[1200 TH] EMC: 0 Fee DGM. Anonymous PPS. US & EU servers. No Registration!

[BlackPrapor]

Try the latest version of CGMiner (or BFGMiner) and let me know if you're still getting stales.  Use US2 or US3 as well, since those are closer to your boxes than US1 is.

As far as NMC goes, Namecoin is falling apart... it's going to be disabled soon.  If you look at the Namecoin list, they are almost all showing up as invalid.  The whole Namecoin protocol for merged mining is a shambles and it's more trouble than it's worth.

I've updated cgminer, just to find that a new version came out, so I need to update again =)). Now it seems to run smooth, rejects are at usual level. Its sad to hear that nmc is falling apart. They could've used it for website certification, digital documents signing and just the obvious ID verification. But as we know, some of these can be provided by bitcoin. Its strange that your pool has lots of invalids for nmc, as bitminter doesn't. But bitminter experiences regular namecoind crashes, which affect bitcoin mining.

[davecoin]

Anyone else having trouble connecting to stratum this morning?  I noticed none of my miners were connected and they all switched to the backup pool.  Any ideas?

[Inaba]

One of my machines is mining stratum on US3 with no problems.  What server are you on?

[davecoin]

us2, they are connecting fine now but stats are not updating.  It shows last activity of 12hrs.  

edit: switched to us3 and stats updated.

[Inaba]

Ok... US2 should be catching up now.  I am going to pull that server and try to figure out what's wrong with it.  I suspect a bad stick of memory at this point.

I have been waiting to get a new US1 server installed as well as bringing back EU and PACRIM... I will try to make that a priority this week.

-EDIT-

*BANGS HEAD* ... the server tech just took the wrong server offline.  It will be back up shortly.

[runlinux]

I think US1 is down...

[Askit2]

Seconded the thought US1 is down.

[Inaba]

Yeah, US1 was down.  I really need to move that server.  It should be back up now.

[juhakall]

"My Shares" column in block history is displaying the amount of shares submitted, which is not very useful when using vardiff. It should be changed to show the combined difficulty of those shares.

[Inaba]

I'm not really sure what you mean.  How is it any less or more useful than before?

[juhakall]

Knowing the amount of shares I submitted during a round isn't useful, when the shares have dynamic difficulty. For example, some shares may have been submitted at diff 2, others at diff 4, especially if my hashrate isn't constant. Total accepted difficulty would be a more meaningful stat. You already calculate this in a similar way on the "Diff1 Shares (Actual)" column - I presume the number in parentheses is the number of shares accepted, while the bigger number represents total accepted difficulty.

[Inaba]

Hmm... ok, so when you say accepted difficulty, what do you mean specifically?  Like an aggregate or average?  I'm certainly willing to change it.

[juhakall]

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.

[Inaba]

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?

[juhakall]

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]

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

[juhakall]

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]

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.

[juhakall]

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]

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?