PM sent - the payment is listed on the site, but the blockexplorer link says "No such transaction".

EDIT: Got the payment now, thanks!

Hi Tycho, your site is nice, and seems to be reliable.  Great job!  I have a small website change suggestion:  The user/pass login always shows in a box on top of the left pane, even when you're logged in.  I suggest to change it so that when you're logged in (and it shows it on the top right side), don't display the user/pass login boxes.  Instead, display "Welcome $USER" and/or a Logout link, or just nothing at all.  It _works_ properly, I'm not complaining about how well it works in the least :-)  Just that it from a UI perspective, it shouldn't continue to prompt you for login credentials if you've already logged in.

Problem with the payouts today? Mine has been stuck in limbo for many hours now.

EDIT: I tried using Deepbit instead of slush's pool, and all of the invalid/stale results are gone. Is this something to do with using slush's pool, or does the deepbit server work differently? They say that "no block confirmation is needed", but does that mean that I'm still submitting invalid blocks, and that they aren't checking them?

Currently I have a miner with 2 5870's crossfired attached to the 2nd VGA port of my monitor. (My main workstation is on the HDMI port running 1 5970.)

I have a 3rd pci-e slot and want to fill it, but I'm not sure if it'd detect if not plugged into a monitor port?

My plan is to add a 5970, does anyone know if it will detect if not plugged in? After any possible crashes/reboots as well?

I just want to see if I really need to make any additonal modifications, or what the best layout here might be, thanks :)

If you are using the PC for nothing too graphics heavy better to bump the f closer to 20 and maybe 30

I tried out the Pay-Per-Share payout method and found that it does not give any details as to how much was being paid out per block.  Is this a glitch or something that is not yet available?

A suggestion, how about a field for a list of addresses that can be sequential/randomized and reused/consumed instead of a single one, perhaps even per-miner?

Then people will start to notice their transactions aren't going through, they'll read around and get the hint that in order to make their transactions be included in a miner's block, they should motivate him by adding a fee. Imagine how many transactions are in that long awaited block.

My understanding of the "weakness" of pooling is there are fewer p2p nodes (users running the bitcoin client) since all clients of the pool are running a cpu/gpu mining program (poclbm, Diablo, Ufasoft, etc).
That said, I still run bitcoind on a server at home to help offset this "wekaness"

I don't really see the problem if this happens, they'll still get the same blocks they'd get otherwise. Anyone who'd do that is just plain stupid.

What if someone manages to hack and attack 3 or 4 or half of the pools at the same time and get them under their control? I don't know I'm just very worried when I see so much CPU power being harnessed by so few individual servers.
EDIT: Or better yet they attack and shutdown all the rest of the pools but their own??

I imagine because with more the proportional share gets smaller and smaller for those with high speed hashing.

I would be pleased if [Tycho]'s pool stayed right around 30-35Ghash  ;)

What's the number in the bottom right corner on your web-site for? It keeps changing every time i switch pages.

Tried this for a short time, did some math and it seems that (for me) this pool pays 8-10% less than slush's pool, so I think I'll stick with the latter ;).

[Tycho] I don't know if you mentioned this before but are you going to limit to how many users can participate in the pool?

But maybe no, because you know (from me) that there will be problems with bitcoind. That's the point. Btw, my pool software (not bitcoind) can handle thousands of getworks per second and I never had problems with speed of my custom software.

(Bts it's nice example of another issue, in the times when I made the pool, running more instances of bitcoind on the same machine was not possible because of hardcoded listening on the 8333 port.)

Hehe, don't say this - you are still on 30ghashes, I had no problems on this speed, too (and also don't have problem at current 90ghash/s).

[03:51] <[Tycho]> On how many getworks/sec did you started to get problems in the first time ?
[03:51] <slush1> I think around 30ghash, not sure which getwork/s it was

I never had troubles with speed of pool software itself and I see your statement as little unfair, because you didin't have to solve 90% of troubles which I had. Just my 2 cents...

Someone else is concerned by log in problem ?
EDIT : Problem solved after a password reset...