hi all, just a heads up that the testnet pool will be offline for a few hours whilst the host the vps runs on has its kernel upgraded. The solo pool will be unaffected, and the testnet pool is a not-for-profit service so I don't think anyone will really mind. If it was critical I'd try and minimise the downtime.
October 10, 2014, 04:01:37 AM
Since Slush has their Diff made to AUTOMATICALLY adjust, does this mean the S4 will be fine on Slush?
Every decent pool has their difficulty automatically adjust. The problem is that they all start at a base level and adjust up from there unless the user sets a minimum level/starting level (which most pools also have the ability to change). If the user keeps the minimum/starting level too low, the S4 will choke to death before it is adjusted to an adequate level.
Solo and Kano CKPool both start at 1024 and work down if necessary.
On Kano pool I work down to no lower than 42 - though of course I also allow the user to set a minimum diff ... greater than 42 ... if the miner chooses less than 42 then the pool limits it to 42 on Kano pool.
October 10, 2014, 03:59:43 AM
Since Slush has their Diff made to AUTOMATICALLY adjust, does this mean the S4 will be fine on Slush?
Every decent pool has their difficulty automatically adjust. The problem is that they all start at a base level and adjust up from there unless the user sets a minimum level/starting level (which most pools also have the ability to change). If the user keeps the minimum/starting level too low, the S4 will choke to death before it is adjusted to an adequate level.
Solo and Kano CKPool both start at 1024 and work down if necessary.
On Kano pool I work down to no lower than 42 - though of course I also allow the user to set a minimum diff ... greater than 42 ... if the miner chooses less than 42 then the pool limits it to 42 on Kano pool.
October 10, 2014, 01:59:55 AM
I wonder how would ant s2 and s4 perform if those are turned to diskless nodes and booted from network, much more power maybe? Im thinking booting those s1:s to gentoo, could that be possibleto get those mining that way?
You mean would their hashrate be higher? Absolutely not, at least not on this or any other ckpool. October 10, 2014, 12:59:49 AM
I wonder how would ant s2 and s4 perform if those are turned to diskless nodes and booted from network, much more power maybe? Im thinking booting those s1:s to gentoo, could that be possibleto get those mining that way?
October 09, 2014, 11:16:08 PM
I am using chainminer. The web page is still showing 242 GH/s and I can see it getting a diff 1 share every now and then in the stratum proxy screen. When I point it to Eligius or BTC Guild everything is fine.
The rig is a V2 M-board with V1 cards. I have cgminer installed on the pi using the black arrow driver, but it just throws all HW errors. The other miner program is installed as well, but it eventually just dies out. It is really not that big of a deal now, it is just weird and now I wanna know why it is not working right.
No idea, but it's downstream from the pool. However, if it wasn't clear, it is still hashing at 242 GH, it's just not submitting any shares below the diff it gets when it starts, which means that only the stats are wrong, but your chance of finding a block with this hardware are still the same 1 in a trillion or whatever they are for 242 GH. The rig is a V2 M-board with V1 cards. I have cgminer installed on the pi using the black arrow driver, but it just throws all HW errors. The other miner program is installed as well, but it eventually just dies out. It is really not that big of a deal now, it is just weird and now I wanna know why it is not working right.
October 09, 2014, 10:38:41 PM
I am using chainminer. The web page is still showing 242 GH/s and I can see it getting a diff 1 share every now and then in the stratum proxy screen. When I point it to Eligius or BTC Guild everything is fine.
The rig is a V2 M-board with V1 cards. I have cgminer installed on the pi using the black arrow driver, but it just throws all HW errors. The other miner program is installed as well, but it eventually just dies out. It is really not that big of a deal now, it is just weird and now I wanna know why it is not working right.
The rig is a V2 M-board with V1 cards. I have cgminer installed on the pi using the black arrow driver, but it just throws all HW errors. The other miner program is installed as well, but it eventually just dies out. It is really not that big of a deal now, it is just weird and now I wanna know why it is not working right.
October 09, 2014, 10:19:27 PM
It was setup with a unique worker, _bitfury
Right now I have it pointed at Eligius. When I get back from dinner I will point it back this way.
Edit: It is pointed back at the pool now. Naturally a couple of cards went out, but the web page shows 253 GH/s.
I looked at it and the share log is consistent with something hashing at 250ish GH and there is nothing untowards going on in terms of rejects or invalids or anything that I can make out.Right now I have it pointed at Eligius. When I get back from dinner I will point it back this way.
Edit: It is pointed back at the pool now. Naturally a couple of cards went out, but the web page shows 253 GH/s.
That's weird. The stats are showing this:
{"hashrate1m": "4.51G", "hashrate5m": "10.8G", "hashrate1hr": "15.8G", "hashrate1d": "956M"}
It dropped your diff from 1024 to 192 here (meaning it felt it was about 250GH):
Code:
[2014-10-09 22:34:38] Client 211 biased dsps 57.73 dsps 33.62 drr 0.06 adjust diff from 1024 to: 192
Then it went downhill, still delivering only the same number of shares even though diff kept dropping:Code:
[2014-10-09 22:38:47] Client 211 biased dsps 24.05 dsps 19.66 drr 0.13 adjust diff from 192 to: 80
[2014-10-09 22:43:53] Client 211 biased dsps 11.35 dsps 10.60 drr 0.14 adjust diff from 80 to: 38
[2014-10-09 22:49:16] Client 211 biased dsps 5.56 dsps 5.44 drr 0.15 adjust diff from 38 to: 19
[2014-10-09 22:54:38] Client 211 biased dsps 2.79 dsps 2.77 drr 0.15 adjust diff from 19 to: 9
[2014-10-09 22:59:43] Client 211 biased dsps 1.33 dsps 1.33 drr 0.15 adjust diff from 9 to: 4
[2014-10-09 23:06:22] Client 211 biased dsps 0.58 dsps 0.58 drr 0.14 adjust diff from 4 to: 2
[2014-10-09 23:11:41] Client 211 biased dsps 0.22 dsps 0.22 drr 0.11 adjust diff from 2 to: 1
Hardly any shares are coming in even though it's now at diff 1. So for whatever reason it seems to be behaving as though it's still at the original diff. Not sure what your client version software/driver etc. are, but that's how I see that behaviour.[2014-10-09 22:43:53] Client 211 biased dsps 11.35 dsps 10.60 drr 0.14 adjust diff from 80 to: 38
[2014-10-09 22:49:16] Client 211 biased dsps 5.56 dsps 5.44 drr 0.15 adjust diff from 38 to: 19
[2014-10-09 22:54:38] Client 211 biased dsps 2.79 dsps 2.77 drr 0.15 adjust diff from 19 to: 9
[2014-10-09 22:59:43] Client 211 biased dsps 1.33 dsps 1.33 drr 0.15 adjust diff from 9 to: 4
[2014-10-09 23:06:22] Client 211 biased dsps 0.58 dsps 0.58 drr 0.14 adjust diff from 4 to: 2
[2014-10-09 23:11:41] Client 211 biased dsps 0.22 dsps 0.22 drr 0.11 adjust diff from 2 to: 1
Every share is still over 1024 diff:
Code:
[2014-10-09 23:19:20] Accepted client 211 share diff 1204.4/1/35G: 00000000003669d1fdee8926976b1eec1e6db87052531cd106bbad341441a883
October 09, 2014, 09:57:39 PM
It was setup with a unique worker, _bitfury
Right now I have it pointed at Eligius. When I get back from dinner I will point it back this way.
Edit: It is pointed back at the pool now. Naturally a couple of cards went out, but the web page shows 253 GH/s.
I looked at it and the share log is consistent with something hashing at 250ish GH and there is nothing untowards going on in terms of rejects or invalids or anything that I can make out.Right now I have it pointed at Eligius. When I get back from dinner I will point it back this way.
Edit: It is pointed back at the pool now. Naturally a couple of cards went out, but the web page shows 253 GH/s.
That's weird. The stats are showing this:
{"hashrate1m": "4.51G", "hashrate5m": "10.8G", "hashrate1hr": "15.8G", "hashrate1d": "956M"}
October 09, 2014, 09:39:46 PM
It was setup with a unique worker, _bitfury
Right now I have it pointed at Eligius. When I get back from dinner I will point it back this way.
Edit: It is pointed back at the pool now. Naturally a couple of cards went out, but the web page shows 253 GH/s.
I looked at it and the share log is consistent with something hashing at 250ish GH and there is nothing untowards going on in terms of rejects or invalids or anything that I can make out. Right now I have it pointed at Eligius. When I get back from dinner I will point it back this way.
Edit: It is pointed back at the pool now. Naturally a couple of cards went out, but the web page shows 253 GH/s.
October 09, 2014, 06:44:40 PM
So apparently my old Bitfury rig is not fond of your pool. It is showing 350 GH/s on the webpage and only 73 GH/s at the pool currently. Any suggestions for what I can do? Other than throw it in the trash.
Maybe you can set it up with a unique worker name and give me the worker name and I can dig into the logs to see if there's anything obvious poolside.It was setup with a unique worker, _bitfury
Right now I have it pointed at Eligius. When I get back from dinner I will point it back this way.
Edit: It is pointed back at the pool now. Naturally a couple of cards went out, but the web page shows 253 GH/s.
October 09, 2014, 05:15:16 PM
So apparently my old Bitfury rig is not fond of your pool. It is showing 350 GH/s on the webpage and only 73 GH/s at the pool currently. Any suggestions for what I can do? Other than throw it in the trash.
Maybe you can set it up with a unique worker name and give me the worker name and I can dig into the logs to see if there's anything obvious poolside. October 09, 2014, 10:37:31 AM
So apparently my old Bitfury rig is not fond of your pool. It is showing 350 GH/s on the webpage and only 73 GH/s at the pool currently. Any suggestions for what I can do? Other than throw it in the trash.
October 09, 2014, 10:23:58 AM
Althought worthless, since the server is on its mining with its 2 CPUs and CPU miner.
In the first days using the pool I saw it was hashing but did not get a YAYs thats common with
cpu miner when in other pools.
So today it started also making some YAYs actually running for less than an hour and have already 3
when other days not even one.
How does this translated???
LOL+Hi Hi
Wishfull thinking 3 blocks in a row!!!
LOL+Hi Hi
LOL... no, you didn't find 3 blocks, you got 3 accepted shares. ckpool uses variable difficulty that starts at 1024 and adjusts according to the hash rate of your miners. Since you're CPU mining (dear lord in heaven what are you thinking???), it just happened to take that long to find a difficulty 1024 share. Today you got lucky and found a share at least 1024 difficulty, so likely the pool has now adjusted the difficulty to match your abysmal hashing speed from the CPU.In the first days using the pool I saw it was hashing but did not get a YAYs thats common with
cpu miner when in other pools.
So today it started also making some YAYs actually running for less than an hour and have already 3
when other days not even one.
How does this translated???
LOL+Hi Hi
Wishfull thinking 3 blocks in a row!!!
LOL+Hi Hi
Seriously... what are you thinking? Do you just not like your server, or are you doing some kind of extended CPU burn in testing? Nothing good can come of CPU mining BTC. Of course, now that I've written this, that CPU will probably be the next block finder on the pool...
Jump to: