 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
About the down time ,
Time : 2018-01-19
First let us explain what is coinsmarkets , we are based on 2 investor , 1 admin , 1 coder , 2 senior support and 4 general support .
In November last year 1 of senior support left the team , It is hard enough to hire a new one , this work is based on a lot of trust , so we still waiting for correct condidat .
Now let's move to the issue , in December we experienced a lot of new users and huge volume , we were ready for double or even triple volume but in our case it was 10x +.
From here all kind of problem start with servers ,
Now add to that the last senior support remaining have some family issue and was forced to be off most of the time .
In addition to all that there was some db corruption issue we faced due to the overload and later hosting issue.
So a lot of work to do with a lot of missing stuff.
Please understand that in exchange you can't just go and hire someone and trust him millions of dollars .
We are sorry for lack of comunication about issue we have thought that people already trust us enough , and we invested 100% of time in restoring the site .
Now issue with hosting , hosting complained about a lot of fraud report from users about our service . We find this really hard to explain , it is clear that not even a single coin has moved from our wallets , and once again we are here to stay ,
We have not even released 10% of our road map , there is a lot of new future to be added in the nearest future.
A week ago we started negoation with new host that can accept similar service , we initiated the move ,
The Database was fixed yesterday night .
Now remain to setup new servers , few fix here and there and service will be restored ,
We write our news only in coinsmarkets news section , any twitter , chat msg etc is a scam ,
Again Official Coinsmarkets message are written only in coinsmarkets news section .
https://coinsmarkets.com/news.php |
|
|
|
|
So if I understand correctly, the CM debacle is Electra's fault?
So other people who also can't access loads of other crypto on CM should be blaming ECA?
Someone should get CNN on this right now.
|
|
|
|
|
The guy who said you should exercise caution when trying to track this guy down is right - seriously bad people will definitely try to take advantage of this situation. Right now you shouldn't be thinking about bringing him to justice. You should be thinking about how to get your money back safely. Handing bad guys information about his whereabouts is not the best way to go about things. Track him down, for sure. But don't advertise his info publicly like this. You're just shooting yourselves in the foot.
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone have any data about block times vs network weight vs stake amount vs reward time?
|
|
|
|
|
I've asked about the wallet's CPU usage before, and someone replied that it's because staking requires CPU power. That's fine. But even when the wallet is offline it uses 9-12% CPU just for being open. Why is this? It should not be the case...
|
|
|
|
|
I find this thread highly entertaining.
EDIT: The post above me was deleted.
|
|
|
|
Decred is where the profit is right now!
How are you guys calculating potential profit? This is my current understanding; please correct me if I'm wrong: Using decred and 4x1060 3GB cards as an example: - 0.95 mBTC/GH last 24h "actual" return (read below for why this is in quotes) - GH/s = roughly 1.4 * 4 (from benchmarks page) = 5.6GH/s - Therefore if all things remain the same, mBTC per day should be 5.6 * 0.95 = 5.32 - Translates at current prices into $13.83 per day However, you have to take into account the price at which the coins will be sold. This depends on confirmation time + batch creation time (sometime coins are sold in batches to reduce fees or because of exchange restrictions) + exchange rate and fees. In other words, the coins you mine now may only be sold a few days later (NETKO is a good example) at prices that are different to what the mBTC per day value shows. This means that the "Actual" 24 hour rate is only indicative of what the coins could return if everything remained the same. But as we know it rarely does. More often than not the value that is reported is not a useful guide over short periods of time. Is my arithmetic and/or reasoning flawed? Am I missing anything? |
|
|
|
|
Is it normal for the wallet to use 12% CPU when idle?
|
|
|
|
Was Verge removed?  Wait something's not right on the site... Equihash is gone, blake2s only has 20 miners... and it's mining 0 Netko?  What's going on? EDIT: Everything back to normal now? |
|
|
|
Mind sharing your script that you use to do this? I was planning on working something out in Python when I relearned it, but this seems like something that would be pretty nice to have.
On Linux it's a simple call to curl every 5 minutes: The contents of recurl.sh: #!/bin/bash
{ date -Iminutes; curl -s http://zpool.ca/api/walletEx?address=MyWalletAddress; } >> outcurl.log
The parsing into a graph is more complex. Maybe I'll write a .NET program to do it later today and I'll share that instead. |
|
|
|
Similar then. I don't look much at the graph, but there are no earnings worth mentionng considering the time and the hashrate. I monitor earnings via the API every five minutes and graph the results locally. It's noticeable when the slope changes. |
|
|
|
It's more than a UI bug because I didn't receive any Verge shares for over an hour too. The only reason I noticed because my earnings suddenly started to flatten out. |
|
|
|
BTW, how come we mine more HUSH after it became low profit, while Zen hashrate dropped. And is there a way to point to a specific coin in a pool? I got in equihash after you announced Zen retun, but we seem to be mining mostly Komodo.
EDIT - or Zcl and Hush as of now. Zen is at 0 h/s. I noticed this with some algos. Blake2s for example hasn't mined Verge in over an hour now.  |
|
|
|
Launching 6 miners won't be the reason that your pc is dying as each of those miners are set to a one single device. Maybe that would explain it. It's probably starting a miner on the integrated GPU and that basically renders me unable to use the machine at all. I would record a vid to show the behaviour, but it's simply not possible under those conditions. As the 3rd miner starts up it basically starts printing 1 ascii character at a time in the console... I'll tweak the PS1 files to get it to ignore the IGPU. |
|
|
|
|
Does anyone have a video or guide that shows what the standard behaviour of Multipoolminer should be? When I run it on my one rig it starts up several copies of the same miner concurrently with different parameters (most probably coinciding with the *.ps1 miner files).
For example, it runs:
Excavator0.ps1
Excavator1.ps1
Excavator2.ps1
Excavator3.ps1
Excavator4.ps1
etc...
all at the same time.
This basically kills all performance on the rig and it shows 0 H/s per card. I usually end up having to perform a hard-reset. Are there some configuration steps I'm missing, or is this just the default behaviour and I should just let it run?
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm... now I regret not screen capping the graph of the hashrates. I've heard people say that it's an issue with the graph code, but I can see a direct correspondence between what it shows and my earnings. Every 1 hour or so I've had to restart my miners because the site shows that my hash rate halves as reported on the site and with it of course my earnings even though my local rate stays constant. This is fixed after a restart, but then after a while it just drops again. I stopped mining on Zpool for a few days because of this, but I started again tonight just to test it. Hopefully this issue has been resolved.
|
|
|
|
I can't comment about the supposed 20%, but can someone explain why their API sometimes shows your totals suddenly decrease for no apparent reason? eg. {"currency": "BTC", ..., "unpaid": 0.00507565, "paid": 0.00000000, "total": 0.00507565, ... }
{"currency": "BTC", ..., "unpaid": 0.00508766, "paid": 0.00000000, "total": 0.00508766, ... }
{"currency": "BTC", ..., "unpaid": 0.00509738, "paid": 0.00000000, "total": 0.00509738, ... } <----------
{"currency": "BTC", ..., "unpaid": 0.00485334, "paid": 0.00000000, "total": 0.00485334, ... } <----------
{"currency": "BTC", ..., "unpaid": 0.00485701, "paid": 0.00000000, "total": 0.00485701, ... }
Those were captured several minutes apart in sequential order. Why did the total decrease? Is it because of fees, or...? |
|
|
|
|
