Bitcoin Forum
September 25, 2016, 12:17:20 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.0 (New!) [Torrent]. Make sure you verify it.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3151 (80.4%)
Bank transfer / USD - 407 (10.4%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 359 (9.2%)
Total Voters: 3915

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 ... 1103 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3852323 times)
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 01:29:23 AM
 #13761

If it was orphaned, why did I just get BTC from it??? Will they take that back?
You haven't got confirmed BTC from it.  It will be deducted from the total as soon as it is flagged as Invalid.

Rather galling, considering that our result was timed first (by one second).

You can send ghash.io your thanks on that one.  Their connectivity with the majority of nodes/pools is downright malicious in how bad it is.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
1474762640
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762640

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762640
Reply with quote  #2

1474762640
Report to moderator
1474762640
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762640

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762640
Reply with quote  #2

1474762640
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1474762640
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762640

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762640
Reply with quote  #2

1474762640
Report to moderator
1474762640
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762640

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762640
Reply with quote  #2

1474762640
Report to moderator
1474762640
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762640

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762640
Reply with quote  #2

1474762640
Report to moderator
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 01:55:13 AM
 #13762

If it was orphaned, why did I just get BTC from it??? Will they take that back?
You haven't got confirmed BTC from it.  It will be deducted from the total as soon as it is flagged as Invalid.

Rather galling, considering that our result was timed first (by one second).

You can send ghash.io your thanks on that one.  Their connectivity with the majority of nodes/pools is downright malicious in how bad it is.

How can ghash.io negatively influence another pool's orphan rate? I can see how being well connected can reduce their own orphan rate, but how can they increase someone else's orphan rate? 


Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 03:20:39 AM
 #13763

If it was orphaned, why did I just get BTC from it??? Will they take that back?
You haven't got confirmed BTC from it.  It will be deducted from the total as soon as it is flagged as Invalid.

Rather galling, considering that our result was timed first (by one second).

You can send ghash.io your thanks on that one.  Their connectivity with the majority of nodes/pools is downright malicious in how bad it is.

How can ghash.io negatively influence another pool's orphan rate? I can see how being well connected can reduce their own orphan rate, but how can they increase someone else's orphan rate? 



Most pools are in at least decent datacenters, which happens to mean they have low latencies with the other pools since they're both close to backbone bandwidth providers.  This reduces overall network orphan rate because the average time between block notifications between the majority of the network hash rate is significantly lower than what it would be between people just running on random local ISPs.  At the same time, GHash.io has abysmal latency and/or absolutely no peers setup between pools, or they're purposely ignoring competing blocks sometimes based on the sheer number of orphan races they compete in.  This is based on admittedly more casual observation rather than deep analysis, but I know other pool ops have been seeing more losing orphan races than usual as a result of ghash.io.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
kendog77
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 03:38:22 AM
 #13764

If it was orphaned, why did I just get BTC from it??? Will they take that back?
You haven't got confirmed BTC from it.  It will be deducted from the total as soon as it is flagged as Invalid.

Rather galling, considering that our result was timed first (by one second).

You can send ghash.io your thanks on that one.  Their connectivity with the majority of nodes/pools is downright malicious in how bad it is.

How can ghash.io negatively influence another pool's orphan rate? I can see how being well connected can reduce their own orphan rate, but how can they increase someone else's orphan rate? 



Most pools are in at least decent datacenters, which happens to mean they have low latencies with the other pools since they're both close to backbone bandwidth providers.  This reduces overall network orphan rate because the average time between block notifications between the majority of the network hash rate is significantly lower than what it would be between people just running on random local ISPs.  At the same time, GHash.io has abysmal latency and/or absolutely no peers setup between pools, or they're purposely ignoring competing blocks sometimes based on the sheer number of orphan races they compete in.  This is based on admittedly more casual observation rather than deep analysis, but I know other pool ops have been seeing more losing orphan races than usual as a result of ghash.io.

Hopefully ghash.io is not testing out the selfish mining strategy...
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 05:39:33 AM
 #13765

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).

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 06:18:23 AM
 #13766

How can ghash.io negatively influence another pool's orphan rate? I can see how being well connected can reduce their own orphan rate, but how can they increase someone else's orphan rate? 



Most pools are in at least decent datacenters, which happens to mean they have low latencies with the other pools since they're both close to backbone bandwidth providers.  This reduces overall network orphan rate because the average time between block notifications between the majority of the network hash rate is significantly lower than what it would be between people just running on random local ISPs.  At the same time, GHash.io has abysmal latency and/or absolutely no peers setup between pools, or they're purposely ignoring competing blocks sometimes based on the sheer number of orphan races they compete in.  This is based on admittedly more casual observation rather than deep analysis, but I know other pool ops have been seeing more losing orphan races than usual as a result of ghash.io.

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?

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 06:24:40 AM
 #13767

How can ghash.io negatively influence another pool's orphan rate? I can see how being well connected can reduce their own orphan rate, but how can they increase someone else's orphan rate? 



Most pools are in at least decent datacenters, which happens to mean they have low latencies with the other pools since they're both close to backbone bandwidth providers.  This reduces overall network orphan rate because the average time between block notifications between the majority of the network hash rate is significantly lower than what it would be between people just running on random local ISPs.  At the same time, GHash.io has abysmal latency and/or absolutely no peers setup between pools, or they're purposely ignoring competing blocks sometimes based on the sheer number of orphan races they compete in.  This is based on admittedly more casual observation rather than deep analysis, but I know other pool ops have been seeing more losing orphan races than usual as a result of ghash.io.

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'll do an exact count later.  They are not winning more orphan races than usual given their hash rate.  But for the most part, the seem to more often than not lose an orphan race to anybody else if they didn't solve the next block themselves (because rarely is their block the first seen by the rest of the network when they're in a race), and they definitely are participating in an unusually large number of orphan races for being ~30% of the network.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 08:04:33 AM
 #13768

If it was orphaned, why did I just get BTC from it??? Will they take that back?
You haven't got confirmed BTC from it.  It will be deducted from the total as soon as it is flagged as Invalid.

Rather galling, considering that our result was timed first (by one second).

Both block Timestamp and Time received on Blockchain.info is one second earlier for us...
It's a bit strange that somebody can influence the validity of our block later... It looks like a "xx % attack" (not literally, of course, but it works that way, even when xx < 50 %). When somebody ignores a block and builds on a newer one, that is his one... With enough power, it can make some gain.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 614


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 08:44:29 AM
 #13769

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
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 614


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 09:20:02 AM
 #13770

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: 1876


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
December 19, 2013, 10:32:16 AM
 #13771

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
 #13772

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
 #13773

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
 #13774


congrats pool with 0.5 petahash Cool

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

Activity: 614


View Profile
December 19, 2013, 03:42:40 PM
 #13775

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
 #13776

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: 1876


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
December 20, 2013, 11:01:16 PM
 #13777

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
 #13778


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
 #13779


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
 #13780


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
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 ... 1103 »
  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!