{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646/events","html_url":"https://github.com/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646","id":371247816,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzNzEyNDc4MTY=","number":1646,"title":"Stale share issue with 0.16.1 and link to search segment randomization","user":{"login":"aleqx","id":8780617,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjg3ODA2MTc=","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/8780617?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx","html_url":"https://github.com/aleqx","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"id":803565402,"node_id":"MDU6TGFiZWw4MDM1NjU0MDI=","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer/labels/discussion","name":"discussion","color":"cc317c","default":false}],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":60,"created_at":"2018-10-17T20:11:49Z","updated_at":"2018-11-15T17:15:03Z","closed_at":"2018-10-21T18:15:06Z","author_association":"NONE","body":"**EDIT 2018-10-21:** The discussion deviated (a lot) from the initial question, but gave rise to a more useful discussion regarding stale ratio comparison between ethminer versions and the role played by randomization in the stale ratio. The reader can start reading here: https://github.com/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646#issuecomment-431668391\r\n\r\nFeature request based on this discussion was posted here: https://github.com/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1650\r\n\r\n------\r\n\r\nI've been using my own modded 0.12 (which removes software evals) since last year, and have been trying all the newer versions when you guys posted them to see if it's worth upgrading.\r\n\r\nI just tested 0.16.1 on Ubuntu 16.04 and all of a sudden I'm getting this on some cards, not all:\r\n\r\n```\r\nError CUDA mining: CUDA error in func init at line 128 out of memory\r\n```\r\n\r\nThese are GTX 1070 Ti. Out of memory shouldn't be possible. Never got that error with any of the previous versions (tried the final 0.13, 0.14, 0.15).\r\n\r\nThis happened after a Xid 32 error, which is a recoverable error - simply killing and restarting the cuda app solves it, and that has been the case for all versions until 0.16.1. It seems 0.16.1 allocates memory differently, or something?\r\n\r\nEDIT: may be relevant: for 0.16 I'm using cuda 10, while for 0.12 I'm using cuda 9.1."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/comments/439117885","html_url":"https://github.com/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646#issuecomment-439117885","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ethereum-mining/ethminer/issues/1646","id":439117885,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzOTExNzg4NQ==","user":{"login":"aleqx","id":8780617,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjg3ODA2MTc=","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/8780617?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx","html_url":"https://github.com/aleqx","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aleqx/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-11-15T17:15:03Z","updated_at":"2018-11-15T17:15:03Z","author_association":"NONE","body":"Well, labelling stale/accepted is done upon receiving the pool's reply to the miner's previous `mining.submit` ... it depends on the pool and the connection to the pool, and it's unreliable anyway. I'd remove the stale label in the miner completely if it was up to me, and just relay whatever the pool says."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"aleqx"}}