A dream of having a new pool

[jonnybravo0311]

I think you're missing the point here.  Small time miners get small time payouts - no matter what you may wish to happen.  You simply aren't going to get a bigger slice of the pie unless you get more hash.  Let's say you do start some kind of pool with an upper limit on hashing power.  So, you've got a pool with 10000 miners each having 100GH/s.  Do you somehow think that you, as one of those 100GH/s users is somehow going to make more than you would as the same user on a pool that has 2 miners, one has 999.9TH/s and you, with 100GH/s?  The simple answer is you are going to make the same.

You are hoping for the impossible.

I wrote on the other thread that I usually make 10 mBTC per 2 weeks on Eligius pool and 1 mBTC per 2 days on Antpool with 100 Gh/s hashrate. Those are roughly equal to 0.7 and 0.5 mBTC per day respectively.

If I would mine together with all other 9,999 miners with the same 100 Gh/s, using this method I will definitely get 2.5 mBTC per day. And I will definitely get multiple of that per day as the pool hashrate is 1 Ph/s so it is likely to solve more blocks a day.

If there would be only 2 miners with 999.9 Th/s and 100 Gh/s, I would have to wait for a few days until my shares value reach the minimum payout threshold while the other miner would get the most payout every day while I am waiting. This is clear to me that I will make very less than on the previous example. Could you please explain why this would not be the expected result, John (I hope you still have the patience of the Saint)?

Ok... let me see if I can break this down for you in a way you'll be able to get .

For the sake of this argument, we're going to assume there are 2 pools.  Pool 1 has 10,000 miners each with 100GH/s.  Pool 2 has 2 miners, one with 999.9TH/s and the other with 100GH/s.  We are also going to assume that each pool finds exactly 1 block a day, and the reward is exactly 25BTC per block.

When a block is found on pool 1, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 10,000 parts.  Therefore, each miner gets 0.0025BTC
When a block is found on pool 2, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 2 parts.  The miner with 999.9TH/s gets 24.9975BTC.  The miner with 100GH/s gets 0.0025BTC.

They are both equal.  Payout thresholds are completely irrelevant.  It doesn't matter how you break it down, 100GH/s expects to earn exactly the same coin on pool 1 and pool 2.

[.anto.]

I think you're missing the point here.  Small time miners get small time payouts - no matter what you may wish to happen.  You simply aren't going to get a bigger slice of the pie unless you get more hash.  Let's say you do start some kind of pool with an upper limit on hashing power.  So, you've got a pool with 10000 miners each having 100GH/s.  Do you somehow think that you, as one of those 100GH/s users is somehow going to make more than you would as the same user on a pool that has 2 miners, one has 999.9TH/s and you, with 100GH/s?  The simple answer is you are going to make the same.

You are hoping for the impossible.

I wrote on the other thread that I usually make 10 mBTC per 2 weeks on Eligius pool and 1 mBTC per 2 days on Antpool with 100 Gh/s hashrate. Those are roughly equal to 0.7 and 0.5 mBTC per day respectively.

If I would mine together with all other 9,999 miners with the same 100 Gh/s, using this method I will definitely get 2.5 mBTC per day. And I will definitely get multiple of that per day as the pool hashrate is 1 Ph/s so it is likely to solve more blocks a day.

If there would be only 2 miners with 999.9 Th/s and 100 Gh/s, I would have to wait for a few days until my shares value reach the minimum payout threshold while the other miner would get the most payout every day while I am waiting. This is clear to me that I will make very less than on the previous example. Could you please explain why this would not be the expected result, John (I hope you still have the patience of the Saint)?

Ok... let me see if I can break this down for you in a way you'll be able to get .

For the sake of this argument, we're going to assume there are 2 pools.  Pool 1 has 10,000 miners each with 100GH/s.  Pool 2 has 2 miners, one with 999.9TH/s and the other with 100GH/s.  We are also going to assume that each pool finds exactly 1 block a day, and the reward is exactly 25BTC per block.

When a block is found on pool 1, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 10,000 parts.  Therefore, each miner gets 0.0025BTC
When a block is found on pool 2, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 2 parts.  The miner with 999.9TH/s gets 24.9975BTC.  The miner with 100GH/s gets 0.0025BTC.

They are both equal.  Payout thresholds are completely irrelevant.  It doesn't matter how you break it down, 100GH/s expects to earn exactly the same coin on pool 1 and pool 2.

Thanks again.

I assumed that you are referring to the methods used by the current pools, as the example on the second pool would not work on the idea I posted because the maximum hashrate for each miner is 1 Th/s.

I think I mixed up with the vardiff usage on the current pools. I assumed that there is a maximum limit of vardiff so that the miners with huge hashrates send more shares than the miners with low hashrates as there is minimum limit of vardiff.

[os2sam]

I think you're missing the point here.  Small time miners get small time payouts - no matter what you may wish to happen.  You simply aren't going to get a bigger slice of the pie unless you get more hash.  Let's say you do start some kind of pool with an upper limit on hashing power.  So, you've got a pool with 10000 miners each having 100GH/s.  Do you somehow think that you, as one of those 100GH/s users is somehow going to make more than you would as the same user on a pool that has 2 miners, one has 999.9TH/s and you, with 100GH/s?  The simple answer is you are going to make the same.

You are hoping for the impossible.

I wrote on the other thread that I usually make 10 mBTC per 2 weeks on Eligius pool and 1 mBTC per 2 days on Antpool with 100 Gh/s hashrate. Those are roughly equal to 0.7 and 0.5 mBTC per day respectively.

If I would mine together with all other 9,999 miners with the same 100 Gh/s, using this method I will definitely get 2.5 mBTC per day. And I will definitely get multiple of that per day as the pool hashrate is 1 Ph/s so it is likely to solve more blocks a day.

If there would be only 2 miners with 999.9 Th/s and 100 Gh/s, I would have to wait for a few days until my shares value reach the minimum payout threshold while the other miner would get the most payout every day while I am waiting. This is clear to me that I will make very less than on the previous example. Could you please explain why this would not be the expected result, John (I hope you still have the patience of the Saint)?

Ok... let me see if I can break this down for you in a way you'll be able to get .

For the sake of this argument, we're going to assume there are 2 pools.  Pool 1 has 10,000 miners each with 100GH/s.  Pool 2 has 2 miners, one with 999.9TH/s and the other with 100GH/s.  We are also going to assume that each pool finds exactly 1 block a day, and the reward is exactly 25BTC per block.

When a block is found on pool 1, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 10,000 parts.  Therefore, each miner gets 0.0025BTC
When a block is found on pool 2, the pool must divide that 25BTC into 2 parts.  The miner with 999.9TH/s gets 24.9975BTC.  The miner with 100GH/s gets 0.0025BTC.

They are both equal.  Payout thresholds are completely irrelevant.  It doesn't matter how you break it down, 100GH/s expects to earn exactly the same coin on pool 1 and pool 2.

Thanks again.

I assumed that you are referring to the methods used by the current pools, as the example on the second pool would not work on the idea I posted because the maximum hashrate for each miner is 1 Th/s.

Payout method has no bearing on the percentage of hash rate you contribute to finding a block.  Both scenarios above are correct for any payout system.  The different payout systems just distribute the payouts differently to discourage pool hopping.

I think I mixed up with the vardiff usage on the current pools. I assumed that there is a maximum limit of vardiff so that the miners with huge hashrates send more shares than the miners with low hashrates as there is minimum limit of vardiff.

Variable diff has no bearing on your percentage of hash rate you contribute.  The variable difficulty is ONLY to decrease the amount of network bandwidth required and to decrease the load on the pool.

[.anto.]

I assumed that you are referring to the methods used by the current pools, as the example on the second pool would not work on the idea I posted because the maximum hashrate for each miner is 1 Th/s.

Payout method has no bearing on the percentage of hash rate you contribute to finding a block.  Both scenarios above are correct for any payout system.  The different payout systems just distribute the payouts differently to discourage pool hopping.

I think I mixed up with the vardiff usage on the current pools. I assumed that there is a maximum limit of vardiff so that the miners with huge hashrates send more shares than the miners with low hashrates as there is minimum limit of vardiff.

Variable diff has no bearing on your percentage of hash rate you contribute.  The variable difficulty is ONLY to decrease the amount of network bandwidth required and to decrease the load on the pool.

Thanks again for your clarifications.