Was watching for your announcement, Inaba. Throwing a few mips at us3 now, the least loaded one atm, to see how things go.

BTW, I did a manual payout today and did not receive an email. I'll watch and let you know what happens on an automatic payout.

Also, if you are sending these emails via a mail-server which does not have a reverse DNS entry to the mail-server / itself with a matching MX entry, my mail server will not allow the connection.

Now to the topic of 'reliability'.

Glitch in progress.

Time for Inaba to go kick the servers again to solve their constipation.

None of my shares shown as submitted by the web server for a while and the top level GH/s rating for all three servers has plummeted.

Going back to my issue of 'rejects'.

1) I'm using MPBM.
2) Sending tens of thousands of shares to MaxBTC, MPBM report zero to 0.03% rejects. (Similar results previously seen with Ozcoin.)
3) MPBM is currently reporting 6.38%, 5.15% and 1.83%, to Eclipse us1, 2, 3 after about a hundred shares sent to each server
4) The Eclipse "My Workers" page currently shows xxx (0) for all three workers/servers where xxx == total number of shares submitted. I.e., what MPBM is counting as a 'rejected' share EMC is showing as valid.

So, it appears that I'm not seeing a 'true' higher reject rate with EMC than with other pools, but for whatever reason the mining software, MPBM, 'thinks' the pool has rejected shares. Which pretty much never happens on MaxBTC or Ozcoin.

Thoughts?

And that was my point. Apologies if it was obscure.

Doesn't matter whether or not the "price is quite high right now".

The price is adequate right now.

We bought into an ASIC production effort, not a BTC price speculation plan.

Found it. Thank you.

I don't see an active motion on GLBSE.

traceroutes sent via a PM.

I see nothing notable in them.

My testing was done on us1 and us2 using a single BFL single as the hash generator.

As a comparison, I've since done 24,000 shares on MaxBTC with zero rejects.

Just completed more duration tests.

Over the same period, that is over the last few days, with first test got 8000 shares with one reject and 14,000 shares with zero rejects at another pool. At EMC, with a few test runs consistently got at least 0.5% to 1+% rejects with one test run of a few hundred shares exceeding 5% rejects.

Conjectures:
1) The new hardware coming online at EMC within a few days will improve things
2) The change to diff 2 at EMC will improve things
3) There are just so many big/'fast' miners at EMC that I would forever lose out due to rejections of late/duplicates at EMC.

Making no judgements. Merely my observations.

Why wouldn't they stay at EclipseMC, or perhaps go to MaxBTC, and just pocket the increased fee?

That sounds reasonable. A large gain for very small pain / variance-increase.

My vote is that you go for it in order to reduce current load / improve current responsiveness.

And it's good practice for when you need to bump it higher in the future.

The model I'm using has that difficulty reached by June 2013.

And ~14 million by January 2014.

Sure would be nice if I'm too pessimistic there, but I rather doubt that.

Thank you.

Thank you, ebereon.

I've got other connectors/ribbons left over from USB to motherboard and SPDIF to motherboard, but my recollection is that those all had the same pin spacing as IDE/floppy connectors.

Probably worth my while to just throw a few dollars at Enterpoint and avoid any parts procurement hassles for this since I only need one atm.

--

Guess all my junk box stuff is getting really old. Anyone need SCSI cables/terminators?

I got the email to confirm and responded with a yes. Haven't heard back with how to make payment (not via BTC for me - I'm BTC poor) and firm shipping date(s) yet.

Can you provide any update on how 'the second half of September' orders are being processed, please?

High reject rates.

I turned off us2 when its reject rate hit 5%.

Just turned off us1 when its reject rate drifted over 1%.

Currently splitting between us3 and another pool.

I'm used to seeing reject rates around 0.3%.

Maybe my hashes/sec are just too slow to play with the big boys on EMC.

--

I also locally show more accepted shares submitted to us2 than the web site shows for that worker.

Sounds to me like you're asking for a lot there fella.

However, top post on the page where you posted:
"... the server loads displayed.
I will be rolling that out to the rest of the pages as soon as I get a chance."

 

Inaba, nice touch showing the GH/s for the US1,2,3 servers. ty

Allows us to do a little user driven load balancing by knowing that.

I'm sending my dinky MH/s split/failover to US1 and US2 atm.

I did not receive an email for an auto-payout event today.

Perhaps related to the known/ongoing SMS problem?

I'm not.

You might want to do a histogram of "> 10 GH/s", "1 to 10 GH/s", "< 1 GH/s" of your users and see how that falls out.

I am, of course, prepared to be left in the dust as a "< 1 GH/s" guy. Just give me a heads up please.