Old simplecoin thread

[teukon]

We're now on pident.

[1713596709]

1713596709

[1713596709]

1713596709

[sirky]

Just joined and added 4 ghash. Much thanks to Sirky to help make that possible.

I'm glad to see such serious miners joining this pool.

For me the PPLNS reward system is the primary reason for mining here but I'm also grateful for the new server and the various top-30 lists (which, for me, creates a sense of community).

May I ask why other people are joining this pool all of a sudden?

I got 1gh/s taken away from me and added to hmblm1245, so we are all even in the long run

[teukon]

I've decided to end the experiment early (for reasons which should be apparent from the results).

pool.simplecoin.us

Code:

python phoenix.py -u http://user:pass@pool.simplecoin.us:8337/ -b http://user:pass@mineco.in:3000/ -k phatk2 VECTORS BFI_INT FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=8 WORKSIZE=256 DEVICE=1

Code:

[338.58 Mhash/sec] [1510 Accepted] [1 Rejected] [RPC (+LP)]

mineco.in

Code:

python phoenix.py -u http://user:pass@mineco.in:3000/ -b http://user:pass@pool.simplecoin.us:8337/ -k phatk2 VECTORS BFI_INT FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=8 WORKSIZE=256 DEVICE=2

Code:

[338.99 Mhash/sec] [1535 Accepted] [14 Rejected] [RPC (+LP)]

Make of this what you will.  I'm now back at SimpleCoin in full force (732 Mh/s).

[teukon]

Server outage.

The website is reporting:

Code:

Lost connection to MySQL server at 'reading initial communication packet', system error: 110

and my two miners (using phoenix 1.6.2) say:

Code:

[20/08/2011 20:27:35] Warning: work queue empty, miner is idle
[0 Khash/sec] [634 Accepted] [2 Rejected] [RPC (+LP)]

On restarting the miners manually I got:

Code:

bitcoinminer@bitcoinMiner2:~/jedi95-Phoenix-Miner-2b57b96$ python phoenix.py -u http://user:pass@pool.simplecoin.us:8337/ -b http://user:pass@mineco.in:3000/ -a 1 -k phatk2 VECTORS BFI_INT FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=12 WORKSIZE=256 DEVICE=2
[20/08/2011 20:38:29] Phoenix v1.6.2 starting...
[20/08/2011 20:38:59] Failed to connect, retrying...
[20/08/2011 20:39:44] Failed to connect, retrying...
[20/08/2011 20:40:29] Failed to connect, retrying...
[20/08/2011 20:40:29] Primary server failed too many times,
[20/08/2011 20:40:29] attempting to connect to backup server.
[20/08/2011 20:40:29] Connected to server
[20/08/2011 20:40:37] Result: 46d9603d accepted
[20/08/2011 20:40:48] Result: d6273b00 accepted         
[20/08/2011 20:41:10] Result: 9398d91d accepted

If this is an intentional MySQL update/restart then any idea how I can get my miners to automatically fallback to another pool?  Is this something which is handled better in cgminer do you know?

[simplecoin]

It was not intentional, I was at lunch when my email alerts went off. I am investigating now.

As for cgminer, it does handle failover pools. I'm not sure about the syntax though.

UPDATE: It was an unscheduled server restart. Not sure of the cause, the servers are in an excellent facility so it's not like someone tripped over a wire.

[teukon]

It was not intentional, I was at lunch when my email alerts went off. I am investigating now.

As for cgminer, it does handle failover pools. I'm not sure about the syntax though.

UPDATE: It was an unscheduled server restart. Not sure of the cause, the servers are in an excellent facility so it's not like someone tripped over a wire.

Strange.  Do you suppose the restart was caused by software?  In any case I'll keep my ear to the ground.

[simplecoin]

It was not intentional, I was at lunch when my email alerts went off. I am investigating now.

As for cgminer, it does handle failover pools. I'm not sure about the syntax though.

UPDATE: It was an unscheduled server restart. Not sure of the cause, the servers are in an excellent facility so it's not like someone tripped over a wire.

Strange.  Do you suppose the restart was caused by software?  In any case I'll keep my ear to the ground.

I haven't found any reason for a restart in the logs yet, which leads to the datacenter causing a restart.

None of my other servers restarted though.... so I'm still making sure it wasn't software related.

UPDATE: no faults found in the logs. This is the 2nd reboot I've had on this server though. Anymore and I'm switching the distro to match the other 3 servers.

[simplecoin]

Automated payout is back online. Payouts should have already sent!

[teukon]

Automated payout is back online. Payouts should have already sent!

Confirmed.  Thanks.

[teukon]

More points about the reported stats:

I visited the stats page today to find that my reported Mh/s was at only 146 Mh/s where it is normally around 750 Mh/s.  Indeed, everyone on the top 30 list seemed to have taken a 3-4 fold hit in reported Mh/s.  The top 5 were:

Rank - User Name - MH/s - BTC/Day
1 - hmblm1245 - 1,208 - 0.673
2 - mike - 874 - 0.487
3 - loderunner - 662 - 0.369
4 - RyNinDaCleM - 626 - 0.349
5 - DooKey - 553 - 0.308

Secondly, the pool efficiency seems to be rising suspiciously steadily.  I'd guess that the reported efficiency is an average taken over a fairly long history.  Is this so and, if so, how much past data does this average take into account?

[simplecoin]

More points about the reported stats:

I visited the stats page today to find that my reported Mh/s was at only 146 Mh/s where it is normally around 750 Mh/s.  Indeed, everyone on the top 30 list seemed to have taken a 3-4 fold hit in reported Mh/s.  The top 5 were:

Rank - User Name - MH/s - BTC/Day
1 - hmblm1245 - 1,208 - 0.673
2 - mike - 874 - 0.487
3 - loderunner - 662 - 0.369
4 - RyNinDaCleM - 626 - 0.349
5 - DooKey - 553 - 0.308

Secondly, the pool efficiency seems to be rising suspiciously steadily.  I'd guess that the reported efficiency is an average taken over a fairly long history.  Is this so and, if so, how much past data does this average take into account?

Most if not all user stats are generated off of the replication server to minimize load on the main server. It seems the replication server lost sync. I just restarted the slave, stats should resume shortly.

Pool efficiency is based on the current round. So, no past data.

[simplecoin]

Google ads are up.... but disabled for donators.

Also, I'm about to install our own forum software on the secondary backup server. This shouldn't affect performance at all, but it will give us a better option for community.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Google ads are up.... but disabled for donators.

I just noticed that! I have the ad, but I totaled my donations to 2.7% possibly more if I look in another wallet.
I however, don't use the auto donation on payout, so I don't know if that is what it goes by.

[simplecoin]

Google ads are up.... but disabled for donators.

I just noticed that! I have the ad, but I totaled my donations to 2.7% possibly more if I look in another wallet.
I however, don't use the auto donation on payout, so I don't know if that is what it goes by.

It is by payout setting. Just set it over 1% and the ads go away.

Donation % is taken on cashout/autopay now, You can change the % before you cashout.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Block #12 

[teukon]

Block #12 

Well done thientibc!

Isn't it Block #11 (or Block #10 if you count from 0)?

This seems to be quite a lucky pool.  mineco.in (which also uses PPLNS) has been working away at a consistent 90 Gh/s and hasn't found a block in 4.5 days.

[hmblm1245]

More points about the reported stats:

I visited the stats page today to find that my reported Mh/s was at only 146 Mh/s where it is normally around 750 Mh/s.  Indeed, everyone on the top 30 list seemed to have taken a 3-4 fold hit in reported Mh/s.  The top 5 were:

Rank - User Name - MH/s - BTC/Day
1 - hmblm1245 - 1,208 - 0.673
2 - mike - 874 - 0.487
3 - loderunner - 662 - 0.369
4 - RyNinDaCleM - 626 - 0.349
5 - DooKey - 553 - 0.308

Secondly, the pool efficiency seems to be rising suspiciously steadily.  I'd guess that the reported efficiency is an average taken over a fairly long history.  Is this so and, if so, how much past data does this average take into account?

I have been rearranging hardware and rigs all day today so its been off for me.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Block #12 

Well done thientibc!

Isn't it Block #11 (or Block #10 if you count from 0)?

This seems to be quite a lucky pool.  mineco.in (which also uses PPLNS) has been working away at a consistent 90 Gh/s and hasn't found a block in 4.5 days.

Yes! Since SC kept track of blocks! There was one before all the upgrades/revisions! 

[teukon]

Block #12 

Well done thientibc!

Isn't it Block #11 (or Block #10 if you count from 0)?

This seems to be quite a lucky pool.  mineco.in (which also uses PPLNS) has been working away at a consistent 90 Gh/s and hasn't found a block in 4.5 days.

Yes! Since SC kept track of blocks! There was one before all the upgrades/revisions! 

I stand corrected.  Who found the first block?

[sirky]

Block #12 

Well done thientibc!

Isn't it Block #11 (or Block #10 if you count from 0)?

This seems to be quite a lucky pool.  mineco.in (which also uses PPLNS) has been working away at a consistent 90 Gh/s and hasn't found a block in 4.5 days.

Yes! Since SC kept track of blocks! There was one before all the upgrades/revisions! 

I stand corrected.  Who found the first block?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=11186.msg183691#msg183691