Bitcoin Forum
February 19, 2017, 12:04:39 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.2  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3170 (80.5%)
Bank transfer / USD - 408 (10.4%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 359 (9.1%)
Total Voters: 3935

Pages: « 1 ... 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 [689] 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 ... 1109 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [150+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 4012017 times)
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 631


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 08:44:29 AM
 #13761

And another one - 275792
This time ours is 15 sec earlier, but GHash.IO found two in a row in less than a minute.

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 631


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 09:20:02 AM
 #13762

Hopefully ghash.io is not testing out the selfish mining strategy...

I'm more inclined to say incompetence over malice.  I honestly think they don't have the slightest clue what they're doing when it comes to setting up a pool and bitcoind node, as demonstrated by their almost daily outages of either their public pool or private mining side (or both).
On my opinion the problem is that most of their hashing power is in locations with low cost electricity and space, which is usually in locations with bad connectivity (at the end of the world and a bit further). Because of that each datacenter is working on it's own mostly, with just few outside connections to synchronize with the network.

So you mean that GHash.IO are could be causing more orphan races than usual, rather than winning more orphan races than usual? Or both?

Am I right in assuming that this is only an issue because they have such a large chunk of the pie?
I think it's both (causing and winning), because of large chunk separated from badly connected to the network.

It was similar when ASICminer had a big chunk in a single location with good connectivity - GHash.IO have it in few with bad connectivity, so the problem appeared a bit earlier.

There should be no single entity with much power (no more than 25%), but there is also another reason causing the big number of orphans - the rate is 9.63 blocks per hour, which is also 30+% over the normal rate for the network. Once it drops below 20% the things will normalize.

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 10:32:16 AM
 #13763

So you mean that GHash.IO are could be causing more orphan races than usual, rather than winning more orphan races than usual? Or both?

Am I right in assuming that this is only an issue because they have such a large chunk of the pie?
I think it's both (causing and winning), because of large chunk separated from badly connected to the network.

It was similar when ASICminer had a big chunk in a single location with good connectivity - GHash.IO have it in few with bad connectivity, so the problem appeared a bit earlier.

There should be no single entity with much power (no more than 25%), but there is also another reason causing the big number of orphans - the rate is 9.63 blocks per hour, which is also 30+% over the normal rate for the network. Once it drops below 20% the things will normalize.


I'm not quite following you there - BTCGuild has had well over 30% of the hashrate at times and has not caused similar issues.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
phrozenspite
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 12:10:41 PM
 #13764

hey slush or another admin can you check the helpdesk for the site?

Sir Alan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 221


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 12:36:07 PM
 #13765

And another one - 275792
This time ours is 15 sec earlier, but GHash.IO found two in a row in less than a minute.
“Mr Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: 'Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action'.”

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
AlexeyK
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 01:49:44 PM
 #13766


congrats pool with 0.5 petahash Cool

if you think that i deserve it
185h9KXxW2Efx6ynFM61ydUKsRNaVWUobs
or GLC -  GQjVzfk3k8gb3Cy65mBUf4ADkNNTRHgsx8
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 631


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 03:42:40 PM
 #13767

I'm not quite following you there - BTCGuild has had well over 30% of the hashrate at times and has not caused similar issues.
I was conservative with the 25% figure and it was not based on some calculations (yes, you can say it's out of thin air), but ...

There are hundreds of thousands peers on the network and each client connects to up to 8 or 16 peers, some are connected to more (accepting inbound connections and no nat), but still there are several hops required to connect all.
Lets say Pool A has huge chunk of the hashing power, but is well connected to other (100+) peers and some pools - those pools won't have problems. A solo miner may still produce an orphan block if not well connected, which is his own problem and will rarely happen, but ...
There is a Pool B with similar (good) connectivity and also large chunk of the hashspeed, which does not have direct connection to Pool A or any of it's peers, but to some other set of pools - the end result is an increased chance for the network to be split and with that comes an increased chance for orphan blocks from both sides.
If the block generation rate is slow normal - 10min are enough for the blocks to pass from Pool A to Pool B, but for short blocks (like it is now) the chance for orphans increases.

Right now the situation is exactly that - GHash.IO is separated from the rest of the pools, which are well connected via the same backbone providers and has a large chunk of the power, but at the same time is connected to enough peers to propagate their work to the network.

I hope this explanation is more clear what i meant.

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
bspurloc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 569


View Profile
December 20, 2013, 10:29:34 PM
 #13768

is the slush mining proxy flakey?
 Got my blades going 10+gh/s now. had 2 pointed at a bfg proxy and 1 pointed at slush's mining proxy.
The one pointed at his proxy reported for the last 8 hours 10.9gh/s while slush pool reported the blade was only doing 9.6gh/s. That is too much of a different to be luck etc...
I then pointed that blade at a bfg proxy, I did not reboot the blade. I simply stopped the slush miner and made bfg take over at that IP/port. It immediately started to rise above 9.6gh/s on the pool and was at 10.6 on the next block as it delcared it was doing.
All the same network, same pc, same everything, so it 100% was the slush mining proxy skimming 1gh/s off.
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
December 20, 2013, 11:01:16 PM
 #13769

I hope this explanation is more clear what i meant.

Thanks for the clarification.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
BuhTuglia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137



View Profile WWW
December 20, 2013, 11:52:02 PM
 #13770


Who's getting all the blocks now? Private pools, or tera-hashing solo miners? I know it ain't us.

Just another dust miner... Enquiring Gnomes want to Mine!
Send nothing to 16SVa2iQA6HuNPDGYShpmeEvUBRi2gW7f1
laureen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 8


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 12:40:23 AM
 #13771


Who's getting all the blocks now? Private pools, or tera-hashing solo miners? I know it ain't us.


sorry for the dumb question - i'm still learning - but are you asking this because your miner also stopped to work as mine?

when i restart bfgminer, it tells me:

Code:
[2013-12-21 01:29:45] Probing for an alive pool
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 alive
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Network difficulty changed to 908M ( 6.50Ph/s)
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us
[2013-12-21 01:29:54] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:23] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:24] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
...

Would someone be so kind to describe what "Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us" means?

Thank you in advance!

BTC: 14SUxr1PfJ9aX1BuUR9PgULzYxrhMWt5Fz
BuhTuglia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137



View Profile WWW
December 21, 2013, 01:42:50 AM
 #13772


Who's getting all the blocks now? Private pools, or tera-hashing solo miners? I know it ain't us.


sorry for the dumb question - i'm still learning - but are you asking this because your miner also stopped to work as mine?

when i restart bfgminer, it tells me:

Code:
[2013-12-21 01:29:45] Probing for an alive pool
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 alive
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Network difficulty changed to 908M ( 6.50Ph/s)
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us
[2013-12-21 01:29:54] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:23] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:24] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
...

Would someone be so kind to describe what "Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us" means?

Thank you in advance!

My BJGminer says that all the  time too, and continues to work normally, so I just ignore it. Yes, I'd be curious to know what it means too. I'm sure it's been explained on here many times, but I can't find it.

russell
     

Just another dust miner... Enquiring Gnomes want to Mine!
Send nothing to 16SVa2iQA6HuNPDGYShpmeEvUBRi2gW7f1
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
December 21, 2013, 02:18:39 AM
 #13773


Who's getting all the blocks now? Private pools, or tera-hashing solo miners? I know it ain't us.


sorry for the dumb question - i'm still learning - but are you asking this because your miner also stopped to work as mine?

when i restart bfgminer, it tells me:

Code:
[2013-12-21 01:29:45] Probing for an alive pool
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 alive
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Network difficulty changed to 908M ( 6.50Ph/s)
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us
[2013-12-21 01:29:54] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:23] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:24] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
...

Would someone be so kind to describe what "Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us" means?

Thank you in advance!

My BJGminer says that all the  time too, and continues to work normally, so I just ignore it. Yes, I'd be curious to know what it means too. I'm sure it's been explained on here many times, but I can't find it.

russell
     

Hiding block contents just means the pool doesn't let you request the full raw block of data.  AFAIK none of the stratum pools have this enabled at the moment.  bfgminer complains about that.  Transparency would be nice, but it's at the cost of massive bandwidth requirements (raw block contents can be 300-500 KB or more), creating an easy way for malicious users to cause massive bills/exhaust available connection bandwidth.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
BuhTuglia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137



View Profile WWW
December 21, 2013, 02:25:32 AM
 #13774


Who's getting all the blocks now? Private pools, or tera-hashing solo miners? I know it ain't us.


sorry for the dumb question - i'm still learning - but are you asking this because your miner also stopped to work as mine?

when i restart bfgminer, it tells me:

Code:
[2013-12-21 01:29:45] Probing for an alive pool
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 alive
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Network difficulty changed to 908M ( 6.50Ph/s)
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2013-12-21 01:29:46] Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us
[2013-12-21 01:29:54] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:23] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2013-12-21 01:30:24] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
...

Would someone be so kind to describe what "Pool 0 is hiding block contents from us" means?

Thank you in advance!

My BJGminer says that all the  time too, and continues to work normally, so I just ignore it. Yes, I'd be curious to know what it means too. I'm sure it's been explained on here many times, but I can't find it.

russell
      

Hiding block contents just means the pool doesn't let you request the full raw block of data.  AFAIK none of the stratum pools have this enabled at the moment.  bfgminer complains about that.  Transparency would be nice, but it's at the cost of massive bandwidth requirements (raw block contents can be 300-500 KB or more), creating an easy way for malicious users to cause massive bills/exhaust available connection bandwidth.

I see... thanks for the info... very interesting, and sensible.

russell

Just another dust miner... Enquiring Gnomes want to Mine!
Send nothing to 16SVa2iQA6HuNPDGYShpmeEvUBRi2gW7f1
dbell
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 59


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 02:55:47 AM
 #13775

I have a some older technology Getwork miners working through a Stratum Proxy hashing on Slush.  Running around 50 to 70 GH combined

I had one recent round, 21228, where I had no reward for any shares.  What is up?  The value formula indicates the reward should have been 0.0013 BTC.  "The reward earned by a given user is given by the following formula:
(25 BTC + block fees - 2% fee) * (shares found by user's workers) / (total shares in current round)"

Not much loss but it seems like something is wrong or I don't understand the BTC reward algorithm, or I don't undestand reward reporting.

Round  Duration   Total Shares     My Shares  BTC Reward    Block #    Block Value   Validation
21230   1:43:31   728080133           102720   0.00390706   276139   25.04945416    98 confirmations left
21229   9:39:26   4091124633         480476   0.00383220   276127   25.12559563    86 confirmations left
21228   4:35:30   1928606238         102602   0.00000000   276067   25.17414052    26 confirmations left
21227   0:46:16   323420163             47502   0.00321315   276036   25.06559435    confirmed
21226   0:14:56   104058374             13282   0.00321300   276031   25.01980000    confirmed
21225   1:07:44   472925199             64496   0.00285957   276029   25.20153852    confirmed
21224   0:04:17   29652709               4292    0.00351801   276018   25.03507003    confirmed
21223   1:52:10   783569002             58652   0.00273363   276016   25.05123438    confirmed

Round 21224 sure was a winner!
FiniteMatter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 07:04:59 AM
 #13776

I have a some older technology Getwork miners working through a Stratum Proxy hashing on Slush.  Running around 50 to 70 GH combined

I had one recent round, 21228, where I had no reward for any shares.  What is up?  The value formula indicates the reward should have been 0.0013 BTC.  "The reward earned by a given user is given by the following formula:
(25 BTC + block fees - 2% fee) * (shares found by user's workers) / (total shares in current round)"

Not much loss but it seems like something is wrong or I don't understand the BTC reward algorithm, or I don't undestand reward reporting.

Round  Duration   Total Shares     My Shares  BTC Reward    Block #    Block Value   Validation
21230   1:43:31   728080133           102720   0.00390706   276139   25.04945416    98 confirmations left
21229   9:39:26   4091124633         480476   0.00383220   276127   25.12559563    86 confirmations left
21228   4:35:30   1928606238         102602   0.00000000   276067   25.17414052    26 confirmations left
21227   0:46:16   323420163             47502   0.00321315   276036   25.06559435    confirmed
21226   0:14:56   104058374             13282   0.00321300   276031   25.01980000    confirmed
21225   1:07:44   472925199             64496   0.00285957   276029   25.20153852    confirmed
21224   0:04:17   29652709               4292    0.00351801   276018   25.03507003    confirmed
21223   1:52:10   783569002             58652   0.00273363   276016   25.05123438    confirmed

Round 21224 sure was a winner!

I've had the all zeros thing happen to me before too, but I found out that my miners weren't connected during that time because of an issue on my stratum proxy (nat'ing issue) so they weren't able to connect to the pool during that round. You sure everything was working as expected during that round for you? I'm guessing that since the next round shows results that it may not be the problem you were seeing, but thought I'd throw it out there just in case.
deagel
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 67


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 09:22:43 AM
 #13777

Hi,
i have a short question:

#      Block found at             Duration   Total shares   Your shares     Your BTC reward   Block #   Block value            Validity
21229   2013-12-21 00:36:48     9:39:26   4091124633   17590     0.00000000           276127   25.12559563    34 Bestätigungen ausstehend

My miner can't finished the block couse of an hardware problem but is it true that i get no reward or will it be calculated later?

thanks

deagel
kabopar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 10:36:40 AM
 #13778

difficulty just rose to 1180923195 (30% increase)
kabopar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 10:41:48 AM
 #13779

Hi,
i have a short question:

#      Block found at             Duration   Total shares   Your shares     Your BTC reward   Block #   Block value            Validity
21229   2013-12-21 00:36:48     9:39:26   4091124633   17590     0.00000000           276127   25.12559563    34 Bestätigungen ausstehend

My miner can't finished the block couse of an hardware problem but is it true that i get no reward or will it be calculated later?

thanks

deagel
It depends when did your hardware stop working, Slush uses an exponentially decaying function, the formula is somewhere in the FAQ or on this thread.  In some cases the reward is reported as zero or low, then it is updated to the correct value.  This may happen even if your system was hashing the full time.  If you stopped hashing a long enough time before the block was found, then your reward will reduce to almost nothing.  On the other hand if you hopped to another pool or had a hardware problem, but got back to Slush enough time before the end of the block, then you'll get essentially the full reward as if you were there 100% of the time...
deagel
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 67


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 10:50:53 AM
 #13780

Hi,
i have a short question:

#      Block found at             Duration   Total shares   Your shares     Your BTC reward   Block #   Block value            Validity
21229   2013-12-21 00:36:48     9:39:26   4091124633   17590     0.00000000           276127   25.12559563    34 Bestätigungen ausstehend

My miner can't finished the block couse of an hardware problem but is it true that i get no reward or will it be calculated later?

thanks

deagel
It depends when did your hardware stop working, Slush uses an exponentially decaying function, the formula is somewhere in the FAQ or on this thread.  In some cases the reward is reported as zero or low, then it is updated to the correct value.  This may happen even if your system was hashing the full time.  If you stopped hashing a long enough time before the block was found, then your reward will reduce to almost nothing.  On the other hand if you hopped to another pool or had a hardware problem, but got back to Slush enough time before the end of the block, then you'll get essentially the full reward as if you were there 100% of the time...

Thats meen the best way to loos not your reward is to mine with to workers. That if one is going down the second one safe your reward?
Pages: « 1 ... 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 [689] 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 ... 1109 »
  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!