Bitcoin Forum
May 27, 2024, 10:20:27 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 »
61  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: I'm working on a pool software and wanted to check if I'm on the right track on: December 02, 2015, 05:51:02 PM
I actually got so angry that I opened up my own pool.  It's nothing fancy and I'm not offering crazy promotions or promises.  Straight up BTC mining.  Anybody who wants to can mine on it.  So far, it's only me.  Every now and then I'll rent some hash and throw it at it to see if I get lucky - after all, I found that block on the scammer's pool.

bravo-mining.com

You don't want to be beaten by a newbie/noob like me, do you? So you have to be ahead of them. Smiley

I am sorry. Off topic but I really couldn't resist.
62  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: CKPOOL - Open source pool/database/proxy/passthrough/library in c for Linux on: November 30, 2015, 04:53:25 PM
As I already implied, the software is full of 64bit maths and that will produce a noticeable difference, as will having double the registers in general code.

... and you will find that 5 year old link quite outdated now ... comments about not everyone having 64bit processors and "fewer issues" with 32bit are now wrong.
It's the other way around, fewer issues with 64bit and I'm not sure you can even find 32bit processors online any more.
If you can, you've been given old dodgy hardware.
I am quite sure that I didn't mention anything related to 32bit processors. My questions are clearly related to the use CKPool software on VPS with Linux i386, which are still very easy to get from all Linux distros or compile it ourselves. All VPS' definitely use 64bit capable processors.

Now the most relevant point ... if you want to run a pool, and you are trying to skimp on hardware, be well aware that you may lose blocks.
You need a bitcoind, and running one on a small vps is a problem waiting to happen.
Again, I am not asking anything outside running CKPool software on VPS with Linux i386. I know the impact of running bitcoind on VPS with RAM less than 2GB as I experience the issues myself, e.g. bitcoind regularly crashes. So I have the full node running on a real hardware with a Quad Core 2 GHz each and 8 GB RAM. However, the bandwidth of the link of the full node is asymmetric. So I want to have the pool software on the VPS with symmetric bandwidth to be able to better manage the user connections.

Anyway, this discussion does not seem to lead anywhere. But thanks for responding to my questions.
63  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: CKPOOL - Open source pool/database/proxy/passthrough/library in c for Linux on: November 30, 2015, 08:35:14 AM
I'm really not sure how a 32bit OS can be more efficient on 64bit hardware ...

Edit: ... and I'll add that mining requires 64bit math quite a bit ... since 4billion really isn't a big enough number Smiley
So all that code would be slower.

I am not a programmer and I know very little about 32bit vs 64bit programs. However, some years ago when I started to rent VPS for my private web site, I did some readings and testing myself. I have made the conclusion that Linux i386 is more efficient in using the RAM than Linux amd64. Somebody did more thorough tests than me and posted the results on this web page, if you wanted to know that.
64  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: CKPOOL - Open source pool/database/proxy/passthrough/library in c for Linux on: November 29, 2015, 11:35:24 PM
Hi Con,

I don't believe that you clearly explained the requirement to use Linux amd64 for your CKPool. The only error I saw from the previous posts is the "unknown type name sa_family_t" from /usr/include/linux/un.h.

Could you please explain in detail which parts on your CKPool require Linux amd64?

The main reason I asked is that, for small VPS it is more efficient - in term of the RAM usage - to use Linux i386 instead of amd64.  So it would be helpful to know the impact of compiling and running your CKPool on Linux i386.

Cheers,

Anto
The answer is I don't care so I've not bothered to make sure the code is fine on 32bit architectures and I don't want to care. You have your priorities wrong if you are worried about that on a pool.
I clearly didn't ask or demanded that you should make sure your code run on i386. I just asked which parts rely on amd64. So never mind then.
65  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: CKPOOL - Open source pool/database/proxy/passthrough/library in c for Linux on: November 29, 2015, 11:11:44 PM

I thought I would see if one of the small project boards would work as a proxy so I compiled it on an Odroid C1 (fedora). Compiled easily with only signed/unsigned warnings and connects just fine to kano.is but I get the following error when a miner finds a share and tries to submit it:
32bit processor? There's no 32 bit support in ckpool code.

Hi Con,

I don't believe that you clearly explained the requirement to use Linux amd64 for your CKPool. The only error I saw from the previous posts is the "unknown type name sa_family_t" from /usr/include/linux/un.h.

Could you please explain in detail which parts on your CKPool require Linux amd64?

The main reason I asked is that, for small VPS it is more efficient - in term of the RAM usage - to use Linux i386 instead of amd64.  So it would be helpful to know the impact of compiling and running your CKPool on Linux i386.

Cheers,

Anto
66  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Pool server software - CoiniumServ vs UNOMP on: November 29, 2015, 07:54:03 PM
I have been evaluating some pool server software, i.e. CoiniumServ, UNOMP, Eloipool, CKPool and some other smaller projects. It seems that only CoiniumServ and UNOMP offer a complete package including the web front end. However, the look of those web front ends are very similar to the Nexious scammer pool. But perhaps I could modify that. I have 2 small VPS' to test them, but I am not sure if they would be enough for running a public pool server.

Does anybody have any recommendations on CoiniumServ or UNOMP especially regarding the requirements of CPU and RAM on the server? For instance, how many user connections would be supported by running one of them on a VPS with 2 GHz CPU and 1 GB RAM?

Thanks in advance for your comments and recommendations.
67  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: mBTC on kano.is was Re: Nexious.com WARNING POOL OPERATOR IS NOT PAYING NOR RESPONDING on: November 29, 2015, 04:59:32 PM
so .anto. 

why not point the  2 u3's to ck's solo pool? hope for a huge hit on a block.

or why not mine on bitminter.com?

 I think he lets you pick a 0.01 payout which is 2 weeks.

Hi Phil,

I tried http://solo.ckpool.org/ for a week or so hopping that I would be very lucky to hit a new block. But that is not realistic with only 100 Gh/s hash rate.

I complained to DrHaribo on this post as to why I have to have an account managed by other companies, but there seems to be no intention to be able to mine on Bitminter using wallet address or open an account locally. FYI, I do not have any online social media accounts as I knew anything behind it long before Edward Snowden revealed that.

Cheers,

Anto
68  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: mBTC on kano.is was Re: Nexious.com WARNING POOL OPERATOR IS NOT PAYING NOR RESPONDING on: November 29, 2015, 03:47:55 PM

And sorry I was going offer you a free S1 I have sitting here collecting dust if you wanted to pay the shipping on it. But the cost of shipping over to Vienna, Austria even at snail mail would still not give you a reward for a very long time if any, if it where to break at some point in time.


Thanks for your long explanation about hashrate rental. I believe I came up to the same conclusion after trying hashrate rental for about 3 weeks.

It is quite generous of you to offer a free Antminer S1. Thanks a lot for that. But unfortunately, the shipping cost from the US and perhaps the tax that I have to pay to get it out of the custom, would be much more than the cost of an used one which I can get here, e.g from this online flea market. Perhaps anybody who is living close to you would be interested on that Smiley
69  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: mBTC on kano.is was Re: Nexious.com WARNING POOL OPERATOR IS NOT PAYING NOR RESPONDING on: November 29, 2015, 02:56:30 PM
As I previously read I think you mining with only 100ghs correct? May I ask why? Also where are you located? I may have a deal for you if you are in the us. To get you a little more ghs. if you are in the US leave your zipcode and I will post my offer for you here.

Unfortunately, I am not living in the US. As I have put into my profile on this forum, I am living in Vienna, Austria. I have only 3 Antminer U3 miners but only 2 of them actively mining on public pool servers. So yes, practically I only use about 100 Gh/s hashrate for trying the pools. I am using the other miner for testing and learning about the miner software and pool server software on my spare time.

As to why I have only that much of hashrates, I am just a hobbyist miner and I don't want to put too much investment on this. I can definitely buy Antminer S7 for instance, but I still don't think I would make profit in short period of time due to the cost of the electricity. And there is no space in my apartment to put big mining rigs. I also tried renting the hashrates but I practically didn't make anything out of it even I have mined on Antpool which always find a new block at least every hour.
70  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 29, 2015, 11:51:55 AM
I assumed that you are referring to the methods used by the current pools, as the example on the second pool would not work on the idea I posted because the maximum hashrate for each miner is 1 Th/s.

Payout method has no bearing on the percentage of hash rate you contribute to finding a block.  Both scenarios above are correct for any payout system.  The different payout systems just distribute the payouts differently to discourage pool hopping.

I think I mixed up with the vardiff usage on the current pools. I assumed that there is a maximum limit of vardiff so that the miners with huge hashrates send more shares than the miners with low hashrates as there is minimum limit of vardiff.

Variable diff has no bearing on your percentage of hash rate you contribute.  The variable difficulty is ONLY to decrease the amount of network bandwidth required and to decrease the load on the pool.

Thanks again for your clarifications.
71  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: mBTC on kano.is was Re: Nexious.com WARNING POOL OPERATOR IS NOT PAYING NOR RESPONDING on: November 29, 2015, 11:47:33 AM
I would not raise questions about dust payout if I would have 1.5 Th/s hashrate

What was your question about dust payout?  I missed that.
The dust payout that I meant is the payout below 1 mBTC per day that I always get using my 100 Gh/s miners. Since I have seen Kano's negative comments toward Eligius pool, I got the impression that his pool is better than Eligius and that triggered my question on this post which in the end led me to try Kano's pool with the hope that I can have better dust payout. If I would have 1.5 Th/s hashrate, I would not bother to get better dust payout as I mentioned on my comment that you quoted above.
Yep on my pool your dust only shows in your account.
(payments under 0.00010000)
I've not sent any yet to anyone (but one person long ago) since the pool started.
I imagine there may be a few miners with as much as $1 or $2 worth of dust not sent.

As I've said, one day ... in a galaxy far far away ... I'll add accounting to the web site and thus the unpaid balances will be correctly identified and it will know which have been sent and haven't been sent.
Then I'll sort out a way to send the dust ... which poses a problem coz sending dust on it's own costs more than the dust.
Merging it into current miners payouts will not be a problem I don't think.
I'll probably have to push the other dust transactions into our blocks and solve it that way.

Hi Kano,

I think I have caused confusion using the term "dust payout". I am sorry for that.

I am not demanding to get a payout below 0.1 mBTC. It is clear to me that your payout threshold is set to 0.1 mBTC to avoid paying transaction fee more than the payout itself. I perfectly understand that. So I don't think you need to bother to spend time trying to work on that because some people demanding that, as you might have to bear the cost for the transaction fees.

Perhaps I should have used the term "penny payout". So in relation to my posts quoted above, I would not bother to raise the questions getting better "penny payout", i.e. payout below 1 mBTC, if I would have 1.5 Th/s hashrate as I could easily exceed the threshold payouts of any pools in days instead of weeks.

Cheers,

Anto

72  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: mBTC on kano.is was Re: Nexious.com WARNING POOL OPERATOR IS NOT PAYING NOR RESPONDING on: November 29, 2015, 02:09:19 AM
I would not raise questions about dust payout if I would have 1.5 Th/s hashrate

What was your question about dust payout?  I missed that.
The dust payout that I meant is the payout below 1 mBTC per day that I always get using my 100 Gh/s miners. Since I have seen Kano's negative comments toward Eligius pool, I got the impression that his pool is better than Eligius and that triggered my question on this post which in the end led me to try Kano's pool with the hope that I can have better dust payout. If I would have 1.5 Th/s hashrate, I would not bother to get better dust payout as I mentioned on my comment that you quoted above.
73  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 29, 2015, 01:49:28 AM
I think you're missing the point here.  Small time miners get small time payouts - no matter what you may wish to happen.  You simply aren't going to get a bigger slice of the pie unless you get more hash.  Let's say you do start some kind of pool with an upper limit on hashing power.  So, you've got a pool with 10000 miners each having 100GH/s.  Do you somehow think that you, as one of those 100GH/s users is somehow going to make more than you would as the same user on a pool that has 2 miners, one has 999.9TH/s and you, with 100GH/s?  The simple answer is you are going to make the same.

You are hoping for the impossible.
I wrote on the other thread that I usually make 10 mBTC per 2 weeks on Eligius pool and 1 mBTC per 2 days on Antpool with 100 Gh/s hashrate. Those are roughly equal to 0.7 and 0.5 mBTC per day respectively.

If I would mine together with all other 9,999 miners with the same 100 Gh/s, using this method I will definitely get 2.5 mBTC per day. And I will definitely get multiple of that per day as the pool hashrate is 1 Ph/s so it is likely to solve more blocks a day.

If there would be only 2 miners with 999.9 Th/s and 100 Gh/s, I would have to wait for a few days until my shares value reach the minimum payout threshold while the other miner would get the most payout every day while I am waiting. This is clear to me that I will make very less than on the previous example. Could you please explain why this would not be the expected result, John (I hope you still have the patience of the Saint)?
Ok... let me see if I can break this down for you in a way you'll be able to get Smiley.

For the sake of this argument, we're going to assume there are 2 pools.  Pool 1 has 10,000 miners each with 100GH/s.  Pool 2 has 2 miners, one with 999.9TH/s and the other with 100GH/s.  We are also going to assume that each pool finds exactly 1 block a day, and the reward is exactly 25BTC per block.

When a block is found on pool 1, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 10,000 parts.  Therefore, each miner gets 0.0025BTC
When a block is found on pool 2, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 2 parts.  The miner with 999.9TH/s gets 24.9975BTC.  The miner with 100GH/s gets 0.0025BTC.

They are both equal.  Payout thresholds are completely irrelevant.  It doesn't matter how you break it down, 100GH/s expects to earn exactly the same coin on pool 1 and pool 2.

Thanks again.

I assumed that you are referring to the methods used by the current pools, as the example on the second pool would not work on the idea I posted because the maximum hashrate for each miner is 1 Th/s.

I think I mixed up with the vardiff usage on the current pools. I assumed that there is a maximum limit of vardiff so that the miners with huge hashrates send more shares than the miners with low hashrates as there is minimum limit of vardiff.
74  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: mBTC on kano.is was Re: Nexious.com WARNING POOL OPERATOR IS NOT PAYING NOR RESPONDING on: November 29, 2015, 01:13:00 AM
Ok... now if we go back to my original statement, with Eligius, you can never, ever make more than that 0.064146152448BTC in those 12 weeks.  On kano, you can make more than that, or you can make less.  Kano's pool has, since inception, been running about 101% luck.  That has no bearing on future luck - it is just a metric of past performance.  However, it is a metric that shows had you been mining on Eligius for the past year and on kano for the past year, given identical hash rates on each pool, you would have made more on kano.

I have been mining on Kano's pool from 20/11/2015 until now or about 7 days and I have got only 1.5 mBTC in total from blocks 384498, 384724, 384805 and 385383. If I would have mined on Eligius, I would have made about 5 mBTC. On Antpool, I would have made about 4 mBTC. How would that be practically possible to make more BTC on Kano's pool than Eligius, even if I would mine on Kano's pool for a year?


I get what he is saying, but he is taking it out of context for one. Yea if you would have mined on the other pools you could have maybe made more if they found blocks during your 7 day trail period. Just like if Kano would have found more block you would have made some more at kano's pools and you cant take two differnt types of pool pay outs and pin them against one other. I have mined at kano's pool and I mine at a couple of others. I do know if I stay at kano's pool I would make more in the long run if his pool was finding blocks just as fast as the other pools. Since his pool is smaller compared to others your reward will be bigger than say if you mined at eligius pool.

Lets say you were mining with 1.5 ths like me. If Kano's pool finds a block I make roughly .01 and some change per block. If I take the same speed and mine at Eligius pool I make roughly around .003 per block. Now since Eligius pool finds more blocks per day than kano's pool it will most likely equal out to around .009 per day versus .01 from one block at Kano's.

But here is the downside to that. If Kano's pool has longer block and it takes two day to find one. Then I am still only getting .01 for that one block. Or even if it take 7 days to get that one block I am still only getting .01 currently. but since kano's pools pays on 5n my share will keep getting paid on the next couple of blocks if they are found with in the 5n range. So my earnings at kano's so shares could be paid out over 5 times. So my earnings will still keep trickleing even after I stop mining. As long as blocks are still found.

This does not happen at lets say eliguis. If I mine at eligius for the same amount of time and we only find 1 block just like kano's my share or earnsing will still only be .003 but if they find more like they do my earns per day could reach the .01 or in my incase .009. But If I turn my miners to another pool my earns drop off almost instantly after about 3 hours. This means my shares I have submitted stop making money and I do not have any more trickling in.  

For me to reach payout on eligiuis I have to mine almost 4 day straight non stop If they find enough blocks for me to reach payout some times it is longer and sometime it is shorter all depending on the luck of the pool finding block.

I completely forgot where I was going with this. But in the end it is all about how you like to mine. Do you like to receive one big payout that may or may not have more earning trickling in over time or receive a bunch of smaller rewards till you reach payout that will stop almost instantaneous once you stop mining.

I love Kano's pool I really do. I would have my miners on his pool now but I am trying something different just to get a feel on how other systems work. After trying various differnt pools I do like Kano's the best. I just hate how long it takes to find a block some times which has nothing to do how his pools payouts out but only by the speed of his pool and luck.

And why the hell did you include Nexious scammer @SS pool into this mix. It has nothing to do with how Kano's pool operates or any one esles pool for that matter. Nexious was a scammer from the beginning. His pool found one block and he ran off with the reward and didnt pay his Miners. Kano's pool has never don't that has built huge amounts of trust within the community. The verbal war between pools only amounts to the lack of knowledge that surrounds the pool operates that comes from noobs like you that have no clue on how mining accurately works. You most likely went to bitcoin profitability calculator punched in some number and it said you are supposed ot make this much per day per week per month. I would love for some one to show me any where that works 100% of the time. So I can join on that trained. because the profit only amounts to the luck of the pool finding blocks.

I am far from a expert in pools and mining. But have come to realize who knows there stuff and who doesn't. Kano's for one Knows his stuff inside and out.

Thanks for your long explanation. By the way, I would not raise questions about dust payout if I would have 1.5 Th/s hashrate. It would have been much easier for me to choose the pool.

I didn't intentionally create this thread. It was moved from Nexious scammer thread by the admin. My posts on the thread was actually triggered by Kano's comment on Eligius pool. I hope that clears it up.
75  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 29, 2015, 12:34:43 AM
However, on the pool that I would like to have, the share is being used to get the proportional BTC reward for the miners. So I hope all miners will approximately get the same payout for the same mining period, regardless of their hashrates. The different will be that the miners who mine in longer time will get more payout than the ones who mine in shorter period. Has this kind of method been used so far? More importantly, does that make sense?

That's not Proportional payout system.  That is Communism.  Nobody here will take part in such an unfair payout scheme.  Everyone wants to be paid for the work they do not to subsidize lower hash rate miners.
If everybody had the same thought like that, we can be sure where the Bitcoin network will be centralised in a few years. Perhaps what I mentioned is very close to communism. But communism idea is practically dead. And I don't think capitalism works either. For instance, how many percent of the US citizens control the economy and politic in the US? I have read this article a few months back and I found that quite interesting.

Capitalism works and has worked every time it has been tried.  Everyone in the US asserts control over the economy and every one could take part in the Political process if they chose to.  It is very sad that so many choose to not participate in it and/or are ignorant to how it works.
I hope that would be the reality. You can look it up yourself on how the US economy is actually being managed. But I will stop responding to this kind of comments as this is out of topic.
76  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 29, 2015, 12:24:10 AM

However, on the pool that I would like to have, the share is being used to get the proportional BTC reward for the miners. So I hope all miners will approximately get the same payout for the same mining period, regardless of their hashrates. The different will be that the miners who mine in longer time will get more payout than the ones who mine in shorter period. Has this kind of method been used so far? More importantly, does that make sense?

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.  So you think the people who spent thousands of dollars on modern and high speed equipment shouldn't get paid more than the people running 2-year old bargain bin ASICs and/or GPUs?  This isn't elementary school where just participating will get you credit.
Ohhh... Come on. The people who invested thousands of dollars definitely choose to mine on the available pools or they even have their own pools. This idea is for the people who are impossible to compete with them. I thought I was quite clear on my first post.
77  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 29, 2015, 12:19:11 AM
I think you're missing the point here.  Small time miners get small time payouts - no matter what you may wish to happen.  You simply aren't going to get a bigger slice of the pie unless you get more hash.  Let's say you do start some kind of pool with an upper limit on hashing power.  So, you've got a pool with 10000 miners each having 100GH/s.  Do you somehow think that you, as one of those 100GH/s users is somehow going to make more than you would as the same user on a pool that has 2 miners, one has 999.9TH/s and you, with 100GH/s?  The simple answer is you are going to make the same.

You are hoping for the impossible.
I wrote on the other thread that I usually make 10 mBTC per 2 weeks on Eligius pool and 1 mBTC per 2 days on Antpool with 100 Gh/s hashrate. Those are roughly equal to 0.7 and 0.5 mBTC per day respectively.

If I would mine together with all other 9,999 miners with the same 100 Gh/s, using this method I will definitely get 2.5 mBTC per day. And I will definitely get multiple of that per day as the pool hashrate is 1 Ph/s so it is likely to solve more blocks a day.

If there would be only 2 miners with 999.9 Th/s and 100 Gh/s, I would have to wait for a few days until my shares value reach the minimum payout threshold while the other miner would get the most payout every day while I am waiting. This is clear to me that I will make very less than on the previous example. Could you please explain why this would not be the expected result, John (I hope you still have the patience of the Saint)?
78  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 28, 2015, 11:55:07 PM
However, on the pool that I would like to have, the share is being used to get the proportional BTC reward for the miners. So I hope all miners will approximately get the same payout for the same mining period, regardless of their hashrates. The different will be that the miners who mine in longer time will get more payout than the ones who mine in shorter period. Has this kind of method been used so far? More importantly, does that make sense?

That's not Proportional payout system.  That is Communism.  Nobody here will take part in such an unfair payout scheme.  Everyone wants to be paid for the work they do not to subsidize lower hash rate miners.
If everybody had the same thought like that, we can be sure where the Bitcoin network will be centralised in a few years. Perhaps what I mentioned is very close to communism. But communism idea is practically dead. And I don't think capitalism works either. For instance, how many percent of the US citizens control the economy and politic in the US? I have read this article a few months back and I found that quite interesting.

What I was looking for is a way to keep the idea of Bitcoin network decentralisation going. And I know that this idea is not for people with huge hashrates, that is why I clearly stated that in the beginning.
79  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 28, 2015, 08:30:08 PM
How does a minimum difficulty of 512 make a pool not "fair"?
Because I would submit more shares on lower difficulty. Or am I wrong on this?

Every single pool that uses difficulties greater than 1 (AKA: all of them) multiplies your share submissions by your difficulty.  So yes, you'll submit 4 times more work at 128 diff, but it would be the same payment as somebody submitting a single piece of work at 512.  Minimum difficulty has zero effect on your payout over any reasonable period of time.
Thanks for the clarification.

However, on the pool that I would like to have, the share is being used to get the proportional BTC reward for the miners. So I hope all miners will approximately get the same payout for the same mining period, regardless of their hashrates. The different will be that the miners who mine in longer time will get more payout than the ones who mine in shorter period. Has this kind of method been used so far? More importantly, does that make sense?
80  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: A dream of having a new pool on: November 28, 2015, 07:00:23 PM
Go have a chat with Nexious, Im sure he will be able to help.
I promise you that I will get as much information about the where about of Nexious if I would be able to chat with him.
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!