|
Si tu parle des bitcoind moded alors oui ou lancer avec les options non documenter .
Seul le raport taille/fee est a prendre en compte.
Et pourquoi je dit qu'un transaction vielle est plus chers a maintenir.
Tous simplement a cause de l'arbre qui fait qu'un vielle transaction peut empecher de couper une grosse branche.
Besoin non présent dans les transactions récente enfin le soucis est pas encore posé pour les vielles et les recentes.
|
|
|
|
Encore une petite question, donc il y a deux adresses identique si je comprends bien ( 1 pour le bitcoin et 1 pour incognitocoin ) donc 1 adresse pour plusieurs coin, j'ai juste ?
Oui, mais le developpeur forkeur de incognitocoin aurait du changer le prefix "1" et ne pas utiliser le prefix le plus répandu dans le monde. Du coup, je me demande si les clés ne sont pas carrement compatible. Si tu exporte la clé privée de incognitocoin et que tu l'import dans bitcoin, par chance, il affichera la clé publique qui correspond. Ne te demande pas elle le sont  |
|
|
|
|
Sorry,
Is my error payout as broken for 8H.
I have make developpement for payout.
I have stop wallet for not make payout per error when test new code.
I have not verify wallet after dev . And wallet as broken and not good restarted ( rebuild wallet.bin need ).
Sorry for inconvenience,
|
|
|
|
|
Que je suis content de la situation actuel.
while(1) {
little_dump(XMR);
Buy(XMR);
little_pump(XMR);
sell(XMR);
log("Win detweend 5 and 10% )
}
|
|
|
|
|
pour moi la monnaie la moins rentable .
Me forcerai a ouvrir un compte sur Facebook.
|
|
|
|
|
On vois ce que l'on veux voir .
Ca monte a la fin du moi a cause de la paye .
Prenons EMEA le 28 et EMEA le 3
Mois 28 3 Etat des finances
Juillet 448 -> 439 101,339045737
Juin 429 -> 470 103,416611595
Mai 423 -> 470 94,395162499
Mai 357 -> 327 84,955646249
Mars 401 -> 343 92,749742235
Fefrier 427 -> 450 108,433372117
Janvier 580 -> 599 102,891221987
Decenbre 537 -> 535 99,627560521
100
Pas tres performant comme technique est encore on est pas encore le 3
|
|
|
|
I have payed one beer . David has payed one beer . I have payed one beer . David has payed one beer . I have payed one beer . David has payed one beer . I have payed one beer . David has payed one beer . Round robin |
|
|
|
Stellar le premier coin certifié par la NSA.
hum non c'est bitcoin ca.. ^^ Nop bitcoin c'est made in NSA pas certified by NSA |
|
|
|
Mine de rien, on a doublé le hashrate en moins de 3 mois.
Ou seulement 8% a 9% en 1 seul moi . |
|
|
|
|
Next week end.
I thing upgrade all code of pool for add new function and make more stability.
And make more convergence with code official.
Stockage of block,payout in DB with upgrade of page HTML.
Just after upgrade data pool efficience is not present .
I make update after for re add pool efficience or similary data .
I think, you like features is in progress .
I wait week end and wait magie of variance and pool regain good efficience "printed".
The pool as 100% of efficience if you look long periode .
One day efficience can 90% and next day 113% .
For periode of one Week efficience is 100% or little better.
To day , I have DDOS of port 8090 (API ) and reduce block see for not make impact of HTTP .
Service HTTP and Stratum is not same server .
For memory ! Mine on host xmr.crpyto-pool.fr and not monero.crypto-pool.fr .
monero.crypto-pool.fr is protect per Arbor and other solution but use only one server.
|
|
|
|
|
Quoi on est bien hors sujet non ?
Ripple n'etant pas une crypto monnaie.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes ,
For information pool is under DDOS continue for more 1 week.
Attacker begins to understand that'm useless .
Change stategy compresse all attack for little moment .
Par ex in the last week Arbor ( the best solution for AntiDDOS as mitiged more 100 DDOS ).
Yes when mitigation is started for DDOS.
Arbor make little false positive and impact only botnet mine on the pool.
Arbor on mitigation delete connexion from host referenced on blacklist ( botnet ).
Not impact regular miner .
The magie of variance, I have best pool efficiency last 3 day whith very hard DDOS .
Efficiency actual is not conséquence of DDOS just one période of badluck. ( Actualy 100% )
Honest :
The uniq impact of DDOS of the pool.
1.) Disconnection of miner withbotnet.
2.) Number of block I leave in history.
3.) Lost time for me supervise health of server and not code new function.
If one half day of 90% is lower for you, not compute efficience of other pool.
For the DDOS , I can not explain all parameter for protect DDOS.
|
|
|
|
Quote MP from Hilux, Probleme seem present only new version clamored . You can send you address for look pb side of pool. Is badhash ? badhash lower ?  ......
......
.......
From more research I believe the difference in reprted hashrate between client and pool lies with the Claymore client software not the pool. I have seen a number of other posts in the last couple days of people claiming actual hashrate reductions at a pool using version 6.0 and 6.1 despite the software claiming a higher hash rate. I am going to try moving my miners back to version 4.2 and see what happens as a test from my side.
regards,
Hilux74
|
|
|
|
|
Cela t'empêche pas de déclarer .
Juste que les impôts te verrons moins.
|
|
|
|
New server add All is OK |
|
|
|
Anyone else notice a LARGE discrepancy between the hash rate that Claymore GPU software reports vs this pool? I am consistently for at least the last couple weeks showing from 60% to 80% on crypto-pool.fr compared to the miner software. When I run all my systems I have a client side reported hash of 672+635+1250+1888=4445h/s. Very rarely on the pool stats do I see above 3500h/s reported and very often it is reporting around 2500h/s! I also believe that earlier in time there used to be a pretty close match between the client and the pool. What is at fault the pool or the mining software?
I know the pool doesn't display orphan/stale stats but could that account for up to 40% of my hash?
I've been with this pool pretty much since the beginning so not really interested in pointing my miners elsewhere if the discrepancy between between client and pool is the same at all pools now.
You have share rejected ? Is possible you have have lower hashrate because, you send bad hash (overcloking,bug,other). Jump pool accept you bad hash is not good solution . If pool accept 30% of hashrate pool as bad efficience. The performance of the pool is not a miracle. We use a code very different now . Test share with the module coded by Wolf for increase performance and best validation. You can send your addresse for look at ? You mine with port 7777 ? Test new port 8888 or 9999 |
|
|
|
|
Les boules de crystal sont cassé ?
|
|
|
|
Tout ça pour nous museler proteger controler  Tout ça pour nous museler proteger controler |
|
|
|
Tout ça pour nous museler.
Tout ça pour nous museler proteger. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
