Quote from: paulthetafy on August 03, 2016, 06:10:55 AM

Quote from: mumus on August 03, 2016, 05:33:04 AM

Quote from: paulthetafy on August 03, 2016, 01:03:02 AM

Quote from: sonsophanith on August 02, 2016, 11:01:43 PM

Someone please help compiling window CPU miner. Miner updates block info too rarely. New compiled release may lower pool loads

I couldn't agree more. This is the bug that I fixed a few weeks ago, but I have not been able to get it compiled on Windows. It won't reduce the pool loads, but will increase the shares found for windows users. If anyone has a mingw64 environment configured with boost (which is the bit I'm struggling with) then let me know!

I can compile it for Windows. Can you please point me to the exact git repository?

Hey Mummus! Good to hear from you. I have it compiled now, but I am seeing a strangely high PPS rate (like 2500+ with 4 threads, instead of an expected ~200ish). Another user confirmed the same result. I've run some debug tests and it doesn't seem to be finding any more shares than one would expect though, which leads be to believe it is a problem with the timers on Windows (or my specific installation of mingw64). If you can build it though to see if you get the same results I would appreciate it!
https://github.com/Nexusoft/PrimePoolMiner

Hi,
I'm using cygwin to compile it. Back then when nexus (coinshield) started I've made some test and it performed better.
Here is the link for the binaries that I've built form the git repository https://github.com/Nexusoft/PrimePoolMiner
https://mega.nz/#!7Z0RCZxC!0lXTS_9lMri07VuCA3dc4g8SrX-3qv-DWxCzYHDddqI
But I had to make a little modification in the miner.cpp. I had to revert back a modification of the declaration of bit_array_sieve that was made in commit: https://github.com/Nexusoft/PrimePoolMiner/commit/7c509609b7ae19870720de71b0b2cfe44a5fc756

Code:

- unsigned char* bit_array_sieve = (unsigned char*)malloc((nBitArray_Size)/8);
+ unsigned char bit_array_sieve[nBitArray_Size/8];

Without this change the miner exists with segmentation fault after the first new block.
Is it possible that the root of your PPS rate problem is the same?

mumus

Posts

Merits