Anything over 990kb is effectively full for the current network block size limits. The algorithm to fill the last few bytes of a 1MB block is designed to not waste heaps of time sorting through thousands of transactions just to find the last few bytes to fill the block. However none of this matters because the size of the block ultimately is up to the miner's configuration. Some miners haven't even bothered changing the default which is set to 750kb in bitcoind, while others (like p2pool miners) have lowered it to work around terrible speed issues in their mining pool design with more transactions. Furthermore the network may have 1 million transactions pending but the miner is free to mine their next block with absolutely zero transactions beyond their generation transaction, and many large pools still do such an optimisation as a workaround for slow block changes in the rest of their tool chain. Basing block size on some dynamic mechanism based on the last block sizes is silly since it means it will depend on miners' whims as to how big the block is, and not really represent how many pending transactions are on the network. Alternatively basing it on the number of pending transactions is also silly because one man's high priority transaction is another's spam, and vice versa. Dynamic sounds good in theory but fails to address the issue that not all miners are altruistic and choose defaults that are best for the network.

That's kind of pointless since it takes 5 days to start getting maximum rewards on kano.is ckpool.

Not if they're not finding blocks...

Completed.

Note that there are still 4 users who have been trying to log in repeatedly with invalid usernames. I have since blocked your IP addresses so if you cannot connect at all you may be one of them.
For those with low hashrate hardware that are having trouble staying on the pool now, it is probably related to the increase in starting diff to 4000, so you can work around this by adding --suggest-diff and a suitable diff to your mining device. Note that there is hardly any reason to use suggest diff otherwise on this pool.

Just looks like a canned polite response to me. Alas, nothing to see here, move along.

One more minor adjustment and bounce, sorry folks.

EDIT: Done. The restarts at least have been virtually seamless today.

You cannot meaningfully mine bitcoin with any computer any more by itself. While you can mine with a computer, virtually all mining is done with specialised hardware called ASICs which are trillions of times more efficient than computers at mining. You can use your computer to control the miners though.

Thanks. Will investigate when time permits. There were huge updates pending first (check the ckpool git to see all the changes); unfortunately those changes seem to have affected these stats. No mining is lost though, the stats are probably not being propagated fully to the main pool.

Check your username is a valid bitcoin address and doesn't contain a space or something, or try another address.

Then you have some kind of network problem. The pool is working perfectly fine for 2.8PH of miners at the moment. Only thing I can see is people trying to connect repeatedly with invalid usernames which is a user problem.

Everything's hunky dory.

There is no precedent on that front in terms of what happens should a soft/hard fork not activate so no one knows yet if/how the core devs would respond. On the other hand segwit has one year to activate and it's way too early to pass any kind of judgement on that front.

Changing to the original block limits would be 32MB, and since current transactions have a quadratic scaling problem, it would be possible to create 32MB of transaction(s) on one block that would take half hour to process with current bitcoind on the current network protocol, bringing the network to a standstill. By the way, segwit transactions don't have this scaling problem, they scale linearly.

After a restart any workers or users that have not been mining since the restart won't have any updates on their stats; the lastupdate field is there to help people notice that. Alternatively if you're mining on the de pool there is a possibility that stats are not being propagated properly to the main pool since that was massively modified in the software update. What exactly is wrong?

Dear users "cobramining", "whirledps1" and "koh0907", you cannot use a regular username on this pool; you must use a valid bitcoin address as your username. Additionally user trying to log in with 1EF7qiyc5Beog1x1sZKitiYKhp31zKYq8w your bitcoin address is invalid.

Found and fixed the redirector problem and have updated the pools yet again. Thanks for your patience. Block on.

All restarts complete. Sorry about any inconvenience. Block on.

The older fan control would fail to control the heat... Newer fan control keeps it under 90 degrees if possible where the old one it can go higher despite not turning fan up to max. In cold environments the fan will now run slower but in warmer environments it will run faster. Depends on whether you care about noise or the device lasting...

That's exactly what pooled mining achieves without the absurd complication of finding a fair way to cause block changes at particular times based on 100 miners contributing block solves leading tho 100x the orphan rate and frequent network splits and reorganisations.

Use their support thread instead of creating a new thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1017498.0

/locked

Given this guy's been involved in a scam previously I highly recommend not using his service or even clicking on his link. While there is nothing anyone can steal from just seeing your mining credentials, some uninformed people have used their mining pool account password as their mining password as well and I suspect he's fishing around for people who have that combination.