All nonce is checked in ~7 seconds on 5870 GPU.
...unless nTime field is also incremented, which is a permissible optimization... Yes, but i was talking about existing version. |
|
|
|
It's nice that you adopted long polling too :) Now you can really increase effeciency to the level of other pools. Poclbm-mod was really quite ineffective - some users are running it in my pool, so i can compare statistics. Stale shares percentage with usual GPU miners (w/o long polling) is currently ~1-2% and with poclbm-mod (w/o long polling) is ~3-4.2% Some users managed to get less than 1% of stale shares w/o long polling by using luck or getwork intervals shorter than 7 sec. Even with long polling, the main version is still averaging 5 - 10 seconds before asking for more work, which prevents you from working through the entire getwork.
Are you sure about that ? It should request new getwork only after checking through all the nonce or 60 seconds of work, whatever comes first. All nonce is checked in ~7 seconds on 5870 GPU. |
|
|
|
Really?! I'd consider solo-mining viable if the average suggested at least one (ideally more) block before the next difficulty change. At 1.3 Gh/s the average is under three days, with around six days before the next difficulty change. To be honest, at 330 Kh/s (average 11 days, 11 hours) I'm considering moving back to solo-mining when the difficulty decreases next week, though I'll concede that I'll need a good bit of luck! :-)
Yes, i'm thinking about this as deciding factor too. But it's not guaranted that you will find a block in 3 days. Last block in slush's pool took 524205 shares to solve. Yesterday i had 489991-shares block in my pool, so it's pretty possible. When mining solo that would be a little disaster, like a month of mining for single block :) I don't see any reason to mine solo at 300 KH/s even with 70k difficulty... |
|
|
|
I really want to get out of this pool but I can't disconnect until we solve a block at some point (Not wasting 4 days).
As I understand it the shares you've accumulated so far will still count, even if you switch pools or start solo-mining, so it wouldn't be a complete loss. Personally, if I had 1300 Mhash/s at my disposal I'd still be solo-mining ;-) As i understand, everything will be lost except for the shares submitted in the last two network block intervals (~20 min) 1.3 GH/s is too slow for solo mining, IMHO :) Will work ONLY if you are lucky. |
|
|
|
Pool #1 distributes the block between its 100 members so each member gets 0.5 BTC
Pool #2 distributes the block between its 100,000 members so each member gets 0.0005 BTC
Each member gets 0.5 BTC only of they all have exactly same hashing speed. If some member has faster rig, it will get bigger reward than others with slower machines. If a member from pool #1 switches to pool #2, he will get same amount of BTC per day, as in #1 pool. |
|
|
|
Yes, but each user will receive same reward in both pools. If a user with high hashing rate will go from one pool to another, his payout will be exactly the same. Same goes for "slow" user. If the pool was "pay per share" I agree with you. If it was not in theory a pool with 100 members with a 50 ghash/s rate compared to a pool with 1000 members with the same rate the first pool should pay out more because they are solving the same amount of blocks and have to pay it out to lesser amount of people therefore each person would get more BTC. Just like if I two people were mining solo and one has 10x the hash rate he should in theory get 10x as much because 1 pool = 1 miner. Sorry, but it looks like you don't understand correctly how mining works. Or i don't understand your question :) If you have 1 GH/s hashing rate, you will receive EQUAL payout per day/week/month in any pool if those pools are working normally. If there is a pool with 50 users of 1 GH/s each and other pool with 500 users of 0.1 GH/s, their total speed will be the same. And the miners in first pool will get 10x more bitcoins because they are mining 10x faster. And if there are a pool with 25 users of 1 GH/s and 250 users of 0.1 GH/s, first ones will get 10x more than slow ones, same as if they were in different pools. |
|
|
|
Что касается "само генерится", то, если кратко - сейчас в одиночку самому сгенерить монеты нереально, не стоит даже пытаться. неужели на столько все плохо =( эх... жаль :'( Если есть несколько мощных видеокарт ATI или есть возможность их купить - то ещё можно нагенерить самому. Нужны карты типа Radeon 5870, например. |
|
|
|
As long as we're discussing different kind of pools:
What if someone created a pool with a limited max hashrate dedicated to just CPU miners?
It will only be interesting for users that don't understand how mining works. Let's say that 1000 CPU users make a pool, then their hash rate will be only 1-10 MH/s total and it will create blocks much slower than other pools. There are no any advantages for CPU users in such pool. |
|
|
|
Thanks, so I guess the idea of having a pool where members must meet a certain hash rate sayyy 100mhash/s for example does not exist yet?
Why would someone do that ? This restriction will only be necessary for some small-scale pool which is incapable to serve many slow miners. Pool without restrictions gets more users and makes more BTC. Say you have a pool with 100 members with the exact same hash rate as a pool with 1000 members, wouldn't the smaller pool generate the same amount of bitcoin and each member would get 10x more than in the larger pool? Yes, but each user will receive same reward in both pools. If a user with high hashing rate will go from one pool to another, his payout will be exactly the same. Same goes for "slow" user. |
|
|
|
You got any estimates for pay-per-share at 1.1Ghash/s (And at 1.3Ghash/s if you can too please).
1.1 GH/s will give you 13 BTC per day at pay-per-share or 14 BTC per day with proportional payout |
|
|
|
Thanks, so I guess the idea of having a pool where members must meet a certain hash rate sayyy 100mhash/s for example does not exist yet?
Why would someone do that ? This restriction will only be necessary for some small-scale pool which is incapable to serve many slow miners. Pool without restrictions gets more users and makes more BTC. The smaller the pool the higher your payout. Currently I am in this pool http://btcmine.com but it isn't generating payouts for days at a time so I will be leaving. The bitpenny pool seems to be much more advantageous to me however as it pays out even if a block isn't solved: This puts the "Gamble" onto the owner of the pool instead, and for this reason he takes 10% commission. The smaller the pool the higher your payout per block. But bigger pools have more blocks, so overall payment is the same. Bitpenny is not the only one with pay-per-share payout. My pool provides it too. |
|
|
|
But what does that tell you? Let's say I ran a pool with a 5% comission. So I get 2.5 BTC from each block. What stops me from having my pool software simulate a few 5970 clients, awarding me their score in the pool rankings. That of course would be done with seperate addresses so it wouldn't show up on block explorer. I can't think of a way to protect against something like that.
It's enough just to compare your expected payout to real one. It should be the same on average, every participant can do this. Second, these pools are mostly being run by one person and lack things like fault tolerance. If Joe pool operator makes a code change that breaks things, the pool goes down. He isn't likely to have a development environment, test deployments etc. So wwe have 2-3% comissions then there is the downtime which reduces efficiency even further.
So in that respect, I am thinking solo provides the greatest efficiency. There is no overhead loss due to comissions or pool outages.
Do you have any statistics on pool outages or proofs of fault tolerance lack ? How would you know if pool operators have test deployments or not ? Please, don't make such assumptions. Solo mining efficiency is higher only if you have hashing speed high enough to find blocks faster than difficulty adjustment steps. |
|
|
|
UPDATES: - Shares and stale counters can be reset, all at once or one at a time (total sum is still saved).
- Now you can delete workers if you don't need them anymore
|
|
|
|
Can you riddle me another question: Is it normal to have 0% stale shares in your pool?
Yes (if you are talking about MY pool). It depends on your miner software, your hashing speed and your luck. |
|
|
|
Tempted to jump on this at 1.3Ghash/s. Soon as I get my next large payment from BTCPool I come on for a couple hours and see what I get.
Any estimations?
15.4450436053 BTC per day and 0.643543483555 BTC per hour. |
|
|
|
Легальных вариантов в голову не пришло при создании опроса ? :) |
|
|
|
В этом топике хочу сказать, что мы наблюдаем закат интереса к биткоину. "Мы" - это кто ? Заката не наблюдается, т.к. сам рассвет ещё и не произошёл :) для пользователей скачивать всякую малварь - это слишком сложно,
кроме того, установка программ может быть запрещена родителями при помощи операционной системы.
При чём тут вообще дети ? Биткойн детям не игрушка :) Р.S.: Это ты троллишь или действительно так думаешь ? |
|
|
|
По моему мнению это и есть их истинное предназначение, а необлагаемость платой за перевод и отсутствие эмиссионного органа -- всего лишь приятные бонусы.
Отсутствие платы за перевод - временное явление, к сожалению. Как доходы от генерации упадут или станет много транзакций - плата сразу появится :) |
|
|
|
Именно, ведь только биткойн позволяет всем пользователям заглядывать в кошельки друг друга и отслеживать транзакции :) |
|
|
|
Вот в США как раз товарищ садится за создание валюты, обеспеченной драгметаллами - "Trial begins for Bernard Von NotHaus, creator of the Liberty Dollar" По их законам это запрещено, как и другие "частные" валюты: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/486.htmlТо есть теоретически можно сесть на пять лет просто за расплату этими деньгами, а даже не за их создание. Хотя сами доллары и так не особо государственные - их выпускает организация из 12 коммерчески банков. У нас 75 статья конституции запрещает выпуск денег: http://www.constitution.ru/10003000/10003000-5.htmНо при этом странно, как работают банковские мультипликаторы :) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
