ckpool is located in the US? when solo mining from EU is it better to mine with a solo pool located in EU?
For two identically set up mining nodes, one closer to you has slightly less latency. However the difference is in the order of about 200 milliseconds, when different pool set ups can have latencies in the order of a few seconds thanks to different pool software, bitcoinds, configuration, connectivity and server performance. A great deal of effort has gone into making sure the latency on this pool is very low, with custom modified bitcoind and the owner of the pool being the author of the ckpool software. In all, I doubt an EU node would be better for you unless you found one equally well set up. I haven't set one up because the number of solo miners is still very low and this pool's profitability remains low so if I were to set up multiple nodes across the world I probably wouldn't get any more miners, it would just cost me more to run the pools. I tried early on to use a very cheap VPS to run the pool on but the reality was it wasn't up to the task and a much higher performance server from a reliable provider made a big difference to performance. |
|
|
|
|
What are you buying the hardware for? Is this for mining or something else?
You've posted in the bitcoin mining support section and even an RPi is powerful enough to run any mining hardware available today.
|
|
|
|
There is a thread discussing use of empty blocks to try and speed up block change propagation for its miners: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085800.0Kano did a comparison of ckpool using full transaction block changes vs a prominent pool that does the 1 transaction block change you mention and the block change speed was always propagated faster with a well tuned bitcoind and good pool software and full transactions. The 1 transaction block you speak of is a workaround for a poor set up and less scalable pool software. It is within that same thread above, the specific post is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085800.msg11847437#msg11847437Saying miners won't use custom code for bitcoind is naive given that most pools run all their own code. The "miners" you speak of these days are 99% mining on prominent pools and every single successful pool out there has coders modifying bitcoind or are not even using bitcoind. p2pool miners who are the only non "pooled-miners" constitute less than 0.5% of the network now as "individual miners" and even then, they are mostly modifying their default bitcoind settings. Matt's relaynode is nothing to do with mining transaction fee blocks. It is exactly the opposite - it is designed to propagate blocks across the world as fast as possible irrespective of the amount of transactions. See https://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/a-bitcoin-backbone/ and http://bitcoinrelaynetwork.org/If you're saying that mining 1 transaction blocks is going to be faster even with all of the above, the answer is generically yes. However, transactions and transaction fee incentive are the cornerstone of bitcoin and mining and some of us pool operators believe every effort should be made to make managing this as fast as possible while transmitting as many transactions as possible the key to good pooled mining. We have shown that you can do this without detriment, and long term when fees become the bulk of the reward it will become essential. I see no evidence anywhere of this alleged 1% advantage to empty block mining. The next halving is only a year away, and with fees being 1-2% now in great transaction floods, that will rise to be up to 5% which is far from insignificant. Add to that the possible rise in max blocksize... |
|
|
|
|
A "share" means a share of the reward at the pool you're mining. When you're mining solo, there's no reward unless you find a block, so there's nothing to share. If you have a hashrate demonstrable then you're mining satisfactorily. Bear in mind that you need a well connected ultra low latency bitcoin node to warrant mining solo since your chance of having an orphaned block is much higher which would put any luck or effort to waste. Home internet type setups for bitcoin nodes should really only be used as a last resort for solo mining for that reason.
|
|
|
|
|
The block would be rejected by every single node it's sent to as every transaction included in the broadcast block is checked by every node it's sent to.
|
|
|
|
A pool goes for a week without finding a block and things must be wrong with the pool itself. Yet, when the pool finds many more blocks than it should, nobody's yelling that something is wrong with the pool.
Too many blocks. There must be something wrong with the pool. |
|
|
|
Use Kano's S2 update instead. Queue does nothing any more on that version so you don't need to worry about it.
Is there any thing like this on my S3+ i should think of? Use Kano's s3 update... |
|
|
|
|
It is up to the pool operator to decide how to prioritise its transactions. For pools that filter transactions according to some arbitrary rules, personal beliefs of the pool operator that makes them use blacklists, and not scalable software, they implement their own choices for how to build blocks and often build 1 transaction blocks to cope with their lack of scalable pool code on block changes before starting again with transaction filled blocks later which is doing the network a real disservice in these times of massive amounts of transactions on the network. For other pools (like all the ckpool based ones) we use the default bitcoind transaction rules which means that we're generating generous large blocks with many of these transactions - and the difference in fee is substantial with many block rewards having 1-2% of the reward from fee which is quite significant. The default bitcoind rules mean that basically the longer the time is between blocks, the higher the transaction fee reward is - and it adds up to quite a lot. Use of matt's relaynode means that block propagation doesn't appear to be hindered to the point of being orphaned even if it is larger. The reality is two pools finding blocks within a short time frame is still uncommon.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're using the stock power supply I highly recommend not going to volts above 780 as they have a knack of melting. These are unreliable pieces of shit unfortunately and as well as needing regular hard restarts, they may not run at their desired speed at default voltage. Since each device is different, don't assume that yours will run at someone else's settings. If you run them at higher speed than they can tolerate they will continue to fail and run lower than the speed you start them at. This is classically seen by them starting at the right speed and then dropping over time. Instead of increasing the frequency, try restarting them at lower and lower frequency till they actually continue to run at their starting speed instead of dropping speed over time, and accept that your device may not be capable of 62GH.
Leave au3-volt at 780 and start at default frequency of au3-freq 225 and then if the speed drops over time, unplug both the power and usb cable for 1 minute and then start again with au3-freq lower by 5 every time till you find a reliable frequency.
|
|
|
|
How do you think, should I change the "queue" value to 0 on my Antminer S2?
Use Kano's S2 update instead. Queue does nothing any more on that version so you don't need to worry about it. |
|
|
|
Fuck me, 9 blocks found and still 5 hours to go
Even better was the fact that nearly 2 petahash left before the good luck. They're back now, but we had juicy good luck with fewer mouths to feed, so a slightly larger reward for those of us who stuck it out. Yet, when the pool finds many more blocks than it should, nobody's yelling that something is wrong with the pool.
You're finding too many blocks. Your pool must be broken. |
|
|
|
|
Indeed it's lousy terminology. What they really mean is "stuck, having not found a block".
|
|
|
|
Um...I thought 4.9.2 was the most recent? Looks like he compiled 4.3.3?
Hello and thanks for your answer, but with the 4.9.2 is the same, i have read for the Bitfurys are the 4.3.3 the most recent!? About the difficult, i mine with the Bitfurys only the "eMark"... regards Always use the most recent. There is no way 4.3.3 is "the most recent". You probably just have a failing device. These things have a life expectancy. |
|
|
|
|
There are 185 separate users mining on my solo mining service averaging ~1PH in total.
|
|
|
|
|
You can report the opening post if you really want to make it about a whole thread, or just say in your report about any one post that it is about the whole thread. Mods get the full message of what the report is about and you can write quite a lot in your report if you wish.
|
|
|
|
[2015-07-26 14:22:27] Possible block solve diff 185784071126.617218 !
[2015-07-26 14:22:27] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2015-07-26 14:22:27] Solved and confirmed block 367056
[2015-07-26 16:43:27] Possible block solve diff 65011417049.587914 !
[2015-07-26 16:43:27] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2015-07-26 16:43:27] Solved and confirmed block 367073
|
|
|
|
Hope someone finds this wadhole soon . If its causing problems with the pool .may he be banned soon.
What are you talking about? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
