Bitcoin Forum
May 25, 2019, 11:34:09 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 [170] 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 ... 304 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][RIC] Riecoin: constellations POW *CPU* HARD FORK successful, world record  (Read 662736 times)
bsunau7
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 22, 2014, 01:52:25 PM
 #3381

xpm aborts if the first number in the 6tuple is a composite (which is true most of the time), for the remaining 5 numbers the primes are counted. If I assume the search for a sixtuple in the arm miner is aborted when the first composite number is met (like in cpuminer-rminerd), you can multiply the 3ch and the 4ch numbers by about 10. This is because you have 10 choices to select 2 out of 5 (or 3 out of 5), 5!/(2!*3!) = 10.

Sorry didn't see your response.  Yes a linear test of p6 chain, as soon as I fail I abort.  For a solo miner it does not make sense to keep testing when you know a block can't be found, the ypool reward structure is different which is why different metrics are used.

--
bsunau7
1558784049
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558784049

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558784049
Reply with quote  #2

1558784049
Report to moderator
PLAY OVER 3000 GAMES
LIGHTNING FAST WITHDRAWALS
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
hirschhornsalz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 16
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 22, 2014, 09:55:10 PM
 #3382

With -m 100000000 on a nexus 4:
http://canusravuspanthera.de/device-2014-07-22-234421.png
bsunau7
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 22, 2014, 11:07:30 PM
Last edit: July 23, 2014, 12:10:14 AM by bsunau7
 #3383

With -m 100000000 on a nexus 4:

Thanks!

With that -m option you are sieving the first 5.7million primes which is about 10 times larger than I would suggest.  I suspect using a tenth will more than double overall performance (reducing it even more should improve it further).  While your output was truncated the overall goal is to get the total time per thread to it's minimum.  Right now you'd be spending ~2 years for a block (i.e not worth it, but playing with -m should improve that significantly).

Some other notes, the sieve makes use of 128bit wide NEON instructions (most premium phones will have that).  All sieves are impacted by memory performance (and phone memory is slow), the nexus 4 has a smaller cache than my system so memory access will play a bigger role in determining your performance (which is why making the sieve even smaller might help).  Also I don't know enough about the Snapdragon processor, but most older ARM CPU's have very bad memory prefetch.

Right now the sieve time should be pretty constant but the fermat tests will vary based on difficulty, I was thinking about a dynamic balancing the amount of sieving  based on the relative performance of the fermat tests.  As difficulty drops less sieving, as it rises more sieving.  It should also help balance architectural differences in the CPUs in addition to difficulty levels.

Thanks again,

--
bsunau7
aamarket
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 259
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
July 23, 2014, 07:59:52 PM
 #3384

hmmmm ... I'll try over the weekend,
but 2 years - even improved by a factor 20  means more than a month for a block ... not very encouraging ...

IMPORTANT:https://bitcointalk.to/index.php?topic=177133.0,Tips welcome BTC:1AAMARKETmJvfjDwEFmhyYYwfre7ZFVseP  RIC:RGnX6LcJrsVEuYeySDDxkmH7AjRqoprcKt
bsunau7
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 23, 2014, 09:37:08 PM
 #3385

hmmmm ... I'll try over the weekend,
but 2 years - even improved by a factor 20  means more than a month for a block ... not very encouraging ...


My gut says his hardware should be about 4 time quicker with a better (smaller) sized sieve.  So only 5 times better to go (and there are 3 or 4 things which should get me significantly closer if I can pull it off).

Regards,

--
bsunau7
northranger79510
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250

Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


View Profile
July 24, 2014, 05:30:59 PM
 #3386

Any uppdate this week Gatra?

Huntercoin: H9kttkrQidiQMG9NibmTgjgCKqWJMAkAXD
Riecoin: Like us on https://www.facebook.com/TheRiecoinCommunity
hirschhornsalz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 16
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 24, 2014, 06:39:34 PM
 #3387

I suspect using a tenth will more than double overall performance (reducing it even more should improve it further).
Yes, I noticed the the "time to block" decreased to a third when using -m 5M. In my miner (for intel hardware though) I use all primes up to 2^32, so I was used to some larger numbers :-) Note that the time to block displayed my be serverly off. You need to apply a correction depending primorial you use, which will increase the likelyhood of finding a sextuplet, but OTOH you do miss some sextuplets if your primorial is bigger than 210 (and of course it is).
Mertens 3rd theorem fits very well on this kind of sieves, it does give exactly the probability of not sieving a number if you sieve with all the primes up to n. You surely noticed the constant factor between p0/p1/p2... This factor can be calculated as the quotient from the 3rd mertens function with n as the sieve size and the prime density at the given difficulty, which is about 1/ln(2^(diff+256+8+1)). This factor raised to the sixt power (for p6) decreases significantly with the size of the primes used, so it might be worth using primes as big a possible, if your sieve is fast enough (but on an arm 2^32 is probably to big).
I was thinking about a dynamic balancing the amount of sieving  based on the relative performance of the fermat tests
The problem I found with the sieve after I eliminated all the modulo operations was that it is limited by memory bandwith. To make more than one core do useful work on it, I needed to divide it into small chunks which fit into the caches.
bsunau7
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 25, 2014, 12:19:24 AM
 #3388

Yes, I noticed the the "time to block" decreased to a third when using -m 5M. In my miner (for intel hardware though) I use all primes up to 2^32, so I was used to some larger numbers :-) Note that the time to block displayed my be serverly off. You need to apply a correction depending primorial you use, which will increase the likelyhood of finding a sextuplet, but OTOH you do miss some sextuplets if your primorial is bigger than 210 (and of course it is).

The first choice I made was to use 32bit everywhere (64bit arithmetic is expensive).  This means each thread only searches at most (nonce -> nonce+2^32)
sieving with larger primes has low chance of pruning the candidate.  It just becomes cheaper to stop sieving primes (diminishing returns) and start fermat testing.

I don't use the pnXX+97 step, but test all 5005 candidates per pn19, so I don't believe I should miss any, so I am not sure why a correction factor would be required.

Quote
Mertens 3rd theorem fits very well on this kind of sieves, it does give exactly the probability of not sieving a number if you sieve with all the primes up to n. You surely noticed the constant factor between p0/p1/p2... This factor can be calculated as the quotient from the 3rd mertens function with n as the sieve size and the prime density at the given difficulty, which is about 1/ln(2^(diff+256+8+1)). This factor raised to the sixt power (for p6) decreases significantly with the size of the primes used, so it might be worth using primes as big a possible, if your sieve is fast enough (but on an arm 2^32 is probably to big).

Yes I did, ~34-35 is the observed factor (@ current difficulty and sieving with the first 550k primes) and I use it outside of the miner to estimate time to block.  In the miner I still use the original gatra code for the time estimate, it is ~10% of what it should be which isn't a big concern (ie low priority).

I think the sieve code is pretty fast, but it is only fast because I stick to the ARM's word size.  A sieve of a few hundred thousand primes will be a natural limit for a 32bit implementation, until the difficulty increases (when fermat testing gets significantly more expensive) I don't see any benefit in removing the 32bit design limit.

Quote
The problem I found with the sieve after I eliminated all the modulo operations was that it is limited by memory bandwidth. To make more than one core do useful work on it, I needed to divide it into small chunks which fit into the caches.

Yes, memory bandwidth is a big issue in ARM as well.  Not only does it use slower memory, hardware pre-fetch is not as advanced as x86, reading & writing to the same cache line has a penalty as does misalignment.  My first few miners were all running at the same general speed no matter what I did, once I started minimizing memory access I was able to get some good gains.

Regards,

--
bsunau7
dga
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737
Merit: 511


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2014, 02:08:58 AM
 #3389


I'll need to look at dga's code to come up with a method to map relative performance; question is does dga's miner look for any 4 out of 6 or does it look for any chain (contiguous) of 4?


The formula dga's miner uses is the 1st plus any three of the remaining 5.  So all other things being equal the scaling factor should be 10 (please check my numbers, red wine and all...).  You'll need to multiply the p4's I report by 10 and divide by the time taken.

Regards,

--
bsunau7

Correct.  I coordinated this definition with jh00 of ypool to ensure that the definition of a share was consistent, so if you need to change it for some reason, just be careful with the pool interaction whichever way you go.

gatra
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 583
Merit: 504


CTO @ Flixxo, Riecoin dev


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2014, 03:21:57 AM
 #3390

Hi people!
I'm still short on time... other members of the community offered help to I'll be working with them.

My problem debugging (the code I hacked based on) dga's miner is that using Eclipse + gdb, after the mining threads are created it stops responding for a while, making debugging very hard.


           ▄▄▄██████████▄▄▄
       ▄▄██
██████████████████▄▄
     ▄█
█████▀████████████▀██████▄
   ▄█
█████████████████████████████▄
  ▄█
█████████▄█▀▀██████████████████▄
 ▄█
███████████▀██████▄▄█████▄███████▄
▄█
██████████▀██▄▄▄▄██▀▀▀▀▀███████████▄
█████████████▀▀██▀████████▀▀████████
█████████████▄█▀████████████████████
████████▀▀▀▀██▀▀▀▀██████████████████
▀█
██████▀▀▀▀██▀▀▀▀███████████████████▀
 ▀█
███████▄████▄▄███████████████████▀
  ▀█
███████████████████████████████▀
   ▀█
█████████████████████████████▀
     ▀█
█████▄████████████▄██████▀
       ▀▀██
██████████████████▀▀
           ▀▀▀██████████▀▀▀
riecoin       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄██▀▀         ▀▀██▄
  ▄██▀              ▀██▄
 ▄██     ██▄▄          ██▄
▄██      █████▄▄        ██▄
██       ████████▄▄      ██
██       ███████████▄    ██
██       ██████████▀     ██
▀██      ███████▀       ██▀
 ▀██     ████▀         ██▀
  ▀██▄   █▀          ▄██▀
    ▀██▄▄         ▄▄██▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
.flixxo   
northranger79510
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250

Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


View Profile
July 25, 2014, 04:33:04 AM
 #3391

Hi people!
I'm still short on time... other members of the community offered help to I'll be working with them.

My problem debugging (the code I hacked based on) dga's miner is that using Eclipse + gdb, after the mining threads are created it stops responding for a while, making debugging very hard.

Great! Destroying Ypool monopolization is a nice goal to have

Huntercoin: H9kttkrQidiQMG9NibmTgjgCKqWJMAkAXD
Riecoin: Like us on https://www.facebook.com/TheRiecoinCommunity
hirschhornsalz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 16
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 25, 2014, 07:32:25 AM
 #3392

The first choice I made was to use 32bit everywhere (64bit arithmetic is expensive).
Yes of course. In the sieving code I use 32 bit too, except for the sieve setup, which requires long (256 bit) arithmetic.
Quote
This means each thread only searches at most (nonce -> nonce+2^32)
so I don't believe I should miss any, so I am not sure why a correction factor would be required.
I search from nonce to nonce+2^255 with a sieve of 2^31 bit size, and to do that in my sieve every bit represents a number 16057 + 173# * n, where 16057 is the offset of the second sixtuple and 173# is the primorial I use. This of course leaves large gaps between numbers represented by the sieve and I wrongly assumed your code would be similar.
Quote
Yes, memory bandwidth is a big issue in ARM as well.
It's not only bandwith (mainly reading a big precalculated table with primes and modulo inverses, which the x86 does indeed pretty well) but the latency of the pseudo random accesses when the primes get bigger than the table, each one amounting to 60 ns (300 clocks cycles!). Nevertheless i found it useful if in the end the blocks comes faster :-)
northranger79510
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250

Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


View Profile
July 26, 2014, 03:00:47 AM
 #3393

I know this is late but riecoin.org is updated to match updated client and miner version.

Huntercoin: H9kttkrQidiQMG9NibmTgjgCKqWJMAkAXD
Riecoin: Like us on https://www.facebook.com/TheRiecoinCommunity
northranger79510
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250

Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


View Profile
July 29, 2014, 03:24:11 PM
 #3394

How many people are planning to buy Riecoin as soon (if) it goes to .00001. I know I am.

Huntercoin: H9kttkrQidiQMG9NibmTgjgCKqWJMAkAXD
Riecoin: Like us on https://www.facebook.com/TheRiecoinCommunity
primer-
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 29, 2014, 03:35:31 PM
 #3395

How many people are planning to buy Riecoin as soon (if) it goes to .00001. I know I am.

Its dead Sad
northranger79510
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250

Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


View Profile
July 29, 2014, 03:40:51 PM
 #3396

How many people are planning to buy Riecoin as soon (if) it goes to .00001. I know I am.

Its dead Sad

o.o lol. Its far from dead if you read Gatra's announcement. Your account makes me lose any faith in your credibility.

Huntercoin: H9kttkrQidiQMG9NibmTgjgCKqWJMAkAXD
Riecoin: Like us on https://www.facebook.com/TheRiecoinCommunity
primer-
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 29, 2014, 03:48:37 PM
 #3397

How many people are planning to buy Riecoin as soon (if) it goes to .00001. I know I am.

Its dead Sad

o.o lol. Its far from dead if you read Gatra's announcement. Your account makes me lose any faith in your credibility.

Gatra is one competent developer but the coin is dead. I will be following his work, should he launch a new coin i'll mine-support it.
northranger79510
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250

Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


View Profile
July 29, 2014, 03:54:22 PM
 #3398

How many people are planning to buy Riecoin as soon (if) it goes to .00001. I know I am.

Its dead Sad

o.o lol. Its far from dead if you read Gatra's announcement. Your account makes me lose any faith in your credibility.

Gatra is one competent developer but the coin is dead. I will be following his work, should he launch a new coin i'll mine-support it.

I agree that the coin has had more hype before and has lot traction since but a dead coin is like Kanye or Particle where dev. actually abandoned it...continuous development = not dead.

Huntercoin: H9kttkrQidiQMG9NibmTgjgCKqWJMAkAXD
Riecoin: Like us on https://www.facebook.com/TheRiecoinCommunity
c.figgis
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 30, 2014, 09:57:10 PM
 #3399

Hi riecoin community, what service/services do you think this coin needs to make it more valuable?



the more the merrier!

The most important service would be more pools.
Then it could be online wallets, payment processors, blockchains with api like blockchain.info....

We still have no open source xpt pool or proxy?
northranger79510
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250

Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


View Profile
July 31, 2014, 02:22:29 PM
 #3400

Hi riecoin community, what service/services do you think this coin needs to make it more valuable?



the more the merrier!

The most important service would be more pools.
Then it could be online wallets, payment processors, blockchains with api like blockchain.info....

We still have no open source xpt pool or proxy?

I believe Gatra is still working on it. Unsuprisingly, it is difficult to do that. Fortunately, he says that he now has a team of developer I believe?

Huntercoin: H9kttkrQidiQMG9NibmTgjgCKqWJMAkAXD
Riecoin: Like us on https://www.facebook.com/TheRiecoinCommunity
Pages: « 1 ... 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 [170] 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 ... 304 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!