[ANN] ptsweb.beeeeer.org - Protoshares mining sub-pool

[drmyfore]

@xolokram
Well, In fact I have 128GB memory, so I can
1. 40 threads, 2GB per thread (29)
2. 20 threads, 4GB per thread (30)

need I enable sph mode when I use AVX miner?

[xolokram]

@afr33sl4ve:
you have to start your client with that parameter, it's not a RPC call!!
http://coinplorer.com/PTS/Addresses/PuDmCckuUoPe9wvzTwZb9rABukVFSXnseL

@MrMeow:
because you made 7702 / 1237920 and then 3417 / 572167
you're aware of the randomness of cryptocoin mining?

@drmyfore:
AVX (should be enabled) & something between 20 and 40 threads
you'll have to test this as the ram access probably will become a bottleneck

@ryen123:
thank you

- xolokram

[afr33sl4ve]

@afr33sl4ve:
transaction was successfully executed in block #27991
block id is 000000a68d85c4a81241fa79964bb6bfdca3a407c933a175ff7216aff89e3c12
tx id is b1b0a8e4737b28c46995caaec70d087209a214ec4bfb92375ee273e82237719e

btsblock is down, does anyone know another public protoshares blockchain explorer?

tldr: check your client/blockchain data, do a rescan (parameter -rescan on your pts client)

Excellent! I type in "-rescan" and it returns method not found. What do?

EDIT: Nevermind. Reopened the wallet client. Turns out the block chain wasn't updating at all. :\ The transaction is there. Thanks again!

[MrMeow]

@xolokram I'm sorry I should've been more specific...

28260 2013-12-04 23:45:23 7702 / 1237920 -> 0.14946 PTS / 24.02 PTS -> block waiting for confirmations
28212 2013-12-04 21:21:58 3417 / 572167 -> 0.15100 PTS / 25.28 PTS -> block waiting for confirmations

My question is why the drop in shares distributed. Does it have to do with the growing complexity? I'm a newb

[drmyfore]

Hi, I have some questions:
My CPU are Xeon E5-2680v2 * 2 (20C40T, HT enabled), I want to use your miner so
1. Which edition settings is best for me? (that is to say, i want to know the different between avx, sse4,intel and sphlib, and which is the fastest)
2. Is Hyper-threading useful for mining?(I can run 40 threads when ht is enabled, and 20 threads when ht is disabled)

[ryen123]

btsblock is down, does anyone know another public protoshares blockchain explorer?

There is this other block explorer > http://coinplorer.com/PTS

[zvs]

@xrpbtc:
orphans are normal, it's nothing you can prevent 100%
the orphan "streak" was a f---up on the backend of the pool, read the posts about it here

I am looking at my log and I received all the blocks solved by beeeeer from between 7-10 seconds after it reports them as being found on the website (which means that one or both of our clocks are off but also there shouldn't be a range of 7-10 seconds, shouldn't be greater than 1 second)

but for the one that was orphaned, 28296 2013-12-05 01:43:20, I received:

2013-12-05 01:39:22 received block 0000008c06a5cd9f9d1aa04fff50555e49215efe7a2df6c7fd152f6f7df44348 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:39:22 Committing 91 changed transactions to coin database...
2013-12-05 01:39:22 SetBestChain: new best=0000008c06a5cd9f9d1aa04fff50555e49215efe7a2df6c7fd152f6f7df44348  height=28296  log2_work=37.117473  tx=121129  date=2013-12-05 01:39:16 progress=0.999994
2013-12-05 01:39:22 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED

about 4m earlier.

I guess the node reaction after block #28295 was received is relevant too:

2013-12-05 01:37:22 received block 000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 Committing 16 changed transactions to coin database...
2013-12-05 01:37:22 SetBestChain: new best=000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20  height=28295  log2_work=37.117204  tx=121100  date=2013-12-05 01:37:11 progress=0.999990
2013-12-05 01:37:22 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks -1 to 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks 28294 to 000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks 28294 to 000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks 28294 to 000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks 28294 to 000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks 28294 to 000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks -1 to 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks 28294 to 000000232347bda9f9fffe288b67feda9d7cc37651675cecd2533dd4240c3e20 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks -1 to 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:37:22 getblocks -1 to 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 limit 500 from xxx

all those nodes requesting 28294+, never received 28294 2013-12-05 01:35:47, until I sent it to them after block 28295

the same holds true for block 28303 (after beer got 28302 about 65 seconds earlier):

2013-12-05 01:52:57 received block 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:57 Committing 40 changed transactions to coin database...
2013-12-05 01:52:57 SetBestChain: new best=00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859  height=28303  log2_work=37.119355  tx=121241  date=2013-12-05 01:52:51 progress=0.999994
2013-12-05 01:52:57 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2013-12-05 01:52:57 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:57 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:57 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:57 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:58 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:58 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:58 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:58 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx
2013-12-05 01:52:58 getblocks 28302 to 00000033d992cb9f48c4a53c29e09315bc19674cbcd869d2847530a2604e8859 limit 500 from xxx

so I think protoshare client connectivity is probably an issue here, for some of these

put 5.9.24.81 on addnode 

[xolokram]

@afr33sl4ve:
transaction was successfully executed in block #27991
block id is 000000a68d85c4a81241fa79964bb6bfdca3a407c933a175ff7216aff89e3c12
tx id is b1b0a8e4737b28c46995caaec70d087209a214ec4bfb92375ee273e82237719e

btsblock is down, does anyone know another public protoshares blockchain explorer?

tldr: check your client/blockchain data, do a rescan (parameter -rescan on your pts client)

[afr33sl4ve]

Hey. uh. xolo... I'm kinda concerned here.

http://imgur.com/RpPPG8z

[jabbaah]

Hi,

newbie. just wondering, does this apply the more servers you have the more PTS you can mine? or better few servers but higher processors?

TIA,

Mike

The more cores, the more PTS you can mine. Of course those cores should also have a reasonable performance.
Therefore it's depending on core speed (and numbers), not the number of servers.

thanks for the response ...i lower the number of my server and rather upgraded on fewer server but with higher CPUs

Mike

You may want to have a look at my ptstools (see my signature for web urls) for easier installation and monitoring your servers.
There is also a small puppet manifest available.

[gigamike]

Hi,

newbie. just wondering, does this apply the more servers you have the more PTS you can mine? or better few servers but higher processors?

TIA,

Mike

The more cores, the more PTS you can mine. Of course those cores should also have a reasonable performance.
Therefore it's depending on core speed (and numbers), not the number of servers.

thanks for the response ...i lower the number of my server and rather upgraded on fewer server but with higher CPUs

Mike

[xolokram]

@xrpbtc:
orphans are normal, it's nothing you can prevent 100%
the orphan "streak" was a f---up on the backend of the pool, read the posts about it here

@zvs:
windows binaries are not yet updated, i'll do this later today
the reconnect on rejects is just a (dirty) workaround anyway
i would prefer to find the real origin of the problem and fix that

@MrMeow:
maybe you shouldn't compare rounds with ~60k shares to rounds with 200k+ shares?

- xolokram

[zvs]

33 rejects, 5088 valids on a Buffalo, NY server
29 rejects, 2433 valids on a Las Vegas, NV server
24 rejects, 1773 valids on a Las Vegas, NV server
0 rejects, 158 valids on a Scranton, PA server
2 rejects, 144 valids on a Dallas, TX server
1 reject, 74 valids on a Houston, TX server
42 rejects, 1745 valids on a Germany server

Now it's

92 rejects, 10377 valids on Buffalo, NY server (8 cores)
57 rejects, 5090 valids on Las Vegas, NV server (8 cores)
60 rejects, 4352 valids on Las Vegas, NV server (8 cores)
7 rejects, 1070 valids on Scranton, PA server (*8 cores) --  ed: it just seems like 4 cores.  gimp Xeon =(
10 rejects, 1128 valids on Dallas, TX server (4 cores)
5 rejects, 448 valids on Houston, TX server (varies)
69 rejects, 4053 valids on Germany server, (7 cores)
18 rejects, 1494 valids on Lenoir, NC server (8 cores)

these are all using the latest git pull, diff versions of ubuntu,  about half on 12.04 and the other half on 13.10

they're also all using the 1024mb memory option

oh, jfyi, that Dallas server is from burst.net...  any new customer can get a server for a month for $1 from them, w/ no strings attached (besides having to remember to cancel it in time)

I ran the Windows client for a bit and it started out with 457 accepted and 3 rejects... by the time I saw it to cancel it it was at 677 accepted and 77 rejects.

the linux client disconnects and reconnects if it gets 3 rejects in a row, the windows client doesnt

[jabbaah]

Hi,

newbie. just wondering, does this apply the more servers you have the more PTS you can mine? or better few servers but higher processors?

TIA,

Mike

The more cores, the more PTS you can mine. Of course those cores should also have a reasonable performance.
Therefore it's depending on core speed (and numbers), not the number of servers.

[gigamike]

Hi,

newbie. just wondering, does this apply the more servers you have the more PTS you can mine? or better few servers but higher processors?

TIA,

Mike