|
it's probably best to let the ckpool set the difficulty based on your hash rate.
|
|
|
|
|
for the hashrate limit on the contest, is that a snapshot at time of finding block or is that an average over some period?
d'oh I see its the red line average from the shift graph. I assume that means its for the 5n period.
|
|
|
|
|
Relay network test were successful. We're now currently on the relay network. Should reduce block change times dramatically.
|
|
|
|
|
can we go back to chicken sacrifices, like the old days? haha
|
|
|
|
This got deleted coz certain people dislike the truth. So I'll post it here  ... Being Catholic, an acronym like "St. Barbara's Faithfully Glorified Mining Initiative Naturally Exceeding Rivals" just calls for me to support it.  ... He stole the name from me then reversioned it to hide that fact. BFG as in BFG from the doom game. ... don't catholics have commandments about lying and stealing?  As a sometimes practicing Catholic I hate that Luke-Jr seems to represent catholicism to everyone in the community. Last time I followed some of his convos on reddit about Catholicism I got real angry. He takes a very hard line on matters of faith. Also, as a Catholic, yes we have commandments about lying and stealing. So do a lot of faiths. Seems Luke-Jr is of the do as I say, not as I do brand of faith. |
|
|
|
about 5PH increase in the last hour, is that people getting ready for block Friday Someone kicked loose all the high priced rentals they were using. Now we can use it for kano Come on Mr Block! It IS almost Friday again, time flies. I kicked some nh power over here. Feels good to mine here again. Have been away since i sold my miners that became unprofitable. Not sure nh mining will be profitable, but i have some BTC sitting over there and figured i'd give a chance at winning an Avalon. |
|
|
|
|
Currently testing connecting the pool to the relay network. Expect possible interruptions.
|
|
|
|
Hello! I get this error when doing blocknotify. ~$ Failed to bind to socket in open_unix_client
Closing file handle 5
Failure in open_unix_client from notifier.c main:50
Failed to open socket: /tmp/ckpool/stratifier
What could be the problem? Make sure /tmp/ckpool/stratifier exists. It's a socket opened by ckpool. Probably also need to make sure the user running bitcoind has access to that socket. This may not be the case especially if bitcoind is running as a service but you're running ckpool from command line. |
|
|
|
|
also, does this currently not relay blocks mined on bitcoin classic? seems to cause an issue for me whenever one is being mined (for example, block 399914).
Without relaying this block, bitcoind tells me the relay client is misbehaving when it tries to relay the next block.
nevermind it was a miscofiguration on my end.
|
|
|
|
|
Does "on the wire" mean the amount left remaining to get for the new block?
|
|
|
|
|
Cool yeah I built master just now and no problems so far
|
|
|
|
@ck are the M* tags considered more stable than master? or S* tags? are there still version numbers for stable releases?
Tagged versions are considered stable for use indeed. The S tags were a mistake, the M tags stand for "milestone" releases. Having said that, the current git master is currently stable but that can change at any time. The version numbers are almost an afterthought. great so use M tags for stability when in doubt |
|
|
|
|
@ck are the M* tags considered more stable than master? or S* tags? are there still version numbers for stable releases?
|
|
|
|
|
Is this functional but just not actively maintained? Don't want to put effort in to getting up and running if it won't connect anywhere.
|
|
|
|
Environment is 32-bit ... Ckpool demands a 64 bit environment and I have no interest in creating support for 32 bits sorry. But I was able to build and run on RPi2. I got errors while it was running but they may not have been related to running in a 32 bit environment. Note that you'll definitely not be able to run with ckdb, as I believe it's recommended to have 16 GB ram or so for a full ckdb implementation running behind ckpool. Warnings at startup are not actually unusual or fatal as the multiprocess nature of ckpool means that sometimes one process waits excessively for another process - usually because they're waiting on bitcoind responses for example. The latest git version has moved away from the multiprocess model so those warnings shouldn't occur any more. While the code was made to be general and should work on 32 bit and big endian, the fact remains that it was never tested on either of those so they should be considered unsupported. Of course if someone wants to audit the code and test it on those platforms and contribute patches to fix any issues they find, they're welcome to. Unlike cgminer, though, for speed of development the code for ckpool was intentionally designed with one platform in mind - making code suit multiple architectures and operating systems means dealing with the quirks of low level behaviour of each platform which slows development down and often limits what can even be done with the code. Since ckpool uses low level socket code and system functions all over the place, cross-platform support, for example, is never going to happen. Yup. I'll be testing on 64 bit ARM as soo as my Odroid C2 comes in. |
|
|
|
Environment is 32-bit ... Ckpool demands a 64 bit environment and I have no interest in creating support for 32 bits sorry. But I was able to build and run on RPi2. I got errors while it was running but they may not have been related to running in a 32 bit environment. Note that you'll definitely not be able to run with ckdb, as I believe it's recommended to have 16 GB ram or so for a full ckdb implementation running behind ckpool. |
|
|
|
is it worth to try it out with 0.6TH power ? I never mined solo before. How little is chance to find a block with this mining power ? once in a 10 year or maybe 100 ?
Your odds are on average 37 years. So a very low chance to get one in the following month. Then it will maybe be something like on average 50 years in a month and so on. Its not impossible however. But i would do it at a trusted pool, not pointed at a bitcoin fork. Please don't insinuate that I'm not trustworthy. Or that bitcoin classic is somehow not trustworthy. And anyway, until 75% of previous 1000 blocks are mined on bitcoin classic nodes, there is no functional difference between bitcoin classic and bitcoin core (at version 0.11.2). And finally, the whole point here is for a "solo pool" for people who support an increased block size limit through hard fork via bitcoin classic. I assume anyone wanting to mine here has already decided they support that. |
|
|
|
Various ways to calculate it, but use any coin calculator and figure out how long it will take to hit 25 BTC. For example: https://alloscomp.com/bitcoin/calculatorPut in your details and the divide your daily income in terms of BTC into 25. Of course difficulty changes over time so it will change, but at current difficulty you're looking at 37 years. Of course the exchange rate of bitcoin will change too. Oh and this is all based on probability, so in theory you could hit a block in an hour (super unlikely), or never hit one in 500 years. I don't know your financial situation, but with 0.6 TH, you're looking at 78 cents of income in terms of USD per day. That's less than the dollar value of the gas I burn driving to work. It's less than I spend on coffee. Trading that off for a very small chance of making 10,500 USD worth of BTC might be worth it. |
|
|
|
Shouldn't this thread be in "Altcoins"?  Can't tell if making a joke. Some make that argument, but Bitcoin Classic is not an altcoin. Classic Nodes still act exactly the same as Core nodes (or btcd nodes or any other bitcoin node) until 75% of the last 1000 blocks are mined by Classic nodes. At that point a 28 day timer starts. If that 75% level is maintained for that 28 days then on day 29 the Classic nodes can start processing, mining, and relaying blocks larger than 1 MB. It was a mild bit of mischief I admit Its not exactly untrue. Its still a fork, which will continue with the existing btc blockchain. Which still means its a different coin, which means its an altcoin. However if 75%+ decide that its the new way to go, then the fork will just become a part of Bitcoin's history as a whole. However i think the topic is a bit moot, because it won't happen. China has much more than 25% of the hashrate. Ergo this won't happen. (They dont want it) I wouldn't be so sure. I guess only time will tell. Antpool has been testing classic on one of their nodes. They actually solved a few classic blocks last I checked. Last time I read anything on the subject, it sounded like China actually wants 2mb but prefers it to come from core. I think there's some meeting planned between core and the miners that classic was specifically not invited to. There was some thought among some people that the miners would use classic as a bargaining chip to get core to promise a block size limit increase hardfork by a certain time or else they'd just mine on classic, basically getting what they want (block size limit increase) one way or the other. These things change every few days though so who knows. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
