nepaluz
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 22
Merit: 0
|
|
December 10, 2015, 03:53:44 PM |
|
Johnybravo, I do not agree with you on the specific issue of the process of SPV mining being unstable in itself, I rather think it is the people who code it that flagrantly implement it - and that is a nod with particular reference to the mentioned forking.
On top of that, forking is not exclusively caused by SPV mining but more importantly there's no harm to "rest of us" when a fork of this nature happens. Infact, forks do happen and the protocol knows about it, thus it can not, by definition, be detrimental.
|
|
|
|
ShrykeZ
|
|
December 10, 2015, 10:47:02 PM |
|
Cool. Is it possible for you to open-source this program? I have a few ideas for it. Can you tell what pool(s) are currently mining 0 transaction blocks consistently? Thanks, Sam
Are you saying that some pools can opt out of mining empty blocks? I thought you don't know what's coming until you finish mining the block :-/ I guess you learn something new everday day! The contents of the 'block to be' are decided by the pool before it sends out the work to the miners. It's rare if ever that there are no transaction available on the network. Many pools send out work to their miners that includes no new transactions other that the necessary coinbase transaction required to build a block. That's what all the "Empty Block" stats are about. My pool https://kano.is/ doesn't send out work containing empty blocks (unless there are no transaction available in the pool's bitcoind - which is probably never) This is why people should switch from the larger usually Chinese based pools over to pools like Kano's or others that operate similarly.
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
December 11, 2015, 04:23:03 AM |
|
Johnybravo, I do not agree with you on the specific issue of the process of SPV mining being unstable in itself, I rather think it is the people who code it that flagrantly implement it - and that is a nod with particular reference to the mentioned forking.
On top of that, forking is not exclusively caused by SPV mining but more importantly there's no harm to "rest of us" when a fork of this nature happens. Infact, forks do happen and the protocol knows about it, thus it can not, by definition, be detrimental.
Well it only takes one miner to produce a block with 1 bad transaction in it, and that can push ~65% of the mining power off the bitcoin blockchain. Not detrimental? The law covers the issue of dealing with someone killing someone else. However, killing someone else is usually considered detrimental ...... by definition.
|
|
|
|
nepaluz
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 22
Merit: 0
|
|
December 11, 2015, 04:26:50 AM |
|
Ofcourse it does, and mangoes are prunes though just like not all blockchain forking is due to SPV mining.
|
|
|
|
|
nepaluz
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 22
Merit: 0
|
|
December 11, 2015, 04:40:42 AM |
|
Is it possible to delete messages? Well I'll spell it out for you then, not all prunes are mangoes.
|
|
|
|
jonnybravo0311 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
|
|
December 11, 2015, 02:32:55 PM |
|
I don't think it was ever claimed that forking was exclusively caused by SPV mining. You made that statement. However, what is true is that SPV mining can and has caused forks.
Just for fun, I re-ran things again to see where we are. As of block 387696:
AntPool 7.61% of their blocks are empty BW.com 4.14% f2pool 3.55% KnC 3.23% Eligius 2.3%
|
Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow! Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets! No SPV cheats. No empty blocks.
|
|
|
nepaluz
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 22
Merit: 0
|
|
December 11, 2015, 04:20:14 PM |
|
You indeed never claimed such, and your numbers should tell a good story ... the one you refuse to see and tell, so I'll ask for some pointed stats. 1. What is the percentage of forks / empty blocks? 2. What is the percentage of forks / all blocks? 3. What is the percentage of forks / empty blocks in a timespan of the highest concentration of forks (in which timespan at least 2000 blocks have been mined)? 4. What is the percentage of forks / all blocks in a timespan of the highest concentration of forks (in which timespan at least 2000 blocks have been mined)?
The answer to all of those is bound to be in fractions of a percentage; extrapolations will without doubt yield similar results, meaning the likelihood of forks happening due to empty block mining is statistically negligible, and that will be true for a very long time.
So if you base your argument of empty block mining being detrimental due to the evil that is forking, which said forking's occurence is statistically negligible, you may have an agenda but you definitely have no point.
|
|
|
|
jonnybravo0311 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
|
|
December 11, 2015, 04:27:39 PM |
|
I welcome you to perform those calculations. I'm simply providing the data. I've also never made the conclusion you came to: base your argument of empty block mining being detrimental due to the evil that is forking, which said forking's occurence is statistically negligible, you may have an agenda but you definitely have no point.
There is nothing in this thread stating empty block mining is detrimental due to forking. In fact, I've never even tied the two together. I'm not sure what agenda you think I may have, other than to report the numbers.
|
Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow! Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets! No SPV cheats. No empty blocks.
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Online
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8711
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
December 11, 2015, 04:37:44 PM |
|
We had the largest block count day in years on the 10th of dec 215 blocks. we had more then 20 1 and 2 transaction blocks. The purpose of BTC is to move payments via transactions. a 10+ percent of no transaction blocks is not good. It clogs up the payment system. If the 20 tiny transaction blocks all had 1000 transactions we would have moved 20,000 transactions. We would not have this happening blockchain info skipped auto payment of fees pulled excess coin out of account sent it back causing an un confirmed .0101 amount from a fully confirmed original balance of .202 https://blockchain.info/tx/92a7cba0eac341534e79362b2d9c2dba42ee3479d69bd347c036f5c778186c6dthus 1 minute later when blockchain info made this payment with a fee they did won't confirm this .151 transfer so .202 fully confirmed btc is now locked up as unconfirmed due to 2 issues. first blockchain info client forget to pay a fee and needlessly casued an unconfirmed .0101 second dozens of empty blocks passed by these two transactions which if you do both of them you do get .0001 btc So the entire point of mining which is moving coins via transactions is lost here. Why some pools just want block rewards. Well we will see how long the .202 stays tied up and pools continue to mine empty blocks to pass by the fees to get rewards. More then 30 hours now. https://blockchain.info/tx/3989f4a2d7cdbcd146e5b9df949c514fd5920e66e9486d4c18bf1681ab7ba3b7
|
|
|
|
Rizky Aditya
|
|
December 15, 2015, 10:18:54 AM |
|
I don't really understand the issue here. Does the miner earn less if he/she finds/mines an empty block? I'm pretty sure that he/she would earn the same amount.
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
December 15, 2015, 10:23:38 AM |
|
I don't really understand the issue here. Does the miner earn less if he/she finds/mines an empty block? I'm pretty sure that he/she would earn the same amount.
No.
|
|
|
|
leowonderful
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1130
Bitcoin FTW!
|
|
February 04, 2016, 10:05:49 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
-ck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4256
Merit: 1645
Ruu \o/
|
|
February 04, 2016, 10:42:19 PM |
|
No need to point out each and every one of them. It's a regular occurrence.
|
Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel 2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org -ck
|
|
|
jonnybravo0311 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
|
|
March 02, 2016, 08:00:18 PM Last edit: March 02, 2016, 08:14:53 PM by jonnybravo0311 |
|
So... with the backlog of transactions currently plaguing the network, one would think that the pools would be constantly pushing full blocks onto the chain. Yeah. Here's how it is really stacking up since last Monday (block 399383 to block 400871):
AntPool - 44/341 blocks mined are empty (12.9%) bw.com - 8 of 103 blocks mined are empty (7.77%) f2pool - 4 of 382 blocks mined are empty (1.05%) KnC - 3 of 58 blocks mined are empty (5.17%) Eligius - 2 of 9 blocks mined are empty (22.22%) Slush - 1 of 69 blocks mined are empty (1.45%)
If we take an average of 1500 transactions per block, which is low by the way, then had AntPool had even half as few empty blocks there would be no transaction backlog at all. Everybody's transactions would be confirmed. There wouldn't be pages and pages of questions in the forums asking why a transaction hasn't been confirmed after days of waiting.
For the love of all that's holy - STOP MINING ON POOLS THAT PRODUCE EMPTY BLOCKS!!!
|
Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow! Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets! No SPV cheats. No empty blocks.
|
|
|
os2sam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3586
Merit: 1098
Think for yourself
|
|
March 03, 2016, 11:37:28 AM |
|
Thanks for the update.
|
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
|
|
|
valkir
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1004
|
|
March 03, 2016, 12:24:10 PM |
|
They want bigger block so they do empty block. So idiot.
|
██ Please support sidehack with his new miner project Send to :
1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
|
|
|
TracerX
|
|
March 03, 2016, 08:24:11 PM |
|
So... with the backlog of transactions currently plaguing the network, one would think that the pools would be constantly pushing full blocks onto the chain. Yeah. Here's how it is really stacking up since last Monday (block 399383 to block 400871):
AntPool - 44/341 blocks mined are empty (12.9%) bw.com - 8 of 103 blocks mined are empty (7.77%) f2pool - 4 of 382 blocks mined are empty (1.05%) KnC - 3 of 58 blocks mined are empty (5.17%) Eligius - 2 of 9 blocks mined are empty (22.22%) Slush - 1 of 69 blocks mined are empty (1.45%)
If we take an average of 1500 transactions per block, which is low by the way, then had AntPool had even half as few empty blocks there would be no transaction backlog at all. Everybody's transactions would be confirmed. There wouldn't be pages and pages of questions in the forums asking why a transaction hasn't been confirmed after days of waiting.
For the love of all that's holy - STOP MINING ON POOLS THAT PRODUCE EMPTY BLOCKS!!!
F2Pool has really cleaned up it's act, at least with BTC mining. They had a higher than 1% weekly average for a long time--I suppose I'll start a thirty/60/90 day stat.
|
|
|
|
jonnybravo0311 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
|
|
March 03, 2016, 08:50:39 PM |
|
Yes, they've certainly gotten better about submitting empty blocks. Unfortunately, they still SPV mine and they are still submitting empty blocks, albeit far less frequently.
|
Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow! Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets! No SPV cheats. No empty blocks.
|
|
|
watashi-kokoto
|
|
March 03, 2016, 09:34:29 PM |
|
they are still submitting empty blocks, albeit far less frequently.
empty blocks result from bursts
|
|
|
|
|