|
This sounds like a pools side issue.
So try posting in your pools support thread.
|
|
|
|
EDIT: Fixed in git, along with an opportunity for a further optimisation.
Any optimizations to help Block Erupters? Still not quite stable for me, 4.x that is. Oh dear, if they're not good by now, they never will be  4.0.x had regressions but there should be no reason 4.1 is any less stable with erupters than any of the best 3.x versions. Well, I think I may have used an inaccurate phrase in "not quite stable". It seems to run and doesn't crash. But it does turn off several erupters on both machines I use, erupters that run just fine on 3.8.4 and 3.11.0. |
|
|
|
EDIT: Fixed in git, along with an opportunity for a further optimisation.
Any optimizations to help Block Erupters? Still not quite stable for me, 4.x that is. |
|
|
|
I've been thinking about how pooled mining works, there are a couple of thing which have left me wondering how fair it all actually is.
1. Is there anything preventing a (dishonest) expert coder from modifying his mining software, allowing it to only submit his work that doesn't discover a valid block for the pool, but when the time comes that he actually finds a valid block the modified software will disconnect from the mining pool and submit the block by himself, therefore he gets to keep the entire 25btc block.... It would seem like a pretty major flaw to pooled mining if this worked, so I'm sure there is something preventing it from happening, if so what is it?
2. Staying on the topic of greedy mining. I'm pretty sure I have read somewhere that it doesn't matter how many transactions miners include in each block, it shouldn't take any extra computational time to produce each hash, I don't understand that. So again, if the same expert coder rewrote his mining software to only include 1 transaction in each block, am I correct in thinking this wouldn't provide any advantage over including the standard 100-1000 transactions in each block?
1. This has been discussed many times and has been answered by experts on the subject, which I am not. So try searching for it. But to answer in laymen's terms, no the block cannot be kept by the dishonest miner. But yes they can stop a block solve from being submitted. It's called a withholding attack. This risk *ALONE* should be reason enough for pools to not offer PPS. Sam I did try searching for the answer to 1, i read the forum a lot also but just never came up with the answer to that question.... Specifically, what is there to stop the person announcing the block through their own node and withhold it from the the pool they were mining with. In other words it would be solo mining but submitting all your failed work to a pool and receiving payout for it. The work items a pool gives to a miner is unique to the pool. So if you submitted said block solve via your local bitcoind it would not be accepted in the block chain. Similarly in your item 2. pools select the transactions that are included according to their own criteria. The more transactions that are included the greater chance a pool has of loosing an orphan race. |
|
|
|
I've been thinking about how pooled mining works, there are a couple of thing which have left me wondering how fair it all actually is.
1. Is there anything preventing a (dishonest) expert coder from modifying his mining software, allowing it to only submit his work that doesn't discover a valid block for the pool, but when the time comes that he actually finds a valid block the modified software will disconnect from the mining pool and submit the block by himself, therefore he gets to keep the entire 25btc block.... It would seem like a pretty major flaw to pooled mining if this worked, so I'm sure there is something preventing it from happening, if so what is it?
2. Staying on the topic of greedy mining. I'm pretty sure I have read somewhere that it doesn't matter how many transactions miners include in each block, it shouldn't take any extra computational time to produce each hash, I don't understand that. So again, if the same expert coder rewrote his mining software to only include 1 transaction in each block, am I correct in thinking this wouldn't provide any advantage over including the standard 100-1000 transactions in each block?
1. This has been discussed many times and has been answered by experts on the subject, which I am not. So try searching for it. But to answer in laymen's terms, no the block cannot be kept by the dishonest miner. But yes they can stop a block solve from being submitted. It's called a withholding attack. This risk *ALONE* should be reason enough for pools to not offer PPS. Sam |
|
|
|
I have just joined this pool, I live in Perth Western Australia so decided to support the locals, hopefully I won't be disappointed, so far I'm happy with how it is all running.  Just remember, small pools have larger less frequent payouts because they don't find blocks as often. Who'da thunk that 200Ths would have been a small pool not so long ago? |
|
|
|
What happened to this pool? Why hasn't it been updated to keep up with the latest advancements in pool mining tech - ie like stratum support, etc.
Rumour is nobody knows, not even the owner... lol, what happened to the owner, did he get abducted by aliens? He used to be very active here on the forum and also if I remember things correctly he was trying to get into the bitcoin ASIC business as well (but that project flopped). You can probably find him here. https://icbit.se/ |
|
|
|
Blockchain.info is saying 31 blocks in the last 4 days
If 300 GHs found 31 blocks then my 30 GHs would have found 3 block. I haven't found any blocks. |
|
|
|
- Fixed AMUs being detected as failing and resetting them too early
Does this mean it's now safe to use 4.0.1 with Block Erupters again? Give it a try and let us know. |
|
|
|
So which is the best one for a new pool? First I need some users lol. I may switch it back to prop because pplns has to be tweaked to the right settings to work good.
PPLNS would probably be best. It is widely accepted now. If you were to use PPS your pool would be exploited by those who could care less if you took losses, especially with the 0 fee introductory period. But your plan of using Proportional then switching to PPLNS seems sound. Most do NOT like Proportional since it is hoppable even though, according to Organofcorti, pool hopping is not happening these days. It is still politically incorrect. Good Luck, Sam |
|
|
|
I'll add you to the list - but before I do, are you sure you want to go with proportional reward? It's a bit dangerous for any pool. There are only two pools left doing proportional rewards and neither of them are doing well. I think that I will change it to PPS . You could be putting yourself at financial risk by using PPS. Proportional would be safer for the pool. PPLNS is also available for these pools. Proportional has a better record of killing pools than PPS, from what I can remember. From what I understand PPLNS could be safe for a pool too. I would just hate to see a new pool go into debt with PPS, unless they have really deep pockets to start with. But even then PPS would be too risky, in my opinion, which isn't really worth much |
|
|
|
I'll add you to the list - but before I do, are you sure you want to go with proportional reward? It's a bit dangerous for any pool. There are only two pools left doing proportional rewards and neither of them are doing well. I think that I will change it to PPS . You could be putting yourself at financial risk by using PPS. Proportional would be safer for the pool. |
|
|
|
99 Mhash/s is not that great i know, but if i stopped my GUIMiner for several hours, will i loose everything i have done so far on my worker?
No, each hash you generate and submit is a complete and separate attempt to solve a block. So you won't loose anything you've already generated and submitted. |
|
|
|
when can i expect to see anything in my wallet based on my computers 99.9 Mhash/s
A Verrryyyy long time. I don't know what slush's minimum payout is, probably in the neighborhood of .01 to .001 BTC. My 32Ghs only makes around .003 BTC per day. So 99Mhs will take a long time to reach .01 BTC. |
|
|
|
no gox-like shenanigans.
Why is MtGox's buy price so low at the moment? Just curious, if anyone knows? |
|
|
|
Is there an API command that will get me the 5s hashrate or something similar?
I have a stack of 16 bitburner boards and occasionally one or more of them will crash and need to be rebooted. I'm looking for a way to figure out this has happened so that I can automatically power cycle and reboot the boards, but I can't find any API command that will tell me the current hashrate or even the current state of the devices. Anyone have any suggestions?
Did you look in the api-readme.txt? Yes, of course. There is nothing in there that seems like it answers my question, unless I am missing something somewhere. I've looked at both the output from the "summary" and the "stats" commands. aw ok, nm, I see some useful information from the "devs" command now. I don't use the API so I don't know what would be best for what you need. I just wanted to make sure you knew of the readme's existence. Though through my quick check it looked like the "notify" command may be helpful, dunno though. |
|
|
|
Is there an API command that will get me the 5s hashrate or something similar?
I have a stack of 16 bitburner boards and occasionally one or more of them will crash and need to be rebooted. I'm looking for a way to figure out this has happened so that I can automatically power cycle and reboot the boards, but I can't find any API command that will tell me the current hashrate or even the current state of the devices. Anyone have any suggestions?
Did you look in the api-readme.txt? |
|
|
|
I'm using cgminer 3.7.2 right now and found out that there are a number of new releases since I set it up I have the gpu_mine.bat file on my desktop and I left that one but replaced the whole miner map with the 3.12.3... without success, cgminer closes seconds after it started. How can I make this work or what am I doing wrong? CGMiner supports only ASIC's and Bitcoin going forward. No GPU support since 3.7.2. |
|
|
|
Well for me, I dont mind not knowing which block I found, just would be cool to have an email that gets sent to me each time I find a block (counter goes +1). This way I can happy happy joy joy dance when I know I got extra coins comin heh
I think you are confused about how POOLED mining works. you do not get anything extra when your workers find a block. Correc me eif I'm wrong, bu the person who finds the block gets transaction fees which AFAIK is everything after the 25., so joee blow finds a block with value of 25.05308509 So he gets his fair pool share then the .05308509. I'm pretty sure that the ".05308509" in your example gets distributed along with the 25 to all miners who contributed to the round/shift. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
