It's not a cgminer issue; not really. The pool isn't "down." Down means you can't connect to it. The pool is up. It is rejecting all proofs of work, but it is "up."

Cgminer has a setting you can enable to automatically disable any pool that rejects too many shares (check the README for details). Note that it won't automatically re-enable the pool after it does this. You'll have to do that manually to test to see if it's working again.

What the hell is 'cryto' ?

Goodness, if I'd just gone one page back in the thread I'd have seen the drama. Thanks for the links. A disappointing turn of events.

rUrCaw9NfP9NeSBm19TUZGu6ZFmj41WY58

Just noticed... Pool stole 10 coins instead of autopaying them out.

Started the 24h period with a small balance in my account (Approximately 1.77) and an autopayout of 10. I'm now showing a 24 hour credit of 7.14673869 and an account balance of only 4.62369647. It should have sent out overnight; the coins are gone, but there's no payout in my history to match.

Just pulled out the last bit of my balance and won't be returning until my missing coins are credited and/or sent. (To the Notroll.in admin: I use the same account name there as here. Please fix it.)

What I've noticed about 0.8.1 (and 0.8) when analyzing traffic with jnettop (was the quickest thing I had handy) is that a peer can ask for blocks and bitcoind will happily send them as fast as it possibly can. If that peer asks for a large range (500 at a time) bitcoind will happily saturate your entire uplink to deliver those block requests.

I've seen single peers pulling 250KB/sec through my DSL uplink, absolutely destroying anything else I'm trying to do. Restarting bitcoind disconnects that peer and they move onto another peer, which is why it seems stable again for a while after restarting. Eventually you get another greedy peer and the cycle repeats.

There is no built in throttling. You'll have to manually figure out a way to do QoS/throttling so it doesn't kill your link.

Here's an odd one I'm running into today after re-burning my USB stick's linux image from a clean copy, pulling in the latest git, compiling and firing up cgminer...

cgminer's interface ignores all normal menu keystrokes (p, g, and so on), UNLESS I neglect to specify a pool in the config file, in which case it works normally because it had to accept keyboard input to allow me to set the pool credentials. I can use ctl-c to kill it and get back to a prompt, no problem. I just can't adjust settings while cgminer is running.

This is latest git pull as of "Thu Apr 11 13:31:17 2013 +1000".

It's looking like you broke it worse than that since the difficulty swung back and forth, but in a way you've now exposed the fact that a rolling daily average for difficulty was not the proper way to fix the underlying issue   EDIT: Actually, it seems to be stuck for 5+ hours right now, other miners abandoned it because difficulty got too high. Maybe a few minutes on with your avalon it to get some blocks moving again would help things.



Unrelated question for anyone - I've not had a chance to peruse the P2Pool source. How hard is it to add other coin networks? With TRC dying/dead a day after I decided to point a miner at it for the first time, I'm curious to see how things like nvc & ppc perform, but the pools I've tried are fairly unstable.

Based on what I've read, they did implement something that was supposed to help vs ASIC bombing. However, someone apparently hit the pool yesterday until the rolling average was blown sky high, then left. The average calculation wound up swinging hard the other direction once the blocks started moving again, driving the difficulty down to 3 or lower for a short while. It's now on the rebound again, and has risen to a point where no new blocks have been found with the current hashrate of the network.


EDIT: blockchain at present. http://www.cryptocoinexplorer.com:3750/chain/Terracoin?count=32

When the network retargets itself to difficulty 3, I expect it's hard for the server to keep up

The swing from very high difficulty down to single digits was kind of cool to watch. It's hard to get a share in when the chain is at difficulty 3 and the pool is asking for 4.

for your second message, drop -march=native from your CFLAGS. Should compile then.

for the first, I've also had to pull the ADL_SDK to get it to compile. Not sure why just yet.

Figured I'd test out scrypt mining, since I've never looked at it before today. Yes, yes, I'm late to the LTC party. Still haven't arrived.


Running a pair of 7970s, Catalyst 12.6 ("8.98.2" driver). Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64. cgminer 2.11.3, latest pull from git. I've tried poking different SDK versions in (2.6, 2.7, 2.8), but 2.8 makes my cards undetectable by cgminer. Have not messed with other catalyst versions yet; I need to pull an image of the USB stick before I try to break something that severely.

Searches on CONCURRENT_THREADS in this thread pointed to a post that referred to a different thread that didn't appear to contain an answer (was the rally to raise funds to get scrypt included in cgminer) and it eventually referred back to this thread. I unfortunately didn't see much on LOOKUP_GAP errors, either.

Has anyone seen this behavior before? Based on the 'undefined' errors when compiling the kernel I assume I'm missing the definitions in the headers with the CL platform, which makes me think SDK or driver version issues... the 2.7 SDK lib/x86_64 files are symlink'd into /usr/lib and the CL header directory into /usr/include. cgminer compiles fine; the problem comes at execution time and only if scrypt is selected as the kernel. (except in the case of 2.8 SDK, in which case it can't enumerate cards regardless of kernel)


EDIT: Fixed. Learned that it's not enough to set kernel:scrypt. also must set scrypt:true.

I can't even get the graph to load. Just the blank window with 'MtGox Live' in the top left, options bottom right, and the IRC comment in the bottom left - which, I discovered, points to a channel that is invite only.

#100016167 Pay-date Feb/18/13: Little SC (1)

#6658 Pay-date Aug/29/12: Little SC (1)

Output was 105.26389291: http://blockchain.info/tx/c8fc47b8ec6c323a885b6ef2b1846889a80c7b3fb786199f5aa8dc55d37c636a

So, somewhere in the area of 103600.

Was it retroactive? I thought he'd always had the LLC, as noted:

What is the difference, technically, between a bond and a contract in this sense?

I'm honestly in the dark on this as someone who doesn't work with securities, bonds, contracts, and the like.

For what it is worth I also have no stake in Gigamining whatsoever. I'm just curious of the difference between these particular terms in the sense they're being applied here.

Have you considered something like CloudFlare to help protect the front end? It won't do anything for the mining ports, but it might help defend the website.

Just a thought. I mention CloudFlare specifically because it's free. $$

After a git pull I'm seeing this line repeated very often in the log.


2012-11-29 00:00:01.675185 Punishing share for 'not all txs present'! Jumping from fdbd8fa8 to b29d41a0!
2012-11-29 00:00:01.835841 Punishing share for 'not all txs present'! Jumping from fdbd8fa8 to b29d41a0!
2012-11-29 00:00:01.887518 Punishing share for 'not all txs present'! Jumping from fdbd8fa8 to b29d41a0!
2012-11-29 00:00:01.940477 Punishing share for 'not all txs present'! Jumping from fdbd8fa8 to b29d41a0!