Skip to content

CPU scaling issue: 4 vs 8 vs 10 CPUs — quip-miner-cpu 0.3.2-rc3 #31

Description

@subzeroua

Hi,

I'm testing quip-miner-cpu 0.3.2-rc3 in Docker and noticed that increasing the CPU allocation does not significantly increase the reported mining throughput.

My tests:

4 CPUs:
~0.7 jobs/s

8 CPUs:
~0.7–0.8 jobs/s

10 CPUs:
Docker CPU usage: ~989%
Reported throughput: ~0.9 jobs/s

With 10 CPUs the logs show:

progress: 70 jobs | 0.9 jobs/s | reads=105 sweeps=846 | best=-14452 | requires energy<=-14528
progress: 80 jobs | 0.9 jobs/s | reads=105 sweeps=846 | best=-14452 | requires energy<=-14528
progress: 90 jobs | 0.9 jobs/s | reads=105 sweeps=846 | best=-14452 | requires energy<=-14528
progress: 100 jobs | 0.9 jobs/s | reads=105 sweeps=846 | best=-14452 | requires energy<=-14528
progress: 110 jobs | 0.9 jobs/s | reads=105 sweeps=846 | best=-14452 | requires energy<=-14528
progress: 120 jobs | 0.9 jobs/s | reads=105 sweeps=846 | best=-14452 | requires energy<=-14528

The container is actually consuming almost 10 CPU cores (~989%), so the CPU allocation appears to be effective.

Could you clarify:

  1. Does the "jobs/s" value represent aggregate throughput across all CPU SA workers?
  2. Is ~0.9 jobs/s expected with 10 CPU cores?
  3. Is there a way to see the number of active SA workers and their individual/aggregate throughput?
  4. Could there be a bottleneck or configuration issue preventing throughput from scaling with the number of CPU cores?

Version:
quip-miner-cpu 0.3.2-rc3
protocol 1

Thanks!

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions