[0Th]Ozcoin Pooled Mining |DGM 1%|Stratum+VarDiff port 80|NEW CN mining|

[slider1978]

I just got a bunch of payout notifications, was this a new feature or was it a fixed feature?

[EnergyVampire]

Yay! Block # 187194 was me!

[Graet]

I just got a bunch of payout notifications, was this a new feature or was it a fixed feature?

our rdns was fixed, maybe they were spamblocked before?

Good work EnergyVampire

[Graet]

http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php we have quietly slipped into 3rd place

Off for a weeks holiday with the kids, I'll be checking in but not so active

[organofcorti]

http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php we have quietly slipped into 3rd place

Off for a weeks holiday with the kids, I'll be checking in but not so active

Saw that on Saturday night: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77000.msg1014954#msg1014954

Congrats!

[organofcorti]

Miner variance insurance will soon be available here, and listed on GLBSE soon. More details are here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=92534.0

I pays you PPS for a fee that will be about 2%, via a "bond" on GLBSE. I know that Ozcoin offers a 5% PPS, but mine will be guaranteed to be lower, and will be between 1.9% and 2.1%. Given the luck the pool's had lately, this might good investment!

If there's anything you don't follow, please pm me or post.

[Dargo]

I'm really liking this pool, but one minor issue I'm having is a higher rejected share rate than I'd like. I'm getting about 2% rejected shares, which is higher than I've experienced on other pools (usually see more like 0.2%). I'm using cgminer 2.4.2 and connected to us.ozco.in:8332/. Any ideas? 2% isn't a big deal, but lower would be nice.

Edit: Linux + 58xx cards if that matters.

[abracadabra]

I'm really liking this pool, but one minor issue I'm having is a higher rejected share rate than I'd like. I'm getting about 2% rejected shares, which is higher than I've experienced on other pools (usually see more like 0.2%). I'm using cgminer 2.4.2 and connected to us.ozco.in:8332/. Any ideas? 2% isn't a big deal, but lower would be nice.

Edit: Linux + 58xx cards if that matters.

where are you located?  which server you using?

[Graet]

Had issues with my desktop overnight. Bitcoin wallet was corrupted on recovery. had to get the wife to restart PC and then try to gfix stuff remotely :/
I have restored a backup and am just waiting for blockchain to catch up.
The hot wallet is empty - payments will be delayed.
I will top up hot wallet asap
sorry for any inconvenience
Graet


Dargo that is unusually high, as abracadabra said, also cgminer 2.4.4 has been very good to me
check "Enable Namecoin Longpolling" is unticked as well - it is a per worker setting. If this is enabled it can cause higher stales too.

[Graet]

Hot wallet topped up, many miners paid

[Dargo]

I'm really liking this pool, but one minor issue I'm having is a higher rejected share rate than I'd like. I'm getting about 2% rejected shares, which is higher than I've experienced on other pools (usually see more like 0.2%). I'm using cgminer 2.4.2 and connected to us.ozco.in:8332/. Any ideas? 2% isn't a big deal, but lower would be nice.

Edit: Linux + 58xx cards if that matters.

where are you located?  which server you using?

I'm in southern California, and seeing the issue in two different GPU rigs, one linux, one windows. Linux is pointed to us.ozco.in and the windows is pointed to au.ozco.in (which is pointed to US server atm).

[Dargo]

I'm really liking this pool, but one minor issue I'm having is a higher rejected share rate than I'd like. I'm getting about 2% rejected shares, which is higher than I've experienced on other pools (usually see more like 0.2%). I'm using cgminer 2.4.2 and connected to us.ozco.in:8332/. Any ideas? 2% isn't a big deal, but lower would be nice.

Edit: Linux + 58xx cards if that matters.

where are you located?  which server you using?

I'm in southern California, and seeing the issue in two different GPU rigs, one linux, one windows. Linux is pointed to us.ozco.in and the windows is pointed to au.ozco.in (which is pointed to US server atm).

The higher reject rate may have been due to the way cgminer handles backup pools. Unless you tell it not to, cgminer will leak work to your backup pool if it thinks your primary pool is lagging. You can tell it not to do this with the command "--failover-only". I actually haven't tried this command, instead I just deleted my backup pool and my stale rate has gone way down (so far anyway). Not sure why leaking work to the backup pool would result in more stale shares, unless it is sometimes getting work from the backup pool and trying to submit it to the primary pool. 

[crazyates]

I'm really liking this pool, but one minor issue I'm having is a higher rejected share rate than I'd like. I'm getting about 2% rejected shares, which is higher than I've experienced on other pools (usually see more like 0.2%). I'm using cgminer 2.4.2 and connected to us.ozco.in:8332/. Any ideas? 2% isn't a big deal, but lower would be nice.

Edit: Linux + 58xx cards if that matters.

where are you located?  which server you using?

I'm in southern California, and seeing the issue in two different GPU rigs, one linux, one windows. Linux is pointed to us.ozco.in and the windows is pointed to au.ozco.in (which is pointed to US server atm).

The higher reject rate may have been due to the way cgminer handles backup pools. Unless you tell it not to, cgminer will leak work to your backup pool if it thinks your primary pool is lagging. You can tell it not to do this with the command "--failover-only". I actually haven't tried this command, instead I just deleted my backup pool and my stale rate has gone way down (so far anyway). Not sure why leaking work to the backup pool would result in more stale shares, unless it is sometimes getting work from the backup pool and trying to submit it to the primary pool.  

Here's what I did in my CGMiner config file. I have us.ozco.in (with user/pass) as pool 1, and then I have us2.ozco.in (with same user/pass) as pool 2. Then I have my backup as pool 3.

[Dargo]

I'm really liking this pool, but one minor issue I'm having is a higher rejected share rate than I'd like. I'm getting about 2% rejected shares, which is higher than I've experienced on other pools (usually see more like 0.2%). I'm using cgminer 2.4.2 and connected to us.ozco.in:8332/. Any ideas? 2% isn't a big deal, but lower would be nice.

Edit: Linux + 58xx cards if that matters.

where are you located?  which server you using?

I'm in southern California, and seeing the issue in two different GPU rigs, one linux, one windows. Linux is pointed to us.ozco.in and the windows is pointed to au.ozco.in (which is pointed to US server atm).

The higher reject rate may have been due to the way cgminer handles backup pools. Unless you tell it not to, cgminer will leak work to your backup pool if it thinks your primary pool is lagging. You can tell it not to do this with the command "--failover-only". I actually haven't tried this command, instead I just deleted my backup pool and my stale rate has gone way down (so far anyway). Not sure why leaking work to the backup pool would result in more stale shares, unless it is sometimes getting work from the backup pool and trying to submit it to the primary pool.  

Here's what I did in my CGMiner config file. I have us.ozco.in (with user/pass) as pool 1, and then I have us2.ozco.in (with same user/pass) as pool 2. Then I have my backup as pool 3.

Thanks for the suggestion - this occurred to me, but I hadn't tried it yet. I'm getting the impression that the servers lag a bit in giving work. I'm pointed at us.ozco.in right now without any backup, and for GPU 1, for example, cgminer is reporting the hashrate as 302/296 Mh/s. Earlier (after a longer run) the discrepancy was larger - 302/279 Mh/s. The suggested fix hopefully will take care of this (as well as the higher stale rate), but still I'm curious as what the underlying cause might be. This behavior hasn't come up for me with other pools. But even without a fix, I seem to get better payouts with Ozcoin. 

[Graet]

Please consider using us1.ozco.in
us.ozco.in is under the heaviest load all the time
cheers
Graet

[crazyates]

Please consider using us1.ozco.in
us.ozco.in is under the heaviest load all the time
cheers
Graet

wait, are us1.ozco.in and us2.ozco.in the same?

[Valalvax]

Please consider using us1.ozco.in
us.ozco.in is under the heaviest load all the time
cheers
Graet

wait, are us1.ozco.in and us2.ozco.in the same?

No, ones in Texas and the other's in Chicago

[crazyates]

Please consider using us1.ozco.in
us.ozco.in is under the heaviest load all the time
cheers
Graet

wait, are us1.ozco.in and us2.ozco.in the same?

No, ones in Texas and the other's in Chicago

How come when I ping them, I'm getting the same ip address? 67.210.248.58?

[Graet]

us.ozco.in and us1.ozco.in are different servers in the same DC
us2.ozco.in was in chicago but had a hdd failure so the url is now pointed to us1's IP
hope that clears up any confusion
us.ozco.in runs between 800Ghash and 1Thash most of the time us1 at about 300Ghash
the 2 eu servers even lighter load. I mine them all from Australia without issues

[Dargo]

us.ozco.in and us1.ozco.in are different servers in the same DC
us2.ozco.in was in chicago but had a hdd failure so the url is now pointed to us1's IP
hope that clears up any confusion
us.ozco.in runs between 800Ghash and 1Thash most of the time us1 at about 300Ghash
the 2 eu servers even lighter load. I mine them all from Australia without issues

Thanks for the clarification Graet.