1 worker or many workers in solo pool

[PrivacyBTC]

Hello ALL

I need Urgent Answer from pool operator or Expert User

I have 6 Miners linked to SOLO POOL

Can I use 1 worker for 6 miners or 6 workers for 6 miners  (1 worker for 1 miner ) ?

we are in solo pool searching only for best shares so if 6 Miners with 1 worker generate different shares so may it be not good for pool to track that worker .

and if i split workers i will have low hashrate for every worker and i will got best share in longer time .

I hope u all reply with yours knowledge
Thanks

[jonnybravo0311]

It really doesn't matter.  It's your total hash that matters, not in how it's accomplished.

[-ck]

It makes no difference to your chance of finding a block. The only reason to use different workers is so you can monitor their performance separately.

[aurel57]

Its like buying 6 chances on the lotto and either putting them on one ticket or 6 different tickets, it does not change things.

[philipma1957]

It makes no difference to your chance of finding a block. The only reason to use different workers is so you can monitor their performance separately.

@ op this is the best answer and if anyone should know it is the guy that wrote the code and owns a solo pool.


I find if you have 6 machines   you can do two btc addresses each with 3 machines.

  If one goes down the number will be off by enough to figure something is wrong.


If 6 are lumped together and one goes down you could miss it.

[GreydonIselmoe]

It makes no difference to your chance of finding a block. The only reason to use different workers is so you can monitor their performance separately.

@ op this is the best answer and if anyone should know it is the guy that wrote the code and owns a solo pool.


I find if you have 6 machines   you can do two btc addresses each with 3 machines.

  If one goes down the number will be off by enough to figure something is wrong.


If 6 are lumped together and one goes down you could miss it.

This. Seeing how there's really no difference, you're better off just using separate workers so you can monitor each. However, you're chances of finding a block with 6 miners (Unless you have access to some crazy new rig) is probably slim to none. Regardless, best of luck to you!

[notlist3d]

Depending on pool I think many workers is better.  It allows difficulty to go to a specific miner, don't have to worry about it having a jumble.

And best is finding if you have a slowdown what is actually causing it.  With 1 worker you would have no idea what to check.  I personally use the last IP numbers as worker makes it very easy to find what's wrong.

[kano]

Depending on pool I think many workers is better.  It allows difficulty to go to a specific miner, don't have to worry about it having a jumble.
...

That doesn't matter with ckpool.
Each connection gets it's own difficulty already, even if they are the same worker.

[kano]

It makes no difference to your chance of finding a block. The only reason to use different workers is so you can monitor their performance separately.

@ op this is the best answer and if anyone should know it is the guy that wrote the code and owns a solo pool.


I find if you have 6 machines   you can do two btc addresses each with 3 machines.

  If one goes down the number will be off by enough to figure something is wrong.


If 6 are lumped together and one goes down you could miss it.

Don't forget that each worker also has web stats.
So you can still use one address but with a different worker name for each miner.

[PrivacyBTC]

Sorry all , I didnt got a right answer  while the problem is

Miner 1 worker A  make 1.000.000  best share
Miner 2 worker A  make 3.000.000  best share
Miner 3 worker A  make 20.000.000 best share

In solo pool what is the right best share for worker A (Real best share )  ?

and if Miner 3 down did the pool still save his best share ?

[aurel57]

Sorry all , I didnt got a right answer  while the problem is

Miner 1 worker A  make 1.000.000  best share
Miner 2 worker A  make 3.000.000  best share
Miner 3 worker A  make 20.000.000 best share

In solo pool what is the right best share for worker A (Real best share )  ?

and if Miner 3 down did the pool still save his best share ?

Why are you worrying about best shares? It does not mean a thing unless you do 47,610,564,513+ then you get a block of 25BTC anything under that share means nothing other than to show you how close you came, which can drive you nuts if it was close.

[jonnybravo0311]

Sorry all , I didnt got a right answer  while the problem is

Miner 1 worker A  make 1.000.000  best share
Miner 2 worker A  make 3.000.000  best share
Miner 3 worker A  make 20.000.000 best share

In solo pool what is the right best share for worker A (Real best share )  ?

and if Miner 3 down did the pool still save his best share ?

Who cares?  The shares are completely irrelevant until one of them exceeds the target network difficulty.  To answer your question, yes, the pool does save your best share.  For example, we lost power at my house a few nights ago.  My rPi didn't automatically restart cgminer (yeah, I should probably fix that), so my 5 U2s are not currently mining.  Yet, here is what is shown from ckpool:

Code:

{"hashrate1m": "0", "hashrate5m": "0", "hashrate1hr": "0", "hashrate1d": "0", "hashrate7d": "0", "lastupdate": 1429712208, "workers": 0, "bestshare": 5211017.239969668}

[100sIg00sI]

@-ck

how does having an assortment of hashpower work on one reward address?

could you break it down how work would be distributed to each to help me understand

S1
S9
S19

Any issues of a slower miner hampering a faster more powerful one? I'd like to think even the single hashboard S1 (makes it a S1/2?) is still gonna be the one to click-in with a win 

I'm not concerned with chances of finding a block, I'm curious about how the mechanics work between the machines.

Would it be better to spread these out on their own addresses or keep them working under the same reward address?

Always wanted to be able to view the stratum data going to my miners - any quick key points on how to do that?

thx for your time

100sI