Plotting took long time



  • Hi guys, i started plotting on a new hdd using a windows wallet. and i started only with 2tb from the whole 5tb driver, till now it has been plotting 26 hours and it is only 15% .
    I don't know if i should stop it and make a smaller files or is it usually takes so long time?

    i'm new here sorry if the question is not very important for you.



  • @medo2016 More CPU power and a better connection to the hard drive is the way to make it faster. How is the drive connected, and what kind of cpu, and how many cores did you allocate to it?



  • Making smaller plot files (50GB + 50GB + 50GB, etc until you hit 2TB or what ever) is not a good idea.
    1- It simply creates a huge mess in your plots folder.
    2-It does nothing to help you create your plot files faster. You're wasting your time doing that. You can do 1TB, 1TB, 1TB, etc or 2TB, 2TB, 1TB, etc. That's fine.

    Just like @ryanw said:

    @medo2016 More CPU power and a better connection to the hard drive is the way to make it faster. How is the drive connected, and what kind of cpu, and how many cores did you allocate to it?

    Better CPU, better Read/Write speed to the Hard Drive, allocate more cores, close out programs and stuff to let the plotter allocate more RAM to use.



  • @p0int_scale said in Plotting took long time:

    Making smaller plot files (50GB + 50GB + 50GB, etc until you hit 2TB or what ever) is not a good idea.
    1- It simply creates a huge mess in your plots folder.
    2-It does nothing to help you create your plot files faster. You're wasting your time doing that. You can do 1TB, 1TB, 1TB, etc or 2TB, 2TB, 1TB, etc. That's fine.

    Just like @ryanw said:

    @medo2016 More CPU power and a better connection to the hard drive is the way to make it faster. How is the drive connected, and what kind of cpu, and how many cores did you allocate to it?

    Better CPU, better Read/Write speed to the Hard Drive, allocate more cores, close out programs and stuff to let the plotter allocate more RAM to use.

    RAM does nothing good or bad for your CPU plotter speed, only
    threads, cpu time and clock speed, and of course hdd write speed.



  • @rds said in Plotting took long time:

    @p0int_scale said in Plotting took long time:

    Making smaller plot files (50GB + 50GB + 50GB, etc until you hit 2TB or what ever) is not a good idea.
    1- It simply creates a huge mess in your plots folder.
    2-It does nothing to help you create your plot files faster. You're wasting your time doing that. You can do 1TB, 1TB, 1TB, etc or 2TB, 2TB, 1TB, etc. That's fine.

    Just like @ryanw said:

    @medo2016 More CPU power and a better connection to the hard drive is the way to make it faster. How is the drive connected, and what kind of cpu, and how many cores did you allocate to it?

    Better CPU, better Read/Write speed to the Hard Drive, allocate more cores, close out programs and stuff to let the plotter allocate more RAM to use.

    RAM does nothing good or bad for your CPU plotter speed, only
    threads, cpu time and clock speed, and of course hdd write speed.

    BS

    alt text



  • This is how data is written to file by xplotter.

    @Blago said in How to measure Bus load:

    @rds yes, but plotter writes 64 bytes (scoop) of one nonce, then seek to another place of file, writes another 64 bytes....
    In brief, each thread calculates matrix [64*4096][1024] and then write to file [64][1024] * 4096 times
    https://github.com/Blagodarenko/XPlotter/blob/master/XPlotter.cpp#L107
    https://github.com/Blagodarenko/XPlotter/blob/master/Nonce.cpp#L130

    why 1024 nonces (64kb for write per once of each threads) by default?
    writing time of 6 * 800 nonces ~= 45 sec
    writing time of 6 * 1024 nonces ~= 45 sec
    writing time of 6 * 1030 nonces ~= 90 sec
    writing time of 6 * 2048 nonces ~= 90 sec
    64Kb it's optimal size
    http://zabkat.com/blog/buffered-disk-access.htm (last column)



  • @IncludeBeer said in Plotting took long time:

    This is how data is written to file by xplotter.

    @Blago said in How to measure Bus load:

    @rds yes, but plotter writes 64 bytes (scoop) of one nonce, then seek to another place of file, writes another 64 bytes....
    In brief, each thread calculates matrix [64*4096][1024] and then write to file [64][1024] * 4096 times
    https://github.com/Blagodarenko/XPlotter/blob/master/XPlotter.cpp#L107
    https://github.com/Blagodarenko/XPlotter/blob/master/Nonce.cpp#L130

    why 1024 nonces (64kb for write per once of each threads) by default?
    writing time of 6 * 800 nonces ~= 45 sec
    writing time of 6 * 1024 nonces ~= 45 sec
    writing time of 6 * 1030 nonces ~= 90 sec
    writing time of 6 * 2048 nonces ~= 90 sec
    64Kb it's optimal size
    http://zabkat.com/blog/buffered-disk-access.htm (last column)

    I have run the xplotter using 256MB, 512MB, 1G, 2G up to 8GB of ram. There is no difference in plotting speed, period.

    Try it if you don't believe me.



  • @rds using much RAM making sense if you see gray last line (not yellow) - in this case bottleneck - writing to the HDD



  • @Blago ,

    respectfully not true. That is why I tried all the different ram configurations, trying to keep yellow. Nothing worked, high or low ram. They all stalled out at the same % of write complete. I could barely see at the low ram configurations, but over 30 minute time frames they all yielded the same result.

    You can however keep yellow by running 2 or 3 plotters at the same time. As long as any one is yellow you get your max nonce/min spread over 2-3 files.



  • The drive brand makes a difference, as does USB 2.0 v. 3.0. Seagate drives seem to write much slower than Western Digital drives or Toshiba.

    I also have not seen anything change with memory usage. I always just set it to 3GB.

    I always plot 1TB files. Not sure why, I just do it that way.


 

Looks like your connection to BurstCoin - Efficient HDD Mining was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.