AMD FX X8 8350 CPU; Xolominer (primeminer) best configuration ? ???
Aloha!
Today i tried to cross compile xolominer for my mips router to let it rock there.
Compilationprocess dies with
In file included from ./port/port_posix.h:50:0,
from ./port/port.h:14,
from ./db/filename.h:14,
from db/builder.cc:7:
./port/atomic_pointer.h:212:2: error: #error Please implement AtomicPointer for this platform.
maybe anyone can help ,e getting this done.
Would be nice seeing this miningrig on a mips / mipsel / kirkwood machine 
@Sy’s stats:
why don’t you use the daily stats from the beta pages (and divide them by 24 for XPM/h) ?? :-X
runs
btw. it looks like Sy’s stats are up again, but they’re missing some payouts from 12-01 to 13-01
correct values can be found on the beta pages
@derdigge:
xolominer for mips? :o 
love it. unfortunately: can’t help with the error message.
AtomicPointer should be part of the LevelDB lib, it looks like it’s not compatible with MIPS <-- afaik
i should really remove all these (unnecessary) lib/src dependencies next
LevelDB is actually not essential for mining, but the miner is using the original client code as basis, and thus they share the same dependencies
- xolokram
Your Mining not work for Centos ?
@ Xolokram
Hi Xolokram! I have a serious issue now, my wallet.dat is completely corrupted to the point where I cannot decrypt my own wallet to retrieve my private key…
This means my address ALfvkxXt7URtNQZMjjLUX6Pebft7aRhajA can’t be used to mine at beeeeer anymore.
Now, I have 2.654 XPM attached to that address in the beeeeer stats page, so I stopped XPM mining for now to avoid hitting the payout barrier and sending the coins to the now corrupt address.
-rescan seems to do nothing, as I deleted the rev00000.dat, rev00001.dat and the rev00002.dat files which forced a re-index of all the blocks…
Is there anyway we can change my old address to a new address? (I still need to generate one and test it somehow…)
Thanks xolokram, I hope we can fix this issue 
got your PM, sent you a reply 8)
[quote=“gavinlew, post:526, topic:358”]All I get on the console output is the following,
[WORKER3] Hello, World!
[WORKER4] Hello, World!
[WORKER5] Hello, World!
[WORKER6] Hello, World!
[WORKER0] GoGoGo!
[WORKER1] GoGoGo!
[WORKER2] GoGoGo!
[WORKER3] GoGoGo!
[WORKER4] GoGoGo!
[WORKER5] GoGoGo!
[WORKER6] GoGoGo!
[WORKER7] Hello, World!
[WORKER7] GoGoGo![/quote]Thats the best software ever written! Look at all the Hello’s and Go’s!
does anyone know why the prime/s on my 64bit i7 is lower than my 32bit i5? both are running with same threads. does it mean my i5 is more faster? ???
[quote=“ooHIoo, post:550, topic:358”]does anyone know why the prime/s on my 64bit i7 is lower than my 32bit i5? both are running with same threads. does it mean my i5 is more faster? ???[/quote]No that only means the miner use different settings. If you want to compare performance, compare chains/day.
Hi,
I got XPM miner from here https://github.com/thbaumbach/primecoin and it gives segmentation faults when shutting down (Ctrl+C). There seem to be a bug right here:
prime.cpp, Line 877
const unsigned int nPrime = vPrimes[nPrimeSeq];
primecoin-miner[11645]: segfault at 7f7bd9e0c014 ip 000000000059182b sp 00007f7bcb7f52a0 error 4 in primeminer[400000+316000]
It’s a bit annoying as it seems that this bug prevents me to do some code profiling.
Is this the right place to post this?
Just curious, why did I receive less of a payout on 1-15 (having found 1 block and 1 9-chain, plus more 7- and 8-chains) than I did on 1-5?
Did the payouts change even though the difficulty did not?
http://beta.beeeeer.org/index.php?p=user&s=xpm&a=AQrvmYB67vkSvXwwwayaxsGQvAzkpsqeTS
@ecf:
the value per share has been decreased to adjust the size of the sharelog, as it is too big (this started around 5th of january)
also a single 9-chain is worth more than 10 8-chans, thus this shouldnt make that much of a difference
btw. these shares have been paid on that specific dates, not actually been found then
@ian:
the cleanup code is not … um … perfect 
yes, this is the right place
[quote=“xolokram, post:554, topic:358”]@ian:
the cleanup code is not … um … perfect
yes, this is the right place[/quote]
Thanks xolokram. Is it possible for a quick fix in order not to mess with the threading termination?
xolokram, I think you misunderstood what I said.
On Jan. 5, I earned .64 for 78 seven chains, two eight chains and two nine chains.
On Jan. 15, I earned .63 for one BLOCK, 125 seven chains, five eight chains and one nine chain. In other words, my question is, are BLOCKS not worth as much as a nine-chain?
to simply answer your question:
9-chain-share’s worth 0.1599 XPM
block-share’s worth 0.2429 XPM
but i’m pretty sure, that’s not what you wanted to hear :
/edit: @ian:
i’ll look into this, once i’m back on coding for the xpm miner
i plan to modify it the same way i did for the pts miner (less bitcoind code; less, clean & efficient networking + mining code)
Right… then what I’m showing on that page makes no sense. /shrug
i’m confused; pls, be more specific what’s the problem (also regarding my first answer)
gtg, will be back tomorrow
Hi All,
What happens when Beeeeer.org does the auto-payout to a wallet address that is not accessible?
The PC where my wallet is, is down for several days for servicing? So the wallet is not accessible.