Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 07:50:52 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 ... 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] 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 ... 1105 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3931605 times)
timmmers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322



View Profile
December 21, 2013, 10:53:07 AM
 #13781

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.


Same here, been that way for a week or more. Roughly 5 to 10% loss most of the time. Hashing at 140 give or take a couple and 120 to 130 shown on Slush. IF it carries on like this I'm off to find a pool that works.

1481313052
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481313052

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481313052
Reply with quote  #2

1481313052
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481313052
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481313052

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481313052
Reply with quote  #2

1481313052
Report to moderator
1481313052
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481313052

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481313052
Reply with quote  #2

1481313052
Report to moderator
kabopar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 11:19:01 AM
 #13782

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?
Smiley  the best way is to mine with all possible miners/workers that you have, and have a good power backup, good internet connection, then use a 'backup pool' so if your main pool goes down, you don't waste your mining resources and automatically switch to an alternative pool....Smiley
It probably doesn't matter if you group your miners into a single 'worker' or not, unless the separation into separate workers involves some redundancy that improves your overall reliability (such as if 2 workers have each a separate PC, if one PC fails the other one will keep going, but you'll have higher electricity costs...)
Mudbankkeith
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868



View Profile
December 21, 2013, 11:36:27 AM
 #13783

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?
Smiley  the best way is to mine with all possible miners/workers that you have, and have a good power backup, good internet connection, then use a 'backup pool' so if your main pool goes down, you don't waste your mining resources and automatically switch to an alternative pool....Smiley
It probably doesn't matter if you group your miners into a single 'worker' or not, unless the separation into separate workers involves some redundancy that improves your overall reliability (such as if 2 workers have each a separate PC, if one PC fails the other one will keep going, but you'll have higher electricity costs...)

Multiple Pi's is the route to good economic redundancy and easy failover, also for mining across multiple pools.     ................(or possibly beagle bones)

BTc donations welcome:-  13c2KuzWCaWFTXF171Zn1HrKhMYARPKv97
deagel
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 67


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 12:38:29 PM
 #13784

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?
Smiley  the best way is to mine with all possible miners/workers that you have, and have a good power backup, good internet connection, then use a 'backup pool' so if your main pool goes down, you don't waste your mining resources and automatically switch to an alternative pool....Smiley
It probably doesn't matter if you group your miners into a single 'worker' or not, unless the separation into separate workers involves some redundancy that improves your overall reliability (such as if 2 workers have each a separate PC, if one PC fails the other one will keep going, but you'll have higher electricity costs...)

Multiple Pi's is the route to good economic redundancy and easy failover, also for mining across multiple pools.     ................(or possibly beagle bones)

thanks for the information.
i have two pi's. the plan was to have one active and one for testing. know both are active and i split my asic's on both pi.
Mudbankkeith
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868



View Profile
December 21, 2013, 12:52:06 PM
 #13785

thanks for the information.
i have two pi's. the plan was to have one active and one for testing. know both are active and i split my asic's on both pi.

I now have 3Pi's and a spare SD card (cards do fail, especially when they are second hand, 2Gb micro SD off fleabay)

BTc donations welcome:-  13c2KuzWCaWFTXF171Zn1HrKhMYARPKv97
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 02:38:47 PM
 #13786

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?

:-)
Do you hope your second worker saving your first worker's reward, just by "masking" its absence by its own presence? This is not the case, each worker's hashrate/reward doesn't influence the other worker's reward at all. Shares from each worker are ageing/losing value independently of each other.
J_Dubbs
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 07:38:17 PM
 #13787

Wondering if this is normal...

Anyone else have slightly lower reported hash rate on some workers? Or maybe just ones running through stratum proxy?

For example, one of my blades is isolated as it's own worker, through the blade UI it says 99.7% efficiency and 10.7gh/s, but on my pool account view (ie, Slush Website) the worker is reporting 9.7gh/s.

Maybe worth mentioning, I have 8 other blades all on one worker account, sharing the same proxy, which also might be seeing the same reporting variance. I am going to split them all into separate workers later on to get a batter idea how each blade is performing.

Also, the one right now that is isolated will sometimes say "last share tome: 1 minute" on Slush account view, which makes me think it gets stuck waiting in line behind the worker with 8 blades on the same proxy.

"a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"
Learn something new?: 1hzpjSkWaxm7XaEMi5P2fL6hhxuj8gxyX
BuhTuglia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137



View Profile WWW
December 21, 2013, 07:42:02 PM
 #13788


This pool has gone to crap lately. Our luck is abysmal. The gods are angry. Someone must be sacrificed. I'd do it, but I have a dentist appointment Tuesday. Any volunteers?

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

Activity: 131

Hobby Miner


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 08:24:27 PM
 #13789

Yeah, last rounds are horrible. Pool luck went down to 52%. I'm in the hospital next week, so I'll sacrifice myself. Cheesy
mdopro1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


Double your Personal Bitcoin Funds.


View Profile WWW
December 21, 2013, 08:50:45 PM
 #13790

*W00t* I just finished making a custom aluminum enclosure for my blades that now almost looks like a KNCMiner Cheesy

I'll do a guide if other people want to know how I did it. Pic attached.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/00aipz3j8l9kyap/gen1complete.jpg


New Bitcoin fund doubling platform has launched!
Receive Automated Payment Every 2 Hours
Appealing alternative with Sophisticated algorithms.
https://Btc-Funds.com
Trongersoll
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448


Retired Software Engineer


View Profile
December 21, 2013, 11:29:16 PM
 #13791

Wondering if this is normal...

Anyone else have slightly lower reported hash rate on some workers? Or maybe just ones running through stratum proxy?

For example, one of my blades is isolated as it's own worker, through the blade UI it says 99.7% efficiency and 10.7gh/s, but on my pool account view (ie, Slush Website) the worker is reporting 9.7gh/s.

Maybe worth mentioning, I have 8 other blades all on one worker account, sharing the same proxy, which also might be seeing the same reporting variance. I am going to split them all into separate workers later on to get a batter idea how each blade is performing.

Also, the one right now that is isolated will sometimes say "last share tome: 1 minute" on Slush account view, which makes me think it gets stuck waiting in line behind the worker with 8 blades on the same proxy.

What you are seeing is pretty normal. It is because the pool bases hashrate on work returned and can be affected by variance. also, if you start in the middle of a round you'll see off kilter reporting.

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

Activity: 238


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 12:42:07 AM
 #13792

Wondering if this is normal...

Anyone else have slightly lower reported hash rate on some workers? Or maybe just ones running through stratum proxy?

For example, one of my blades is isolated as it's own worker, through the blade UI it says 99.7% efficiency and 10.7gh/s, but on my pool account view (ie, Slush Website) the worker is reporting 9.7gh/s.

Maybe worth mentioning, I have 8 other blades all on one worker account, sharing the same proxy, which also might be seeing the same reporting variance. I am going to split them all into separate workers later on to get a batter idea how each blade is performing.

Also, the one right now that is isolated will sometimes say "last share tome: 1 minute" on Slush account view, which makes me think it gets stuck waiting in line behind the worker with 8 blades on the same proxy.

What you are seeing is pretty normal. It is because the pool bases hashrate on work returned and can be affected by variance. also, if you start in the middle of a round you'll see off kilter reporting.

I've had all my stuff running for a few days, feel like this is just today it's a bit less. Should I reboot everything? This isn't a case of joining mid-round, but I should read up on scoring variance so I understand it. Thanks.

Edit: just realized all the miners reporting low on the pool website have one thing in common; they're the only ones running through proxy. My BFL Jally reports correctly and runs through BfGminer directly to pool, but it is also not competing for bandwidth like the blades are because it's USB.

"a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"
Learn something new?: 1hzpjSkWaxm7XaEMi5P2fL6hhxuj8gxyX
dbell
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 59


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 03:38:05 AM
 #13793

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!

It happened again.  I can see that I mined all the way through round 21233.  Never switched to the backup pool.  My shares for round 21233 are proportionally correct for the duration of the block.  No apparent dropouts from the Stratum Proxy.  Every thing looks correct except BTC reward for Round 21233 is ZERO!.  What's up with that?  Again, very little lost but it should have given me at least 0.0025 or so BTC for that round.  Something wrong with this one.  The exponential decay function could not have zero'ed my shares which were 1/10,000 of the total.  1/10,000 of 25 BTC is 0.0025, not zero.

Round  Duration      Total Shares   My Shares     BTC Reward   Block #    Block Value   Validation
21236   1:04:02       445846104     62580          0.00375781   276297   25.08008069    94 confirmations left
21235   0:31:04       215263719     33420          0.00407103   276290   25.07021854    87 confirmations left
21234   11:36:07     4869485213    455502        0.00342830   276286   25.20665744    83 confirmations left
21233   4:49:31       2040992243    193643        0.00000000   276206   25.04204200    3 confirmations left
21232   1:10:32       499330676      72415         0.00332870   276185   25.07522347    confirmed
21231   4:16:34       1810725132    255048        0.00335437   276177   25.03722000    confirmed
J_Dubbs
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 05:13:31 AM
 #13794

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!

It happened again.  I can see that I mined all the way through round 21233.  Never switched to the backup pool.  My shares for round 21233 are proportionally correct for the duration of the block.  No apparent dropouts from the Stratum Proxy.  Every thing looks correct except BTC reward for Round 21233 is ZERO!.  What's up with that?  Again, very little lost but it should have given me at least 0.0025 or so BTC for that round.  Something wrong with this one.  The exponential decay function could not have zero'ed my shares which were 1/10,000 of the total.  1/10,000 of 25 BTC is 0.0025, not zero.

Round  Duration      Total Shares   My Shares     BTC Reward   Block #    Block Value   Validation
21236   1:04:02       445846104     62580          0.00375781   276297   25.08008069    94 confirmations left
21235   0:31:04       215263719     33420          0.00407103   276290   25.07021854    87 confirmations left
21234   11:36:07     4869485213    455502        0.00342830   276286   25.20665744    83 confirmations left
21233   4:49:31       2040992243    193643        0.00000000   276206   25.04204200    3 confirmations left
21232   1:10:32       499330676      72415         0.00332870   276185   25.07522347    confirmed
21231   4:16:34       1810725132    255048        0.00335437   276177   25.03722000    confirmed

What kind of hardware? Blades? Wondering if there's a problem with the Stratum proxy... I'm not getting 0 rewards but I am seeing my miners get skimmed on their reported hash.

When you look on your account page are the hashes reported accurate to what your miners show locally??

"a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"
Learn something new?: 1hzpjSkWaxm7XaEMi5P2fL6hhxuj8gxyX
dbell
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 59


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 06:40:19 AM
 #13795

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!

It happened again.  I can see that I mined all the way through round 21233.  Never switched to the backup pool.  My shares for round 21233 are proportionally correct for the duration of the block.  No apparent dropouts from the Stratum Proxy.  Every thing looks correct except BTC reward for Round 21233 is ZERO!.  What's up with that?  Again, very little lost but it should have given me at least 0.0025 or so BTC for that round.  Something wrong with this one.  The exponential decay function could not have zero'ed my shares which were 1/10,000 of the total.  1/10,000 of 25 BTC is 0.0025, not zero.

Round  Duration      Total Shares   My Shares     BTC Reward   Block #    Block Value   Validation
21236   1:04:02       445846104     62580          0.00375781   276297   25.08008069    94 confirmations left
21235   0:31:04       215263719     33420          0.00407103   276290   25.07021854    87 confirmations left
21234   11:36:07     4869485213    455502        0.00342830   276286   25.20665744    83 confirmations left
21233   4:49:31       2040992243    193643        0.00000000   276206   25.04204200    3 confirmations left
21232   1:10:32       499330676      72415         0.00332870   276185   25.07522347    confirmed
21231   4:16:34       1810725132    255048        0.00335437   276177   25.03722000    confirmed

What kind of hardware? Blades? Wondering if there's a problem with the Stratum proxy... I'm not getting 0 rewards but I am seeing my miners get skimmed on their reported hash.

When you look on your account page are the hashes reported accurate to what your miners show locally??

Running 2 AsicMinerCubes:  For example, available in groupbuy here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=375247.0.  Each cube running as a separate worker.

Running Slush Stratum Proxy on local PC which looks to be running fine.

Hash rate reported on Slush pool stats for the two cubes agrees with hash rate reported locally on the cubes and the hash rates indicate the units are running at top speed, no lagging.  I am getting top rated performance from each of the cubes.

If there was a problem with the Stratum Proxy on round 21233 then it corrected pretty quickly since I got the correct ratio of My Shares vs. Total Shares, i.e. similar ratio compared to the other two long duration rounds that did reward BTC. 

Round 21231:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  Paid out
Round 21233:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  No Reward
Round 21234:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  Paid out
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 08:09:07 AM
 #13796

It happened again.  I can see that I mined all the way through round 21233.  Never switched to the backup pool.  My shares for round 21233 are proportionally correct for the duration of the block.  No apparent dropouts from the Stratum Proxy.  Every thing looks correct except BTC reward for Round 21233 is ZERO!.  What's up with that?  Again, very little lost but it should have given me at least 0.0025 or so BTC for that round.  Something wrong with this one.  The exponential decay function could not have zero'ed my shares which were 1/10,000 of the total.  1/10,000 of 25 BTC is 0.0025, not zero.

Round  Duration      Total Shares   My Shares     BTC Reward   Block #    Block Value   Validation
21236   1:04:02       445846104     62580          0.00375781   276297   25.08008069    94 confirmations left
21235   0:31:04       215263719     33420          0.00407103   276290   25.07021854    87 confirmations left
21234   11:36:07     4869485213    455502        0.00342830   276286   25.20665744    83 confirmations left
21233   4:49:31       2040992243    193643        0.00000000   276206   25.04204200    3 confirmations left
21232   1:10:32       499330676      72415         0.00332870   276185   25.07522347    confirmed
21231   4:16:34       1810725132    255048        0.00335437   276177   25.03722000    confirmed

Running 2 AsicMinerCubes:  For example, available in groupbuy here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=375247.0.  Each cube running as a separate worker.

Running Slush Stratum Proxy on local PC which looks to be running fine.

Hash rate reported on Slush pool stats for the two cubes agrees with hash rate reported locally on the cubes and the hash rates indicate the units are running at top speed, no lagging.  I am getting top rated performance from each of the cubes.

If there was a problem with the Stratum Proxy on round 21233 then it corrected pretty quickly since I got the correct ratio of My Shares vs. Total Shares, i.e. similar ratio compared to the other two long duration rounds that did reward BTC.  

Round 21231:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  Paid out
Round 21233:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  No Reward
Round 21234:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  Paid out

This is simply not true.
More exact ratios your/total look like this:

21231 0.000140854
21232 0.000145024
21233 0.000094876
21234 0.000093542
21235 0.000155251
21236 0.000140362

You can see a dropout at the end of 33 and begining of 34. That is the reason.

[edit]
Mining must have been out for about 1.5 hours at the end of 21233 and ~4 hours at the beginning of the following round.
dbell
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 59


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 08:56:45 AM
 #13797

It happened again.  I can see that I mined all the way through round 21233.  Never switched to the backup pool.  My shares for round 21233 are proportionally correct for the duration of the block.  No apparent dropouts from the Stratum Proxy.  Every thing looks correct except BTC reward for Round 21233 is ZERO!.  What's up with that?  Again, very little lost but it should have given me at least 0.0025 or so BTC for that round.  Something wrong with this one.  The exponential decay function could not have zero'ed my shares which were 1/10,000 of the total.  1/10,000 of 25 BTC is 0.0025, not zero.

Round  Duration      Total Shares   My Shares     BTC Reward   Block #    Block Value   Validation
21236   1:04:02       445846104     62580          0.00375781   276297   25.08008069    94 confirmations left
21235   0:31:04       215263719     33420          0.00407103   276290   25.07021854    87 confirmations left
21234   11:36:07     4869485213    455502        0.00342830   276286   25.20665744    83 confirmations left
21233   4:49:31       2040992243    193643        0.00000000   276206   25.04204200    3 confirmations left
21232   1:10:32       499330676      72415         0.00332870   276185   25.07522347    confirmed
21231   4:16:34       1810725132    255048        0.00335437   276177   25.03722000    confirmed

Running 2 AsicMinerCubes:  For example, available in groupbuy here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=375247.0.  Each cube running as a separate worker.

Running Slush Stratum Proxy on local PC which looks to be running fine.

Hash rate reported on Slush pool stats for the two cubes agrees with hash rate reported locally on the cubes and the hash rates indicate the units are running at top speed, no lagging.  I am getting top rated performance from each of the cubes.

If there was a problem with the Stratum Proxy on round 21233 then it corrected pretty quickly since I got the correct ratio of My Shares vs. Total Shares, i.e. similar ratio compared to the other two long duration rounds that did reward BTC.  

Round 21231:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  Paid out
Round 21233:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  No Reward
Round 21234:  Roughly 1:10,000   My Shares to Total Shares,  Paid out

This is simply not true.
More exact ratios your/total look like this:

21231 0.000140854
21232 0.000145024
21233 0.000094876
21234 0.000093542
21235 0.000155251
21236 0.000140362

You can see a dropout at the end of 33 and begining of 34. That is the reason.

[edit]
Mining must have been out for about 1.5 hours at the end of 21233 and ~4 hours at the beginning of the following round.

Case solved.  I believe you are correct sir!  Must be something still wrong with my Stratum Proxy. 

The exponential decay function was a killer making the first 2/3 of that round worthless to me because I missed the last 1/3.    On the next round, missing the first 1/3 did not seem to cost me anything in payout.   Makes me think I could have missed the first 2/3 of that round and still received roughly the same payout.

The exponential decay function is a hard master, punishing those who miss the end of a round and rewarding of those who work the end of a round.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 615


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 06:55:38 PM
 #13798

My shares for round 21233 are proportionally correct for the duration of the block.
...
21233   4:49:31       2040992243    193643        0.00000000   276206   25.04204200    3 confirmations left
...
21231   4:16:34       1810725132    255048        0.00335437   276177   25.03722000    confirmed
Realy?
EDIT: Sorry sow it was stated in a later post.

--------------------------

The exponential decay function was a killer making the first 2/3 of that round worthless to me because I missed the last 1/3.    On the next round, missing the first 1/3 did not seem to cost me anything in payout.   Makes me think I could have missed the first 2/3 of that round and still received roughly the same payout.

The exponential decay function is a hard master, punishing those who miss the end of a round and rewarding of those who work the end of a round.

Yes, that's why it was implemented - (IF) you are a pool hopper you loose almost immediately.

It's not 1/3 or 2/3 of the round - it's a matter of ~20-30 min, so for a 11h round you may miss 10:30 of it and get the full reward (joining at the end) or miss the last 6% of it and loose all the reward you had

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
InfiniteGrim
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 118


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 10:29:47 PM
 #13799

Why is it that I make 10-20% more on SHORTER rounds?
Trongersoll
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448


Retired Software Engineer


View Profile
December 22, 2013, 10:46:30 PM
 #13800

Why is it that I make 10-20% more on SHORTER rounds?

because somebody else makes less.

*insert appropriate begging line here* 
BTC: 1CS6AV7VnjcPLxaTFoUhTjXK4mQCTzfSxE
Doge: DB22tiynvXKg7SyPpnH9jyfitKLTZb6ejc
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 ... 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!