Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 06:17:27 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 [193] 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1200 TH] EMC: 0 Fee DGM. Anonymous PPS. US & EU servers. No Registration!  (Read 461549 times)
juhakall
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 422



View Profile
December 17, 2012, 04:19:05 AM
 #3841

I mean the total amount of work that's actually used in reward calculations. If I have submitted 1000 diff1 shares, 1000 diff2 shares and 1000 diff4 shares, it doesn't make much sense to tell me that I've submitted 3000 shares. Total accepted difficulty in this case would be 1000+1000*2+1000*4=7000. Or 3000 shares times the average difficulty of 2.333, just in a more useful format.
1481177847
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481177847

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481177847
Reply with quote  #2

1481177847
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481177847
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481177847

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481177847
Reply with quote  #2

1481177847
Report to moderator
1481177847
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481177847

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481177847
Reply with quote  #2

1481177847
Report to moderator
1481177847
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481177847

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481177847
Reply with quote  #2

1481177847
Report to moderator
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
December 17, 2012, 04:27:27 AM
 #3842

I don't have a problem with that... does anyone else reading this still want "actual" shares vs diff1 shares in that column?  If so, why?

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
juhakall
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 422



View Profile
December 17, 2012, 04:39:18 AM
 #3843

I feel like you don't really understand what I'm saying. I want to see diff1 shares in that column, because that's the actual measure of work done. I thought you would understand that as a pool op. It's currently showing the raw number of shares, which is very uninformative when the difficulty of those shares is not known.
BitcoinOxygen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile WWW
December 17, 2012, 04:41:14 AM
 #3844

I don't have a problem with that... does anyone else reading this still want "actual" shares vs diff1 shares in that column?  If so, why?

Actual share are not important as it is not much useful to the user/miner.

I think what juhakall wants is a SUM of total shares submitted in diff 1 format

BTCOxygen PPS Mining Pool 2% Fee  <<<  Join Now
juhakall
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 422



View Profile
December 17, 2012, 04:44:15 AM
 #3845

Actual share are not important as it is not much useful to the user/miner.

I think what juhakall wants is a SUM of total shares submitted in diff 1 format

That's right, I even tried to demonstrate it with my example, but I believe Inaba somehow still misunderstood what I'm asking. I agree that the terms we're using here are not very well defined, for example what does "actual shares" mean to different people? I thought terms like "total amount of work done" would make sense to a pool op.

At least this part should be unambiguous: "If I have submitted 1000 diff1 shares, 1000 diff2 shares and 1000 diff4 shares, it doesn't make much sense to tell me that I've submitted 3000 shares."
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
December 17, 2012, 05:39:49 AM
 #3846

That's what I am asking.  Does anyone see a need for having actual shares displayed vs diff1 shares?   Currently it's actual shares and I will change it to diff1 shares assuming there are no objections.

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
juhakall
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 422



View Profile
December 17, 2012, 05:48:33 AM
 #3847

Oh, sorry for the confusion then. I thought you were thinking that it's fine as it is, when you were just asking if anyone has objections to the change.

I'm very good at being misunderstood and misunderstanding others myself!
mufa23
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


I'd fight Gandhi.


View Profile
December 20, 2012, 07:47:37 PM
 #3848


I've had my miners on us1 for awhile. I just noticed that it said it was "Moving", even though my miners are still connected to something and shares are being submitted. Is us1 being forwarded to us2/us3, or should I manually point my miners to one of the two other servers?


Positive rep with: pekv2, AzN1337c0d3r, Vince Torres, underworld07, Chimsley, omegaaf, Bogart, Gleason, SuperTramp, John K. and guitarplinker
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
December 20, 2012, 08:34:35 PM
 #3849

Yeah, US1 is redirected to US2.  As long as you aren't pointing to the IP directly, it should be mining on US2 now with no problems.

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
Math Man
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 150


View Profile
December 23, 2012, 09:45:30 PM
 #3850

I'm not able to get work from US2.  Thanks for your diligence for keeping this pool running well for quite some time, Inaba.
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
December 23, 2012, 09:52:27 PM
 #3851

Got a ticket in for it now ... should be up in a few minutes.  Once I get US1 moved, I will pull US2 and get the RAM replaced.

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
mufa23
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


I'd fight Gandhi.


View Profile
December 23, 2012, 09:58:35 PM
 #3852

Yeah, everything's back up. I'm connected to us1.

Positive rep with: pekv2, AzN1337c0d3r, Vince Torres, underworld07, Chimsley, omegaaf, Bogart, Gleason, SuperTramp, John K. and guitarplinker
BlackPrapor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 584



View Profile
December 24, 2012, 11:04:00 AM
 #3853

Hey Inaba! What's up with blocks not being counted as found? I found one block within the last 21h, and its just not on the EMC website. Here are the screenshots. I'm waiting for an "in-debt explanation"  Roll Eyes


There is no place like 127.0.0.1
In blockchain we trust
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
December 24, 2012, 03:54:01 PM
 #3854

You might have to ask Con about how block reporting works, I'm not sure.  I know there was some question recently about a similar subject (I think it was a max share issue) that reported erroneous difficulty levels or shares.  There was a problem with US3 yesterday, but I can't imagine the problem would result in reporting erroneous blocks.  Do you have any idea what time that took place?

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
BlackPrapor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 584



View Profile
December 24, 2012, 08:37:56 PM
 #3855

You might have to ask Con about how block reporting works, I'm not sure.  I know there was some question recently about a similar subject (I think it was a max share issue) that reported erroneous difficulty levels or shares.  There was a problem with US3 yesterday, but I can't imagine the problem would result in reporting erroneous blocks.  Do you have any idea what time that took place?
I'll ask Con about the possibility of erroneous block reports, but I just have no idea what time it was. All I can say if somewhere between the time I took those screenshots and the start timer on those screens. that's 21 hours I believe. I've got logs, if that helps.

There is no place like 127.0.0.1
In blockchain we trust
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
December 24, 2012, 08:40:07 PM
 #3856

You might have to ask Con about how block reporting works, I'm not sure.  I know there was some question recently about a similar subject (I think it was a max share issue) that reported erroneous difficulty levels or shares.  There was a problem with US3 yesterday, but I can't imagine the problem would result in reporting erroneous blocks.  Do you have any idea what time that took place?
I'll ask Con about the possibility of erroneous block reports, but I just have no idea what time it was. All I can say if somewhere between the time I took those screenshots and the start timer on those screens. that's 21 hours I believe. I've got logs, if that helps.
Logs might have the block hash. The misreported difficulty issue should not have affected the block detection.

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
December 24, 2012, 09:26:18 PM
 #3857

You might have to ask Con about how block reporting works, I'm not sure.  I know there was some question recently about a similar subject (I think it was a max share issue) that reported erroneous difficulty levels or shares.  There was a problem with US3 yesterday, but I can't imagine the problem would result in reporting erroneous blocks.  Do you have any idea what time that took place?
I'll ask Con about the possibility of erroneous block reports, but I just have no idea what time it was. All I can say if somewhere between the time I took those screenshots and the start timer on those screens. that's 21 hours I believe. I've got logs, if that helps.
grep BLOCK xyz.log

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
December 25, 2012, 03:27:54 AM
 #3858

Was that miner on US2 or US3?  US2 was fine during that whole time, but US3 was having some issues... but as I said, it should not have reported a found block regardless.

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
BlackPrapor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 584



View Profile
December 25, 2012, 10:29:17 AM
 #3859

Was that miner on US2 or US3?  US2 was fine during that whole time, but US3 was having some issues... but as I said, it should not have reported a found block regardless.

its on US3 server. How does a found block text look like in the log file?

There is no place like 127.0.0.1
In blockchain we trust
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
December 26, 2012, 08:04:57 AM
 #3860

Was that miner on US2 or US3?  US2 was fine during that whole time, but US3 was having some issues... but as I said, it should not have reported a found block regardless.

its on US3 server. How does a found block text look like in the log file?
That's what my grep command is for Tongue
Look for the upper case word BLOCK in the log

Anyway, my last block looked like this:
[2012-11-28 18:02:55] Accepted 0000002b Diff 99.2M/8 BLOCK! ICA 0 pool 0

That was cgminer 2.9.5a - but it still looks the same.
Anyway, the word "BLOCK", which I put in there 15 months ago, hasn't changed Tongue

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
Pages: « 1 ... 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 [193] 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 »
  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!