Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 07:51:09 PM *
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  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3160 (80.5%)
Bank transfer / USD - 407 (10.4%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 359 (9.1%)
Total Voters: 3924

Pages: « 1 ... 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 [570] 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 ... 1105 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3931614 times)
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
August 02, 2013, 11:09:38 PM
 #11381

How comes BTC are only 3 times bigger, yet find a massive order of magnitude more blocks more regularly?

Variance is big, even for large pools.  Also...your data from BTC Guild is significantly out of order.  BTC Guild's average block solve time is ~30-45 minutes.  Slush's is ~2 hours (doing rough math).

That is *average* time.  Both pools have rounds lasting seconds/a few minutes, or multiple hours.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
1481313069
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481313069

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481313069
Reply with quote  #2

1481313069
Report to moderator
"In a nutshell, the network works like a distributed timestamp server, stamping the first transaction to spend a coin. It takes advantage of the nature of information being easy to spread but hard to stifle." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481313069
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481313069

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481313069
Reply with quote  #2

1481313069
Report to moderator
1481313069
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481313069

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481313069
Reply with quote  #2

1481313069
Report to moderator
bigbeninlondon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
August 02, 2013, 11:38:11 PM
 #11382

How comes BTC are only 3 times bigger, yet find a massive order of magnitude more blocks more regularly?

Variance is big, even for large pools.  Also...your data from BTC Guild is significantly out of order.  BTC Guild's average block solve time is ~30-45 minutes.  Slush's is ~2 hours (doing rough math).

That is *average* time.  Both pools have rounds lasting seconds/a few minutes, or multiple hours.

Slush for the last month has averaged about 1:23:04 per block.  The last 14 days has been about 1:25:09.  Just FYI; I keep track. Smiley
Trongersoll
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448


Retired Software Engineer


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 12:05:22 AM
 #11383

How comes BTC are only 3 times bigger, yet find a massive order of magnitude more blocks more regularly?

Variance is big, even for large pools.  Also...your data from BTC Guild is significantly out of order.  BTC Guild's average block solve time is ~30-45 minutes.  Slush's is ~2 hours (doing rough math).

That is *average* time.  Both pools have rounds lasting seconds/a few minutes, or multiple hours.

Slush for the last month has averaged about 1:23:04 per block.  The last 14 days has been about 1:25:09.  Just FYI; I keep track. Smiley

good to know, long blocks are just frustrating.

*insert appropriate begging line here* 
BTC: 1CS6AV7VnjcPLxaTFoUhTjXK4mQCTzfSxE
Doge: DB22tiynvXKg7SyPpnH9jyfitKLTZb6ejc
drewage
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 85



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 02:36:37 AM
 #11384

Anybody thinking this block is a little light?


19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644     22010   0.00193569      249905   25.17464593    92 confirmations left

BTC: 1iCmUC88RkQFfSUR1vj6eq2mnhjoEBXvH
thebrit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168

Make the Bitcoin, don't let the Bitcoin make you.


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 02:48:03 AM
 #11385

Anybody thinking this block is a little light?


19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644     22010   0.00193569      249905   25.17464593    92 confirmations left

Concur:

19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644   3904704   0.34637969    249905   25.17464593    90 confirmations left

This is half the production of my previous 20 blocks... and the estimated reward for the next block ....

anyone?

bitzip
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 54



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 02:50:05 AM
 #11386

Anybody thinking this block is a little light?


19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644     22010   0.00193569      249905   25.17464593    92 confirmations left

It seems light to me also.  Almost half what I usually average.
angryrob
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 251



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 03:07:05 AM
 #11387

yep, light on my end too. hope it gets a recalc sometime.

hope we get some freakin better luck sometime too... lol

bspurloc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 569


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 03:31:26 AM
 #11388

19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644   25325   0.00213075   249905   25.17464593    86 confirmations left

yeah totally wrong
bigbeninlondon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 03:49:26 AM
 #11389

That's my third low block today.  First one got fixed just before confirmation; second on is height 249854, although that one may have seen some downtime on my miners.  Either way, bummer to see 3x in one day.
NoDisco
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 07:57:11 AM
 #11390

Variance is big, even for large pools.  Also...your data from BTC Guild is significantly out of order. 
How is it out of order? The times are in the order when the blocks finish.

I looked over the last 100 blocks and there was only 1 block out of 100 that took over 1 hour to be found. So the variance seems very small to me - they have multiple blocks finishing per hour all day long.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
August 03, 2013, 08:10:06 AM
 #11391

Variance is big, even for large pools.  Also...your data from BTC Guild is significantly out of order.
How is it out of order? The times are in the order when the blocks finish.

I looked over the last 100 blocks and there was only 1 block out of 100 that took over 1 hour to be found. So the variance seems very small to me - they have multiple blocks finishing per hour all day long.

It looks like you clicked the date/time column to sort for your copy+paste.  The sorting on the column isn't aware of context (notice the switching between AM and PM on the timestamps).  Sort by block ID to get the proper order.  BTC Guild has long blocks daily (I would know, I run it).  The difference is, a LONG block for BTC Guild is ~2 hours.  An abnormally unlucky round (something you would only expect to see every 500-1000 blocks) would be 4 hours.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
willinliv
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 26


View Profile WWW
August 03, 2013, 08:32:52 AM
 #11392

Anybody thinking this block is a little light?


19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644     22010   0.00193569      249905   25.17464593    92 confirmations left

I think I lucked out with that one - highest earnings on a single round so far for me! Thank you for your donations:

19423   2013-08-03 06:15:47   2:28:32   54379598   4192   0.00211264   249940   25.44683309    86 confirmations left
19422   2013-08-03 03:47:15   1:54:27   42104601   3140   0.00178380   249923   25.05371000    69 confirmations left
19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644   11999   0.00971988   249905   25.17464593    51 confirmations left
19420   2013-08-02 18:42:54   0:02:03   759065   68   0.00217892   249855   25.08682056    1 confirmations left

Raspberry Pi block erector build: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=255582 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=255582)
Any use consider a bonation: 1PhtdmAhwUB2ywGiYGEYHLY7ponXykKfBY
angryrob
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 251



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 08:49:33 AM
 #11393

my score reset right before 19425 ended, hoping that one and 19421 both get a recalc before they are confirmed.

kabopar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 08:53:24 AM
 #11394

Anybody thinking this block is a little light?


19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644     22010   0.00193569      249905   25.17464593    92 confirmations left

I think I lucked out with that one - highest earnings on a single round so far for me! Thank you for your donations:

19423   2013-08-03 06:15:47   2:28:32   54379598   4192   0.00211264   249940   25.44683309    86 confirmations left
19422   2013-08-03 03:47:15   1:54:27   42104601   3140   0.00178380   249923   25.05371000    69 confirmations left
19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644   11999   0.00971988   249905   25.17464593    51 confirmations left
19420   2013-08-02 18:42:54   0:02:03   759065   68   0.00217892   249855   25.08682056    1 confirmations left
at least someone benefits from our losses.... Grin
angryrob
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 251



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 09:00:00 AM
 #11395

hmmm 19425 fixed and normal for me now.

wonder what is up with 19421. I'd almost say it was just my own bad luck (variance) but so many other people also posted about it. oh well, i'm not ganna sweat about 1 round being a bit low.

19419 was invalid tho? just noticed this. super bummer. i had a pretty nice reward on that one too lol

gravitate
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


www.thegreatmango.com


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 09:15:49 AM
 #11396

Name   ID   Temp   MH/s   Accept   Reject   Error   Utility   Last Share Time
AMU   0   0   335.66   258   0   35   0.29   21:03:55
AMU   1   0   335.72   269   1   54   0.3   21:11:22
AMU   2   0   335.57   266   1   32   0.3   21:10:29
AMU   3   0   335.98   281   2   34   0.31   21:10:37
AMU   4   0   335.71   245   0   39   0.27   21:07:18
AMU   5   0   335.93   269   0   45   0.3   21:11:54
AMU   6   0   335.95   269   1   45   0.3   21:11:50
AMU   7   0   335.72   256   1   42   0.28   21:10:09
AMU   8   0   335.77   252   0   40   0.28   21:07:05
AMU   9   0   348.97   22   2   1922   0.02   21:06:55
AMU   10   0   335.97   261   0   42   0.29   21:12:26
AMU   11   0   335.57   248   1   46   0.28   21:12:40
Totals   12      4042.52   2896   9   2376   3.22   


I seem to be getting a lot of errors. Is this normal?

INVALID BBCODE: close of unopened tag in table (1)
chunglam
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 221



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 09:25:00 AM
 #11397

hmmm 19425 fixed and normal for me now.

wonder what is up with 19421. I'd almost say it was just my own bad luck (variance) but so many other people also posted about it. oh well, i'm not ganna sweat about 1 round being a bit low.

19419 was invalid tho? just noticed this. super bummer. i had a pretty nice reward on that one too lol
Same here for #19421, only 60% of average reward per round and my connection to pool for that round should be same as usual.

19421   2013-08-03 01:52:48   7:09:54   160946644   265926   0.02419936   249905   25.17464593    43 confirmations left

gravitate
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


www.thegreatmango.com


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 09:52:19 AM
 #11398

ps i am a noob. Do my stats look normal?

Name   ID   Temp   MH/s   Accept   Reject   Error   Utility   Last Share Time
AMU   0   0   335.66   258   0   35   0.29   21:03:55
AMU   1   0   335.72   269   1   54   0.3   21:11:22
AMU   2   0   335.57   266   1   32   0.3   21:10:29
AMU   3   0   335.98   281   2   34   0.31   21:10:37
AMU   4   0   335.71   245   0   39   0.27   21:07:18
AMU   5   0   335.93   269   0   45   0.3   21:11:54
AMU   6   0   335.95   269   1   45   0.3   21:11:50
AMU   7   0   335.72   256   1   42   0.28   21:10:09
AMU   8   0   335.77   252   0   40   0.28   21:07:05
AMU   9   0   348.97   22   2   1922   0.02   21:06:55
AMU   10   0   335.97   261   0   42   0.29   21:12:26
AMU   11   0   335.57   248   1   46   0.28   21:12:40
Totals   12      4042.52   2896   9   2376   3.22   

INVALID BBCODE: close of unopened tag in table (1)
aurel57
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
August 03, 2013, 10:25:29 AM
 #11399

ps i am a noob. Do my stats look normal?

Name   ID   Temp   MH/s   Accept   Reject   Error   Utility   Last Share Time
AMU   0   0   335.66   258   0   35   0.29   21:03:55
AMU   1   0   335.72   269   1   54   0.3   21:11:22
AMU   2   0   335.57   266   1   32   0.3   21:10:29
AMU   3   0   335.98   281   2   34   0.31   21:10:37
AMU   4   0   335.71   245   0   39   0.27   21:07:18
AMU   5   0   335.93   269   0   45   0.3   21:11:54
AMU   6   0   335.95   269   1   45   0.3   21:11:50
AMU   7   0   335.72   256   1   42   0.28   21:10:09
AMU   8   0   335.77   252   0   40   0.28   21:07:05
AMU   9   0   348.97   22   2   1922   0.02   21:06:55
AMU   10   0   335.97   261   0   42   0.29   21:12:26
AMU   11   0   335.57   248   1   46   0.28   21:12:40
Totals   12      4042.52   2896   9   2376   3.22   

I take it you have USB Eruptors? what kind of hub are you using? Port 9 is way off...if the power supply is right and cooling I only see less than 1% error on mine. So all yours seem to have a high error rate and like I said port 9 is way off.

I also hope #19421 gets fixed.
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
August 03, 2013, 10:47:21 AM
 #11400

Rookie question:

I have 9 of the Block Erupter USB sticks hashing all on the same rig, which averages about 3 Gh/s.  Should I set the difficulty for the worker to 2, since the total hashing power is over 2 Gh/s, or should I keep it at one, since each stick only has 335 Mh/s of power?

Keep at 1, else endless discarded.

?
I've always believed that the rig should behave like one worker with combined power. Is there any reason for discarded shares other than bad configuration/setting?
Pages: « 1 ... 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 [570] 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 ... 1105 »
  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!