|
slider1978
|
 |
July 02, 2012, 02:44:01 PM |
|
I just got a bunch of payout notifications, was this a new feature or was it a fixed feature?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally
controlled
networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem
to be holding their own." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EnergyVampire
|
|
July 02, 2012, 03:03:40 PM |
|
Yay! Block # 187194 was me!  |
|
|
|
Graet (OP)
VIP
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 02, 2012, 03:09:13 PM |
|
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 (OP)
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 10, 2012, 06:10:31 AM |
|
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
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
|
July 10, 2012, 07:06:28 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
|
July 10, 2012, 11:26:29 AM |
|
Miner variance insurance will soon be available here, and listed on GLBSE soon. More details are here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=92534.0I 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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 10, 2012, 05:31:57 PM
Last edit: July 10, 2012, 05:59:32 PM by 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
|
|
July 11, 2012, 12:53:51 AM |
|
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 (OP)
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 11, 2012, 01:23:01 AM
Last edit: July 11, 2012, 01:37:18 AM by 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 (OP)
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 11, 2012, 02:10:46 AM |
|
Hot wallet topped up, many miners paid |
|
|
|
Dargo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 11, 2012, 05:37:41 AM |
|
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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 12, 2012, 04:25:02 AM |
|
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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 12, 2012, 03:52:12 PM |
|
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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 12, 2012, 06:04:51 PM |
|
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 (OP)
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 13, 2012, 12:28:16 AM |
|
Please consider using us1.ozco.in us.ozco.in is under the heaviest load all the time cheers Graet |
|
|
|
crazyates
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 13, 2012, 12:42:09 AM |
|
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
|
|
July 13, 2012, 12:54:21 AM |
|
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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 13, 2012, 01:07:45 AM |
|
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 (OP)
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 13, 2012, 03:05:47 AM |
|
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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1820
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 13, 2012, 03:45:54 AM |
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
