0.2 BTC to 15SSRJdHfhjcRU7woXR9sYKPUXNS4ScaaB  |
|
|
|
I want to donate you 0.2 BTC for this feature, and also because your pool is awesome. What's your address?  You can make a one time donation through the donations & perks link under the "my account" tab. My balance is 0 at Bitminter. I can't. I'm pretty sure that setting up a good old address for spontaneous donations would make lots of people happy. |
|
|
|
Yeah, allowing connections on one of those ports should be doable. That's what you have access to through a firewall?  I want to donate you 0.2 BTC for this feature, and also because your pool is awesome. What's your address? |
|
|
|
Request: If/When you'll be looking at implementing the Stratum protocol, please consider making it reachable on your server through one of these ports:
1288
1863
5050
5100
5190
5560
6665
6666
6667
6668
6669
6891
6892
6893
6894
6895
6896
6897
6898
6899
6900
6901
8443
This time it's really just a matter of two more lines in the iptables configuration!  Example: --iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --destination-port 5050 -j ACCEPT
--iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -i eth0 -p tcp --destination-port 5050 -j REDIRECT --to-ports <stratum_listen_port>
Thank you! |
|
|
|
I got a suggestion from PsychoticBoy to change the N in PPLNS from 2x difficulty to 4x difficulty. That would be to double the size of the shifts. Please speak up if you have an opinion on it.
Currently 10 shifts take about 5 hours. Doubling shift size would mean 10 shifts take 10 hours at the current pool hashrate. This would mean it takes longer before a proof of work is fully paid, but also that the variance for a proof of work goes down. 24/7 miners shouldn't notice much, but those who don't mine 24/7 should experience reduced variance.
In other news the testing on port 9000 helped uncover a bottleneck that has now been fixed. A big thanks to all who are mining there to help with testing. The test is still running. I'll try and finish up what will hopefully be the next production version of the mining backend, let it run on the test port for a bit, then bring it over on the regular port.
I'm favorable to this change! The higher the share difficulty the better. |
|
|
|
For those experiencing high stale rate like me, a restart of the miners seems to do the trick. The second restart a short while ago was to get in a new version that automatically puts all requests from cgminer and bfgminer with lower version number than 2.7 on the slow queue. The "slow queue" is contained to 1 cpu core on the server. This should prevent those using old outdated miners from causing problems for users with more recent miners like you have. I'm hoping we'll see much less rejected work in the next round. Can you provide either the whitelist or blacklist (of the miners and versions) you use? Edit: nevermind, I just reread your post  |
|
|
|
1.6% now Personally I use cgminer 2.7.5 and went from <0.3% before last update to >1.3% now. I don't know, something is obviously wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Well, runeks just bought us, for 2 BTC, the information that the Single SC @ 40 GH/s will not consume more than 114W.
Kinda expensive just to know that if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
Greee, everybody is mocking you. Your payout strategy is highly flawed. This should be your #1 priority (all other features don't matter in comparison). Read the pdf linked above by Graet to learn more. tl;dr: Don't use proportional payout. Ever. It has severe, crippling flaws.PS. Sorry pool-hoppers  Thanks for this , but as i have said we are new on bitcoin network and we try to improve our pool server to work flawless, we have the resources to create more servers and to develope existing or new web functions so first time we have no fees to make a profit. We simply reward the miners exacly for their work. Reward formula: $estReward = $totalShares/$totalPoolShares;
$adminFee = '0';
$estReward = round((50*$estReward)-(50*($adminFee*.01)), 8); So you don't pay tx fees to miners. Bitminter still best pool around. |
|
|
|
Stale ratio went from <0.4% to <0.8% Looking forward the next block to see if DrHaribo really fixed the bug |
|
|
|
|
Do you pay tx fees to miners?
|
|
|
|
|
When you implement the Stratum protocol, please don't let the port 80 down. I'm quite sure that with three simple iptables rules you can support all three mining protocols (getwork, Stratum, and GBT). I could provide my help if needed.
|
|
|
|
Looking at that pic BFL are so going to get sued! Apple doesn't care what the device does. No one is allowed to think like them.  And what are you basing that off of? Apple vs Samsung, I'm assuming? A phone manufacturer that makes phones to look like another phone manufacturer. Comparing a phone to a phone is totally different than a cryptographic hashing unit to a TV media streamer. They're allowed to look similar. Very good point!  I'm Nihiro Patel. Pictured are two QMB2013 (Quantum Mining Box(es)) to be released next year, but we are currently taking pre-orders now. Regards kind, Nihiro K BF Labs_Nihiro WTF? |
|
|
|
Numbers? Now that I've had BFGMiner 2.8 running for a number of days, I have some reasonably useful numbers... getwork session A: 0.83% stale getwork session B: 1.09% stale GBT session A: 0.71% stale GBT session B: 0.66% stale There's probably a good chance the GBT stales are lower only by coincidence (a lot depends on when blocks are found, after all), but I think it's pretty safe to conclude there's not any notable practical difference just from the protocol. If I understand correctly GBT also supports LP, doesn't it? Did you make use of LP with getwork and GBT in your test? There's probably a good chance the GBT stales are lower only by coincidence (a lot depends on when blocks are found, after all), but I think it's pretty safe to conclude there's not any notable practical difference just from the protocol.
Comparing both solutions based on HTTP+LP, you obviously don't see any difference. Stratum session on my machine: 60627 submits, 53 stale, it's 0.08 % stale ratio. This ^^ also includes short outage of my Internet connectivity overnight ;-). Since stratum is working over a plain TCP connection, one could say that the equivalent of LP is just a simple TCP "message" like any other one, isn't it? It would really be interesting to see the stale ratio of GBT+LP vs Stratum over one week on the same pool/same connection. |
|
|
|
@BFL-Engineer/BFL_Josh/BFL_Sonny:
Are you going to do something to compensate the fact that the Avalon might be mining @ 60GH/s for $1299, versus the Single SC mining @ 40 GH/s for the same price?
I'm really concerned about future concurrence, and I'd like to have a word from an official about that. Thanks. Did you even read what everyone said? Here: It's only $1299 for the first pre-orders. After that the Avalon will be $1999.
you do realize you can't compare 2 items only based on their hashrate right? From what I understand, the Avalon will use a lot more power, but official numbers have not been released yet so we have no idea.
Additionally that we don't have all the specs yet: The quoted price of the Avalon is just the pre-order price for the first 300 units. After that it will be 1999USD, putting GH/s/$ back into perspective with BFL. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110090.0No, they will not adjust their prices. I was specifically asking someone from BFL. The price is not the only thing adjustable. |
|
|
|
@BFL-Engineer/BFL_Josh/BFL_Sonny:
Are you going to do something to compensate the fact that the Avalon might be mining @ 60GH/s for $1299, versus the Single SC mining @ 40 GH/s for the same price?
I'm really concerned about future concurrence, and I'd like to have a word from an official about that. Thanks. |
|
|
|
will you guys accept paypal?
Actual, +1 Sorry, i think this possibility is very low.... we don't like paypal. Once the pre-order phase is over, are you really going to up the price to $1999? Even if there's a lot of competition, offering better GH/s/$ than your ASIC?
Yes/No? |
|
|
|
|
Once the pre-order phase is over, are you really going to up the price to $1999? Even if there's a lot of competition, offering better GH/s/$ than your ASIC?
|
|
|
|
|
@BFL-Engineer/BFL_Josh/BFL_Sonny:
Are you going to do something to compensate the fact that the Avalon might be mining @ 60GH/s for $1299, versus the Single SC mining @ 40 GH/s for the same price?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
