Will the pool continue to run Core or will it go to Knots?
Don't see knots as a needed option. Query: Why would you think the pool should change to it? From his past and present interactions with them, Luke Jr has ticked off many of the OG devs. Also doesn't help that his bgminer is a ripoff of cgminer... I would love to understand the bases of the question, I have not been following much lately, did core break or something?  Why would anyone run Knots for that matter? Core is relaxing the OP_RETURN size limits that have been there for a long time because using it for spam makes no sense since it cost 4x more than using taproot for the spam, and relaxing the limit makes other transaction types possible. People are obsessed that relaxing the limit is encouraging spam and shifting to knots because it allegedly filters spam, although filtering at the node level 100% does not work if the pools will still mine it. Moving to knots ultimately amounts to no more than virtue signalling and filtering of valid transactions in addition, thereby constituting censorship in what is meant to be a censorship resistant network, and slows down block propagation across knots nodes on the network. People have been duped into following a pointless cult, using software maintained effectively by just one person with an agenda, which is 99.9% core code with many rejected patches on top, thinking that the core devs have been compromised, which is a hilarious allegation since there are over 100 devs from all over the world so it's actually a distributed development process very much in the spirit of bitcoin itself. In 6 months, long after core v30 comes out, and nothing bad has happened on the network, people will still gloat they did the right thing, but bitcoin will just keep on doing what it's always done. |
|
|
|
Congratulations to miner bc1q~jr38 for solving the 307th solo block at solo.ckpool.org, with only 200TH! [2025-09-07 14:35:00.299] Possible block solve diff 187321850280069.250000 !
[2025-09-07 14:35:00.355] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2025-09-07 14:35:00.356] Solved and confirmed block 913593 by bc1qtfrexlhl2099rkqdcr56hjt6ukyhqylvdajr38.Blockbuster
[2025-09-07 14:35:00.356] User bc1qtfrexlhl2099rkqdcr56hjt6ukyhqylvdajr38:{"hashrate1m": "208T", "hashrate5m": "201T", "hashrate1hr": "201T", "hashrate1d": "201T", "hashrate7d": "144T", "shares": 65338332086, "authorised": 1748791854}
[2025-09-07 14:35:00.356] Worker bc1qtfrexlhl2099rkqdcr56hjt6ukyhqylvdajr38.Blockbuster:{"hashrate1m": "36T", "hashrate5m": "37.8T", "hashrate1hr": "38T", "hashrate1d": "37.3T", "hashrate7d": "25.3T"}
[2025-09-07 14:35:00.370] Block solved after 35404493611084 shares at 26.0% diff
A miner of this size only has a 1 in ~36,000 chance of solving a block each day, or once every ~100 years! |
|
|
|
Congratulations to massive new rental miner bc1q~4kzx for solving the 306th solo block at solo.ckpool.org! [2025-09-01 02:48:56.360] Possible block solve diff 475434506010404.812500 !
[2025-09-01 02:48:56.431] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2025-09-01 02:48:56.434] Solved and confirmed block 912632 by bc1qh63yugquzjvdd9qn3fwsd6asgfzlh7s8sv4kzx.FH
[2025-09-01 02:48:56.434] User bc1qh63yugquzjvdd9qn3fwsd6asgfzlh7s8sv4kzx:{"hashrate1m": "61.9P", "hashrate5m": "18.6P", "hashrate1hr": "1.71P", "hashrate1d": "155T", "hashrate7d": "472T", "shares": 2590244944463, "authorised": 1686335063}
[2025-09-01 02:48:56.434] Worker bc1qh63yugquzjvdd9qn3fwsd6asgfzlh7s8sv4kzx.FH:{"hashrate1m": "61.9P", "hashrate5m": "18.6P", "hashrate1hr": "1.71P", "hashrate1d": "155T", "hashrate7d": "461T"}
[2025-09-01 02:48:56.448] Block solved after 147102310200318 shares at 113.4% diff
|
|
|
|
Hey, are there any problems with eusolo? I’m not getting any statistics displayed. Now I switched to solo and immediately got statistics displayed.
Everything fine as far as I can see. Might be a routing issue from you to the pool. |
|
|
|
|
I highly recommend using a 2:3 multisig. However I don't have the time to be part of one, and obviously some fee to the other parties taking responsibility would be appropriate.
|
|
|
|
Hello ck,
the 4334 is not ok? I mean, it works.. I am finding shares..
Thanks.
Regards, Frank
As -CK said, you need to be on the other port 3333 for lower hash rate equipment 17TH/s will require a much lower difficulty to return shares regularly enough for a stable hash rate to be shown on the stats page. Port 4334 is for high performance systems and rentals >1PH/s Use port 3333 things will be better for you. hi! If i have 1.2 phs (9 asics), better 4334 or 3333? Let me make this clearer: 4334 is ONLY for rentals. |
|
|
|
Hello folks, sorry for perhaps bothering..
Just a short question.
In eusolo pool, I get more or stronger changes in hashrate, is this normal?
My S9 works smooth at around 17 th/s (braiins os)
I chose the "higher port". Do I need to readjust some settings?
Thank you so much.
Frank
The high port is for rentals, so don't use that. |
|
|
|
Hello ck, i totally agree with the Sub 1sat/vB transaction discussion.
But maybe you can include sub-1sat/vb that are beneficial for the UTXO set.
We can clean it up if there is some free space in the block.
If input>2xoutput for example
It's not a bad idea but there's no provision for such a thing in the bitcoin node at present and it would have to be coded up. |
|
|
|
ck - i wanted to know if solo.ckpool.org or eusolo accept PBST on request or if it is only implemented in very special cases for a reasonable price.Thank you.
No sorry, not under any circumstances. Solo doesn't solve enough blocks anyway for it to make sense. |
|
|
|
Sub 1sat/vB transaction discussion and reversal of decision to mine them on solo ckpool. Block 910440 https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000000d22167aa0c9d1a49e7878631d6c93ea1b1c87b98ba24 is the first block that solo ckpool has mined that has included sub 1sat/vB transactions. I made this change because the bulk of the mining pools are now mining transactions below the default (until now) mempool policy of mining transactions only 1sat/vB or above. The reason for switching solo ckpool was partially out of necessity - if the mempool differs substantially from what other pools are mining, when other pools mine a block with low fee transactions, solo ckpool will be slow to build new blocks. The reason is because of the disparity in what is in the pool's mempool and it missing transactions included, so it would have to ask for the missing transactions before it can build a full block. Now that solo ckpool has mined a block with sub 1sat/vB transactions I have data on the reward mined as the result of a low transaction fee period. Of the ~4900 transactions mined in this block, ~3300 were sub 1sat/vB transactions. It took some time to sift through the data of these transactions to determine what the mined fees were. They amounted to ~.0018 BTC more in fees, or ~$220. This is ~.06% of the current 3.125 BTC block reward. These particular low fee transactions were very small and appeared to create 1-2 UTXOs each. In light of how ridiculously small the extra fees mined were by accepting these transactions, and the potential for creating a significant number of new UTXOs, I am reversing my decision to mine these transactions. To maintain solo ckpool's ability to be aware of these transactions in the mempool I will only be setting the minrelaytxfee to accept and forward them, but not setting a lower blockmintxfee to mine them. The block reward needs to have dropped substantially for such low fee transactions to add meaningful reward to mining pools, and I would only consider doing so if the reward was at least 1% more. The block reward would need to have dropped below 0.2 BTC total meaning we are decades away from such fees to be significant. By that time the landscape is likely to be very different to the current one, and it is unknown if fees will remain low that far away. A lower minimum fee is also likely to worsen fees' ability to be a significant contributor to mining rewards as block subsidy diminishes. I implore other pool owners to do their own calculations and reconsider their decision to mine them at this stage. |
|
|
|
Congratulations to miner bc1q~nwsgdw0wfh4trqal69fz with 9PH for solving the 305th solo block at solo.ckpool.org! A miner of this size has about a 1 in 800 chance of solving a block per day. [2025-08-17 10:19:46.991] Possible block solve diff 342913087948669.125000 !
[2025-08-17 10:19:47.087] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2025-08-17 10:19:47.088] Solved and confirmed block 910440 by bc1qhgfpg54q8u0qnq8cyzvtpwhzm7z4g0wk8hpq60nwsgdw0wfh4trqal69fz.52BE1957C966
[2025-08-17 10:19:47.088] User bc1qhgfpg54q8u0qnq8cyzvtpwhzm7z4g0wk8hpq60nwsgdw0wfh4trqal69fz:{"hashrate1m": "9.18P", "hashrate5m": "9.16P", "hashrate1hr": "9.2P", "hashrate1d": "7.15P", "hashrate7d": "1.92P", "shares": 306446076609, "authorised": 1755277406}
[2025-08-17 10:19:47.088] Worker bc1qhgfpg54q8u0qnq8cyzvtpwhzm7z4g0wk8hpq60nwsgdw0wfh4trqal69fz.52BE1957C966:{"hashrate1m": "125T", "hashrate5m": "127T", "hashrate1hr": "111T", "hashrate1d": "85.7T", "hashrate7d": "23T"}
[2025-08-17 10:19:47.095] Block solved after 80320634207461 shares at 62.1% diff
|
|
|
|
Hi -ck
Is eusolo.ckpool.org running OK at present, I've been unable to connect all morning.
Thanks
G.
All seems fine as far as I can see. |
|
|
|
Now bringing http://ausolo.ckpool.org back online. Miners will likely not come back until their DNS updates and ther mining hardware reconnects. I will kick them back from the main pool within an hour to make sure AU miners go back to the correct pool. The downtime was due to mineracks trying to fix a connectivity quality issue I detected with the pool which unfortunately caused unexpected downtime. Bear with us as we believe to have addressed all remaining issues, and connectivity should be improved as well. |
|
|
|
The ausolo pool issue unfortunately appears that it will be responsible for extended downtime, so I am redirecting the AU domain to the main http://solo.ckpool.org and stats once more. mineracks is trying to rectify it as quickly as possible. Apologies for the inconvenience. |
|
|
|
|
ausolo.ckpool.org is currently down and undergoing unplanned maintenance, sorry about any inconvenience. As always be sure to have a backup pool specified on your miners. We'll try to get it up as soon as possible.
|
|
|
|
Hi -CK
Technical question on CKPool/Bitcoincore if I may.
When a block is found by a miner, how does this data propagate from the miner to bitcoincore and then onto the network
Also, does Bitcoincore propagate the entire block when a block is found or just the block header with the winning hash?
How much data is submitted to the bitcoin network upon finding a block?
Miner sends small amount of data to pool representing what is required to constitute a low hash from its current stratum template. Pool submits a submitblock message to bitcoin core with the full block data. Bitcoin core submits a compact block message describing block header, nonce, transaction IDs, prefilled transactions as needed and extra transactions it thinks may be needed. The amount of data is variable depending on how much the other node knows, and they may request further data. A full block is only sent to nodes that don't advertise compactblock support. |
|
|
|
|
The ausolo pool had connectivity issues a couple of hours ago, and AU miners were migrated to solo.ckpool.org. If you are on ausolo.ckpool.org and your stats aren't showing up at ausolostats.ckpool.org then you are probably still mining at solo.ckpool.org and your stats will be there. I'll kick miners from solo.ckpool.org by restarting it for miners to go back to their correct pool.
|
|
|
|
Congratulations to the 2nd solo block solver 35mU~8hK7 in 2 days for solving the 304th solo block at solo.ckpool.org! This was a huge miner with 270PH at the time of solving the block. https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000001e6a5aec8788183793b27370ef638b152b4d02f9f0787[2025-07-27 21:44:08.427] Possible block solve diff 148067213350109.312500 !
[2025-07-27 21:44:08.498] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2025-07-27 21:44:08.501] Solved and confirmed block 907465 by 35mUZqxfz6gUygD76bfaRXTwGSUR7d8hK7.v12
[2025-07-27 21:44:08.501] User 35mUZqxfz6gUygD76bfaRXTwGSUR7d8hK7:{"hashrate1m": "273P", "hashrate5m": "273P", "hashrate1hr": "188P", "hashrate1d": "173P", "hashrate7d": "53P", "shares": 18071595464782, "authorised": 1751999651}
[2025-07-27 21:44:08.501] Worker 35mUZqxfz6gUygD76bfaRXTwGSUR7d8hK7.v12:{"hashrate1m": "124P", "hashrate5m": "146P", "hashrate1hr": "68P", "hashrate1d": "3.76P", "hashrate7d": "543T"}
[2025-07-27 21:44:08.526] Block solved after 72736186780465 shares at 57.0% diff
A miner of this size has about a 1 in 20 chance of solving a block each day, however this miner doesn't appear to have been mining continuously at that hashrate for very long, and the worker size suggests this was a rental. |
|
|
|
Congratulations to miner 35Wu9WPzifv3khCHGeviKVuYo6TQzhyPhF for solving the 303rd solo block at eusolo.ckpool.org with only 49TH! https://mempool.space/block/000000000000000000012b46e1a7ce322e850afde12422c440ee19d9c1b6d74a [2025-07-26 14:16:20.601] Possible block solve diff 240768663288169.000000 !
[2025-07-26 14:16:20.668] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2025-07-26 14:16:20.668] Solved and confirmed block 907283 by 35Wu9WPzifv3khCHGeviKVuYo6TQzhyPhF
[2025-07-26 14:16:20.668] User 35Wu9WPzifv3khCHGeviKVuYo6TQzhyPhF:{"hashrate1m": "53.3T", "hashrate5m": "49T", "hashrate1hr": "48.5T", "hashrate1d": "48.3T", "hashrate7d": "38.7T", "shares": 19040528263, "authorised": 1749827185}
[2025-07-26 14:16:20.668] Worker 35Wu9WPzifv3khCHGeviKVuYo6TQzhyPhF:{"hashrate1m": "53.3T", "hashrate5m": "49T", "hashrate1hr": "48.5T", "hashrate1d": "48.3T", "hashrate7d": "38.7T"}
[2025-07-26 14:16:20.672] Block solved after 26305285186148 shares at 20.6% diff
A miner of this size only has a one in 130,000 chance of solving a block per day, or once every 370 years on average! |
|
|
|
WOW! Avalon nano 3 best share  Very nice, but sadly short of a block. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
