 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
Only issue is that block height in wallet reported: 23286, block height found at http://nrs.argakiig.us is 23533 I have sam issue.. BTW Cannot get single PoS block  What you done to get PoS ? PLS ?  Guys i had the same problem ,just restart the wallet, and left it open some time until is fully sicronized, maybe you can see some strange behavior but it stabilize when its fully sync Hmm, same problem here - actually stuck on block 23281. Wallet reports being out of sync, doesn't seem to pick up any new blocks. Waited several hours now with no change. This is after a full re-download of the blockchain. Something doesn't look right... |
|
|
|
Hello, I'm happy to announce a brand new Litecoin pool that is waiting to see some proper hashing. First things first, here are some details about the pool: - Stratum mining only - Two (more to come) stratum servers, one in the US and one in the EU - SSL enabled - PPLNS reward system - supports variable difficulty - transaction fees are paid out to miners - pool keeps a 1% fee to pay for pool operator's expenses The pool is based on mmcfe-ng, currently with the default theme until I can come up with something better (or pay someone to do that). To help boost this pool's hashrate to a more useful value, I've decided to offer a number of rewards. First off, the already announced reward of 0.5 LTC for the first five block finders will be doubled to 1 LTC. Additionally, there will be a "5 for 5" deal, whereby I will pay a reward of 5 LTC to the first 10 miners who average at least 5MH/s for 10 consecutive days. To qualify for the reward, you will need to contact me with your pool username at my email address (see bottom of any pool webpage) or via personal message to user "holgerr" on the litecoin.net/bitcointalk forums *before* you start mining.The pool's website is now live at https://www.minersdream.com - signup is open to anyone. If the frontend should become overloaded, I will add more power to it. The stratum servers are independent of the frontend and can be reached at stratum-us.minersdream.com and stratum-eu.minersdream.com (registration required, though). I know it's recommended not to put too much trust in new pools. In this case, the domain is registered in my name and with accurate details, so feel free to research my background before you sign up. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to PM me or post here and I'll try to respond quickly. Happy mining, Holger |
|
|
|
Hi, I'm testing an eloipool setup with two bitcoind backends (0.8.eligius branch), one configured with priority 0, one with priority 1. Both bitcoinds appear to be reasonably well connected with other peers. From time to time, I see the following in my logs: 2013-06-07 05:16:52,179 merkleMaker ERROR Upstream 'primary' rejected proposed block from 'secondary': stale-prevblk
2013-06-07 05:16:52,389 merkleMaker INFO New block: 00000000000000e4250875295568b720fbf9ab87d885fd2d4a6ea76c24d48a9b (height: 240205; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:16:52,391 merkleMaker WARNING Change from height 240206->240205; no longpoll merkleroots available!
2013-06-07 05:16:52,402 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:16:55,974 merkleMaker INFO New block: 000000000000001ae26a52e6724f9608bb98580fd668b413d13451db517d17a6 (height: 240206; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:16:55,976 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:16:56,636 merkleMaker ERROR Upstream 'primary' rejected proposed block from 'secondary': stale-prevblk
2013-06-07 05:16:56,961 merkleMaker INFO New block: 00000000000000e4250875295568b720fbf9ab87d885fd2d4a6ea76c24d48a9b (height: 240205; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:16:56,963 merkleMaker WARNING Change from height 240206->240205; no longpoll merkleroots available!
2013-06-07 05:16:57,002 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:00,766 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:01,081 merkleMaker INFO New block: 000000000000001ae26a52e6724f9608bb98580fd668b413d13451db517d17a6 (height: 240206; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:17:01,082 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:01,458 merkleMaker ERROR Upstream 'primary' rejected proposed block from 'secondary': stale-prevblk
2013-06-07 05:17:01,601 merkleMaker INFO New block: 00000000000000e4250875295568b720fbf9ab87d885fd2d4a6ea76c24d48a9b (height: 240205; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:17:01,601 merkleMaker WARNING Change from height 240206->240205; no longpoll merkleroots available!
2013-06-07 05:17:01,632 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:05,780 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:06,129 merkleMaker INFO New block: 000000000000001ae26a52e6724f9608bb98580fd668b413d13451db517d17a6 (height: 240206; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:17:06,131 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:07,156 merkleMaker ERROR Upstream 'primary' rejected proposed block from 'secondary': stale-prevblk
2013-06-07 05:17:07,374 merkleMaker INFO New block: 00000000000000e4250875295568b720fbf9ab87d885fd2d4a6ea76c24d48a9b (height: 240205; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:17:07,488 merkleMaker WARNING Change from height 240206->240205; no longpoll merkleroots available!
2013-06-07 05:17:07,496 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:10,798 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:11,272 merkleMaker INFO New block: 000000000000001ae26a52e6724f9608bb98580fd668b413d13451db517d17a6 (height: 240206; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:17:11,275 JSONRPCServer INFO Nobody to longpoll
2013-06-07 05:17:11,882 merkleMaker ERROR Upstream 'primary' rejected proposed block from 'secondary': stale-prevblk
2013-06-07 05:17:12,031 merkleMaker INFO New block: 00000000000000e4250875295568b720fbf9ab87d885fd2d4a6ea76c24d48a9b (height: 240205; bits: 1a011337)
2013-06-07 05:17:12,034 merkleMaker WARNING Change from height 240206->240205; no longpoll merkleroots available!
It looks like eloipool is getting conflicting information from the two bitcoinds about which is the current block (for about 30 seconds, until whichever one is slower has found out about the new block). I thought that the priorities should take care of that (and for good measure I also adjusted the weight, but that has made no difference) - has anyone else seen this kind of thing? What I really want is for eloipool to always use the local bitcoind unless that one is down for some reason. Has anyone had the same problem? I'm pretty sure I'm doing something wrong here... but what? Any hints appreciated. Holger |
|
|
|
|
Thanks kinlo, that article on pool hopping is a fascinating read.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the answers so far, those gave some useful insights. I'm glad I am in no rush to get things going and can take the time to research my options properly.
Just to clarify, when I talked about donations I wasn't thinking about one off donations to the pool's expenses, but rather an optional percentage fee on the miner's earnings, unlocking some perks (such as mining on port 80 or something similar).
Kinlo, I also thought that the AGPL would require a MySQL module for Eloipool to be made available as source, so I'm wondering if nobody has actually written one or if those that have don't comply with the license. Anyway, if I end up writing one (alternatively I guess a flat file based approach could be more resource friendly...), I'll make sure it gets posted so that people can find it.
Wasn't aware that Slush's algorithm is hoppable - the impression I got from reading about the various methods was that it is specifically designed to prevent that. But it's quite possible that I missed something there. Do you happen to have any details?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I'm in the process of setting up a new Bitcoin mining pool that is designed to offer maximum stability through the use of distributed nodes and a good level of redundancy, as well as a complete separation of the web frontend from the mining backends. The backend part of this is already running quite nicely based on Eloipool and I have a few miners hashing on it just for testing purposes. I'm in no rush to get this launched, so I'd rather do it right than do it quick and dirty. That's why I'd like to solicit some feedback from miners and other pool operators on some of the decisions I have to make.
First off a technical question, though - has anyone written a mysql user database plugin for eloipool? I could write one myself, but if someone would be willing to share...
Okay, the main other question I have is this: what kind of payment model would miners prefer? I can't and won't do PPS and am looking at ways to reward miners fairly and reliably, with as little variance as possible, while keeping the risk to the pool to a minimum and discouraging pool hopping. Slush's method seems pretty fair, but I don't think his algorithm is available for others to use.
Also there's the question of fees - I'd like to keep those to a minimum, but need to charge some to fund the cost of servers and bandwidth. Currently I'm thinking that the pool should keep transaction fees - above that I'm wondering what to do. One thought is to ask for a 1% donation and in exchange to provide some exclusive donors only features - are any pool operators willing to share their experience with the rate of donations received if that's an option on their pool?
Last question: the plan is to have the pool as a Stratum only pool. Considering that most other pools are phasing out Getwork, am I on the right track with that?
Thanks for any useful feedback - any additional suggestions are also appreciated.
Holger
|
|
|
|
|
It's because the pools estimate your hash rate based on submitted shares, while your cgminer has access to the actual hash rate. So if you're lucky and find a lot of shares quickly with your constant hash rate, the pool will think you are hashing faster, while if you're a bit unlucky and don't find as many shares for a while, it will think you're hashing slower. As you said, it all evens out over time. If it doesn't, maybe you're creating a lot of invalid/stale shares.
|
|
|
|
|
Well if people stop mining, the difficulty goes down again, making it easier to mine. But I don't think people will stop mining, just that it will take some upfront investment in ASIC based mining gear to mine profitably. So it makes it a bit harder for the average user to just mine for a few coins...
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, 100$ for domestic shipping? And payment only in Bitcoins, so even if they don't actually exist, there's no way to get a refund? I'm sure that must be really legitimate...
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, I'd been looking for something like this. Excellent work!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
after mining Bitcoins for about a year on various pools, I'm currently looking into setting up my own public pool. With the additional hashing power coming online through the various ASIC mining products, I think we need a more diverse pool infrastructure, especially since the BTCGuild pool is already forced to take measures to avoid taking over a majority share of mining power.
Holger
|
|
|
|
|
I tried to switch my 7950 card to litecoin mining - wasn't really worth it, really disappointing hashrates compared to the power consumption. I'm back to mining bitcoins for now, while that's still marginally profitable. Mining litecoins, I'm getting nearly the same hashrate using the spare CPU cycles of three rented root servers (i.e. I don't pay extra for electricity) that I was getting with my 7950.
|
|
|
|
To add to what the previous poster said, at the current price of Bitcoins it is still marginally profitable to mine on a Mac if you have a relatively recent AMD graphics card that has decent hashing power. See https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison#Card_Comparison_Spreadsheet to find out what works best. Generally, Bitcoin mining is moving to specialized hardware that will use less electricity for a lot more hashing power. Since Bitcoin is designed to only release a certain number of coins over a defined period of time, as a result the difficulty to find a block is rising and soon commodity hardware will no longer be able to mine at a profit, unless of course the price of Bitcoins goes up dramatically. |
|
|
|
|
