Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 06:42:04 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Mining with multiple pools (round robin)  (Read 6390 times)
qdot
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 09:46:17 AM
 #1

Hi!

I wonder if there is (it's so simple I must not be the first user to come up with it) a patch for any OpenCL mining software that enables switching to other pools in a round-robin fashion in the event pool becomes unreachable.


Incentives for miners:
 * Register at multiple pools, mine even when a pool is down
 * Stop worrying about down pools
 * 'Steady as she goes' thermal workload on mining rigs.. I wonder if cooling down the idle miner and reheating it, negatively impacts it's reliability.. it probably does.

Incentives for network:
 * No tragic loss of 40% hashing power should deepbit.net go down again.. which means no confirmations for 30mins etc..
 * Overall balanced use of pools - entering multiple pools, each of which dying randomly means the miners would distribute evenly on all pools entered in the client

Disincentives for miners:
 * Having to manage payouts from multiple pools.. not quite as important, since most pay automatically after certain threshold.
 * Hard to estimate earnings.

1D5yrcmAZzwYTzrDYxNX3SSr19ss2uZx7x
1480963324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480963324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480963324
Reply with quote  #2

1480963324
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480963324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480963324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480963324
Reply with quote  #2

1480963324
Report to moderator
1480963324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480963324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480963324
Reply with quote  #2

1480963324
Report to moderator
1480963324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480963324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480963324
Reply with quote  #2

1480963324
Report to moderator
keybaud
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 09:48:19 AM
 #2

I just run 2 miners on each GPU. They work at 50% to each pool and if one pool goes down the second pool's miner ramps up to 100%. I seem to get a higher total hash rate doing this than with a single pool as well.

I actually have 3 installations of Phoenix per GPU, each one setup for a different pool. I run 2 pools per GPU at the same time, but if one pool goes down long term, I fire up the 3rd pool's miners. I do this with 3 GPUs, so have 9 miners configured, but only run 6 at a time.
russelljohnson
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 09:51:28 AM
 #3

I just run 2 miners on each GPU. They work at 50% to each pool and if one pool goes down the second pool's miner ramps up to 100%. I seem to get a higher total hash rate doing this than with a single pool as well.

Are there any negative effects for that?

If you've found my post helpful, send me some bitcoins!
1FkGxXmesGbhoFewYGrtNEmifzwvNaNCXH
keybaud
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 09:52:26 AM
 #4

I just run 2 miners on each GPU. They work at 50% to each pool and if one pool goes down the second pool's miner ramps up to 100%. I seem to get a higher total hash rate doing this than with a single pool as well.

Are there any negative effects for that?

Other than managing them, no.
russelljohnson
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 09:54:34 AM
 #5

I just run 2 miners on each GPU. They work at 50% to each pool and if one pool goes down the second pool's miner ramps up to 100%. I seem to get a higher total hash rate doing this than with a single pool as well.

Are there any negative effects for that?

Other than managing them, no.

Should we all put each GPU to mine at 2 pools then? I'd do it

Do you use guiminer? If you do, do you use different -f flags?

If you've found my post helpful, send me some bitcoins!
1FkGxXmesGbhoFewYGrtNEmifzwvNaNCXH
TheSeven
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504


FPGA Mining LLC


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2011, 09:58:15 AM
 #6

Incentives for miners:
 * Register at multiple pools, mine even when a pool is down
 * Stop worrying about down pools
 * 'Steady as she goes' thermal workload on mining rigs.. I wonder if cooling down the idle miner and reheating it, negatively impacts it's reliability.. it probably does.

Incentives for network:
 * No tragic loss of 40% hashing power should deepbit.net go down again.. which means no confirmations for 30mins etc..
 * Overall balanced use of pools - entering multiple pools, each of which dying randomly means the miners would distribute evenly on all pools entered in the client

Disincentives for miners:
 * Having to manage payouts from multiple pools.. not quite as important, since most pay automatically after certain threshold.
 * Hard to estimate earnings.

Disincentives for pool operators and the network:
 * If someone manages to DDoS two or three pools, the other ones will be taken down by the load of additional miners switching over to them as well?

My tip jar: 13kwqR7B4WcSAJCYJH1eXQcxG5vVUwKAqY
qdot
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 10:01:47 AM
 #7

Quote
I just run 2 miners on each GPU. They work at 50% to each pool and if one pool goes down the second pool's miner ramps up to 100%. I seem to get a higher total hash rate doing this than with a single pool as well.

That's a good hint! Mining is ALU-bound, so it should behave that way Smiley

Unfortunately, on my machine, it (sometimes??) crashes the other miner?

Perhaps it's just X11 that got in the way, I disabled it, and it should be chugging along just fine.

1D5yrcmAZzwYTzrDYxNX3SSr19ss2uZx7x
russelljohnson
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 10:02:56 AM
 #8

I think if you simultaneously mine at two separate pools, you lose a % of your hashing power. My max hashing power for 1 rig was 720MH/s but running them at two different pools simultaneously give me only a max of 688MH/s. GPU usage was hovering around 92% instead 99%.

But I don't know if that's better than having random connection errors at one single pool.

If you've found my post helpful, send me some bitcoins!
1FkGxXmesGbhoFewYGrtNEmifzwvNaNCXH
keybaud
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 10:04:44 AM
 #9

I think if you simultaneously mine at two separate pools, you lose a % of your hashing power. My max hashing power for 1 rig was 720MH/s but running them at two different pools simultaneously give me only a max of 688MH/s. GPU usage was hovering around 92% instead 99%.

But I don't know if that's better than having random connection errors at one single pool.

My combined hashing on 2 pools per GPU is higher than with one pool and my GPU usage is permanently at 100%.

What miner and settings are you using?
qdot
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 10:06:03 AM
 #10

Disincentives for pool operators and the network:
 * If someone manages to DDoS two or three pools, the other ones will be taken down by the load of additional miners switching over to them as well?

A sensible pool should be able to handle growth in legitimate traffic.

Speaking with no experience in bitcoin pool operations in general, but with a lot of experience in designing scalable web applications, a typical DDoS is roughly 10x larger than a foreseeable legitimate traffic.

I don't think all legitimate miners could bring down a pool that is supposed to have a fighting chance against organized DDoS.


1D5yrcmAZzwYTzrDYxNX3SSr19ss2uZx7x
russelljohnson
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 10:09:53 AM
 #11

I think if you simultaneously mine at two separate pools, you lose a % of your hashing power. My max hashing power for 1 rig was 720MH/s but running them at two different pools simultaneously give me only a max of 688MH/s. GPU usage was hovering around 92% instead 99%.

But I don't know if that's better than having random connection errors at one single pool.

My combined hashing on 2 pools per GPU is higher than with one pool and my GPU usage is permanently at 100%.

What miner and settings are you using?

guiminer poclbm

flags: -v -w256 -f1

If you've found my post helpful, send me some bitcoins!
1FkGxXmesGbhoFewYGrtNEmifzwvNaNCXH
keybaud
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
June 03, 2011, 10:14:31 AM
 #12

I think if you simultaneously mine at two separate pools, you lose a % of your hashing power. My max hashing power for 1 rig was 720MH/s but running them at two different pools simultaneously give me only a max of 688MH/s. GPU usage was hovering around 92% instead 99%.

But I don't know if that's better than having random connection errors at one single pool.

My combined hashing on 2 pools per GPU is higher than with one pool and my GPU usage is permanently at 100%.

What miner and settings are you using?

guiminer poclbm

flags: -v -w256 -f1

I'm using Phoenix with a command line batch file and I use separate installations so they run independently of each other.

You could try copying the GUIminer folder and running the second pool from that exe, to see if that improves things.
russelljohnson
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 03, 2011, 10:21:30 AM
 #13

I think if you simultaneously mine at two separate pools, you lose a % of your hashing power. My max hashing power for 1 rig was 720MH/s but running them at two different pools simultaneously give me only a max of 688MH/s. GPU usage was hovering around 92% instead 99%.

But I don't know if that's better than having random connection errors at one single pool.

My combined hashing on 2 pools per GPU is higher than with one pool and my GPU usage is permanently at 100%.

What miner and settings are you using?

guiminer poclbm

flags: -v -w256 -f1

I'm using Phoenix with a command line batch file and I use separate installations so they run independently of each other.

You could try copying the GUIminer folder and running the second pool from that exe, to see if that improves things.

appreciate the help. I'm gonna get some sleep now it's 3AM here in California. Hopefully things work out later.

If you've found my post helpful, send me some bitcoins!
1FkGxXmesGbhoFewYGrtNEmifzwvNaNCXH
techman05
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2013, 02:30:03 AM
 #14

Just curious how I manage a round robin with cgMiner.  I set it there thinking it would.be easier than using rotate but it hasn't.done as expected.  I missing how round robin is expected to work?

Sorry for resurecting but it seemed like a good description and the title matchex what I was thinking.

Like the info address for potential tips Wink
BTC 1CL5BnNhdL2wDVmSDwMbW1cNhZew87CAPV
* http://www.miningrigrentals.com/register?ref=563
os2sam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Think for yourself


View Profile
October 21, 2013, 02:36:04 AM
 #15

Just curious how I manage a round robin with cgMiner.  I set it there thinking it would.be easier than using rotate but it hasn't.done as expected.  I missing how round robin is expected to work?

With Round Robin, when a pool fails for 5 minutes it will move to the next pool and mine on it until it fails and then moves to the next.  If your primary pool is a good one and never fails then it will never move to another pool.

What behavior are you seeing?

What behavior are you expecting that your not seeing?

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?
Aco
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
October 21, 2013, 02:07:49 PM
 #16

I was told by a very experienced friend that pool hopping tends to be worse.
os2sam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Think for yourself


View Profile
October 21, 2013, 02:13:40 PM
 #17

I was told by a very experienced friend that pool hopping tends to be worse.

Was he talking about pool hopping?  Or was he talking about how it takes a while for your earnings to level out with payout systems like DGM and PPLNS?

If it's the latter you will still get paid for your shares over time so no real need to worry.

If its the former, there are only like two hoppable pools left so it's pretty much a non issue these days.

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?
techman05
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2013, 02:23:55 PM
 #18

Just curious how I manage a round robin with cgMiner.  I set it there thinking it would.be easier than using rotate but it hasn't.done as expected.  I missing how round robin is expected to work?

With Round Robin, when a pool fails for 5 minutes it will move to the next pool and mine on it until it fails and then moves to the next.  If your primary pool is a good one and never fails then it will never move to another pool.

What behavior are you seeing?

What behavior are you expecting that your not seeing?

I was trying to maximize the amount of shares I got, that's why I was thinking round robin would share time for both pools so I wouldn't miss out on either with my hashing speed.  I'll just have to finish one and stick with the other. Both seem good except one was bitminter and if its donations don't get in the way it would be nice with more mining power out of my shares in it.

Like the info address for potential tips Wink
BTC 1CL5BnNhdL2wDVmSDwMbW1cNhZew87CAPV
* http://www.miningrigrentals.com/register?ref=563
os2sam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Think for yourself


View Profile
October 21, 2013, 02:28:39 PM
 #19

Just curious how I manage a round robin with cgMiner.  I set it there thinking it would.be easier than using rotate but it hasn't.done as expected.  I missing how round robin is expected to work?

With Round Robin, when a pool fails for 5 minutes it will move to the next pool and mine on it until it fails and then moves to the next.  If your primary pool is a good one and never fails then it will never move to another pool.

What behavior are you seeing?

What behavior are you expecting that your not seeing?

I was trying to maximize the amount of shares I got, that's why I was thinking round robin would share time for both pools so I wouldn't miss out on either with my hashing speed.  I'll just have to finish one and stick with the other. Both seem good except one was bitminter and if its donations don't get in the way it would be nice with more mining power out of my shares in it.

Balance and load balance are probably more along the lines of what your thinking.

Maybe the new quota's would help?  Don't know much about what quota's are yet myself.

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?
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!