Bitcoin Forum
October 01, 2016, 01:30:40 AM *
News: Due to DDoS attacks, there may be periodic downtime.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3152 (80.4%)
Bank transfer / USD - 407 (10.4%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 359 (9.2%)
Total Voters: 3916

Pages: « 1 ... 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 [1038] 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 ... 1104 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3859220 times)
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
March 05, 2015, 04:48:03 PM
 #20741

Looks like the "0% luck for a day" has finally come to a close at 27+ hours. That was BRUTAL!!!!
I don't think it's luck. There's a pretty consistent pattern there where we have bad luck for that block if the pool hashrate is (10 + n*0.23-n)PH/s, where n is any positive integer. The block at 10.23PH/s was 20.5 hours, and the one at 10.45PH/s was over a full day. Lord knows what would happen if we actually hit 10.67PH/s, it could be a couple day long block.

I hope slush looks into this and can find the error in his code. These long blocks need to stop.
I get the feeling people took your comment seriously Cheesy

The devil made him do it.
That guy's always whispering in my ear.
1475285440
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475285440

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475285440
Reply with quote  #2

1475285440
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
dmwardjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


The Few, The Proud, The BTC


View Profile
March 08, 2015, 12:12:23 AM
 #20742

My Kill A Watt meter was defective when determining power consumption of my rigs.  In fact, it has burned out completely now and will not work.  I got information from another buddy who has a working watt meter and came up with the following results:

I HAVE DRAWN THE CONCLUSION IT IS NOT WORTH UNDER-CLOCKING THE S3 or S3+ [At least at present price of bitcoin].  I don't know that it would ever be worth under clocking it?  I can see under-clocking to make more power available to add more rigs with a higher hash rate and better power efficiency to your present set up.  That's about the only advantage.  As well as having a faster interface with the new firmware upgrade.

I have tuned my S3's back to .725 volts and default frequency instead of slightly over clocked frequency of 237.5 MHz.


S3 @ 270 watts [under-clocked at 175 MHz @ 0.68 volts (0680) and 340 to 360 GH/s (I chose 350 GH/s for the math)]

$0.106 (10.6 cents) per kWH power costs for 270 watts:

Cost Per Hour:   $0.028620
Cost Per Day:   $0.686880
Cost Per Week:   $4.808
Cost Per Month:   $19.23
Cost Per Year:   $250.02

Power costs at $0.106 (10.6 cents) per kWH for 380 watts:

Cost Per Hour:   $0.040280
Cost Per Day:   $0.966720
Cost Per Week:   $6.767
Cost Per Month:   $27.07
Cost Per Year:   $351.89

With BTC @ $273.471 & Difficulty at 46,684,376,316 and S3 tuned to 175 MHz @ 0.68 volts for 350 GH/s @ 270 watts:

Mined Per Hour:    0.0001571  BTC   $0.04296  USD - $0.028620 pwr. costs = $0.01434 per hour
Mined Per Day:     0.00377  BTC       $1.031  USD - $0.686880 pwr. costs = $0.34412 per day
Mined Per Week:   0.02639  BTC       $7.217  USD - $4.808 pwr. costs = $2.409 per week
Mined Per Month:  0.1131  BTC         $30.93  USD - $19.23 pwr. costs = $11.70 per month

With BTC @ $273.471 & Difficulty at 46,684,376,316 and S3 tuned to 237.5MHz @ 0.725 volts for 480 GH/s @ 380 watts:

Mined Per Hour:    0.0002155  BTC   $0.05893   USD - $0.040280 pwr. costs = $0.01865 per hour
Mined Per Day:     0.005171  BTC     $1.414       USD - $0.966720 pwr. costs = $0.44728 per day
Mined Per Week:   0.03619  BTC      $9.897       USD - $6.767 pwr. costs = $3.13 per week
Mined Per Month:  0.1551  BTC       $42.42       USD - $27.07 pwr. costs = $15.35 per month

The following screen shot shows what is mined in BTC with 350 GH/s:



The following screen shot shows what is mined in BTC with 480 GH/s:


BTC ADDRESS: 1HBSBwbFDg2XQii8cNJGAhLyd2mFS4jbG9
bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
March 08, 2015, 12:30:08 AM
 #20743

When I get a miner I just plug it in and leave it alone.  Works out well that way.

alliebtcpup
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1


View Profile
March 08, 2015, 03:10:40 PM
 #20744

When you set back to default settings on the S3 is that by putting 0725 in the voltage?
dmwardjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


The Few, The Proud, The BTC


View Profile
March 08, 2015, 03:19:12 PM
 #20745

When you set back to default settings on the S3 is that by putting 0725 in the voltage?

I'm assuming it is the default.  I really don't know for certain on the older S3's before the S3+ came out.  I do know that is the default on the S3+ models.  I know this because I got two S3's of the last batch (batch 11) with the January, 2015 firmware and they were default at 0725.  I went ahead and put my old S3's at 0725 volts.  Then shut it down and turn it back on.

EDIT:  I've been up all night doing taxes.  It is 10:20am and I have not had sleep since 2:30pm yesterday.  It's night night for me (bed time).

BTC ADDRESS: 1HBSBwbFDg2XQii8cNJGAhLyd2mFS4jbG9
rupy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 724



View Profile
March 08, 2015, 05:43:01 PM
 #20746

@kkurtmann Well, it's just simpler to have everything synchronize over on port, now you need two solutions: 1 webserver and then 1 socketserver with memory leaks, file descriptor leaks, thread management, etc. Basically it's the way we should all go; microservices HTTP-only is a good standard so firewalls and scaling works the same way everywhere, language agnostic, so we can focus on the product with different tools; because developers want them, not because some guy with a suit & tie had a bad morning and needed complexity to keep his job.

Also if you wan't mining to work on port 80 you need it to be HTTP.

BANKBOOK GWT Wallet & no-FIAT Billing API
BTC 14xr5Q1j61A1eA6Mrs5MRhUmYZKboY8iq2 | Vanillacoin FPGA Miner
Rudler
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 117


View Profile
March 09, 2015, 06:50:59 AM
 #20747

Bloody hell.....1 day, 4:50:16 again and again.....?!

And Poolluck at 0%!!

Whats up? Too much pooljumpers?

This sucks all the time!

Whole life is a ponzi.....
SargeR33
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112

★Bitin.io★ - Instant Exchange


View Profile
March 09, 2015, 06:57:05 AM
 #20748

HUGE block for 11PH. Where did this pool BW.COM come from? They appeared over night and have some big power. Oh and its a Chinese pool and google translate doesn't translate the page.

bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
March 09, 2015, 09:25:41 AM
 #20749

HUGE block for 11PH. Where did this pool BW.COM come from? They appeared over night and have some big power. Oh and its a Chinese pool and google translate doesn't translate the page.

Click the flag top right dude.  Changes it to English.

Mikestang
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602



View Profile
March 09, 2015, 07:34:10 PM
 #20750

HUGE block for 11PH. Where did this pool BW.COM come from? They appeared over night and have some big power. Oh and its a Chinese pool and google translate doesn't translate the page.

They are located in the same physical structures as AntPool: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=969823.0
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 10, 2015, 04:15:07 AM
 #20751

HUGE block for 11PH. Where did this pool BW.COM come from? They appeared over night and have some big power. Oh and its a Chinese pool and google translate doesn't translate the page.

They are located in the same physical structures as AntPool: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=969823.0

That thread doesn't mention them being located with AntPool. Is there another post you meant that does?

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
Mike0029
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20


View Profile
March 14, 2015, 07:42:03 PM
 #20752

I still don't fully understand mining, so pardon my ignorance if this has been answered or addressed already, or if this is in the wrong thread. Thanks for any insight into the issue. I use Slush pool as my primary BTC mining pool, and I currently run 2 underclocked Antminer S1's on the pool at 130 GH/s. As far as I know, Slush pool DOES NOT merge mine any alt coin of sorts, so this is where my problem arises... I know that the Bitcoin network difficulty is at 47427554950 and I would need a "BestShare" greater than that number to find a block. One of my Antminer S1's report a "FoundBlock" and this isn't the first time this has happened at Slush pool for me, however my "BestShare" is only 66,379,851... My main questions are: Why does this happen? Does Slush actually merge mine and just not tell the users? Is my Antminer S1 just being glitchy? Does the "1" under "Stale" explain this? I did a little bit of research and the only altcoin that I found that can be merge mined with BTC AND has a difficulty below 66,379,851 is i0coin... Did my miner find an i0coin block, because it is possible to "merge mine" with Bitcoin? Here is an image for reference:

http://s21.postimg.org/9rdz8c737/Found_Block.jpg

Thanks again for any help!
~Mike
bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
March 14, 2015, 07:45:06 PM
 #20753

I still don't fully understand mining, so pardon my ignorance if this has been answered or addressed already, or if this is in the wrong thread. Thanks for any insight into the issue. I use Slush pool as my primary BTC mining pool, and I currently run 2 underclocked Antminer S1's on the pool at 130 GH/s. As far as I know, Slush pool DOES NOT merge mine any alt coin of sorts, so this is where my problem arises... I know that the Bitcoin network difficulty is at 47427554950 and I would need a "BestShare" greater than that number to find a block. One of my Antminer S1's report a "FoundBlock" and this isn't the first time this has happened at Slush pool for me, however my "BestShare" is only 66,379,851... My main questions are: Why does this happen? Does Slush actually merge mine and just not tell the users? Is my Antminer S1 just being glitchy? Does the "1" under "Stale" explain this? I did a little bit of research and the only altcoin that I found that can be merge mined with BTC AND has a difficulty below 66,379,851 is i0coin... Did my miner find an i0coin block, because it is possible to "merge mine" with Bitcoin? Here is an image for reference:



Thanks again for any help!
~Mike

Hi, Haven't a clue personally.  Hopefully someone will provide an answer but this forum is like a ghost town lately.  Sounds like most home miners have gone into hiding or retirement.

pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
March 14, 2015, 07:50:53 PM
 #20754

I still don't fully understand mining, so pardon my ignorance if this has been answered or addressed already, or if this is in the wrong thread. Thanks for any insight into the issue. I use Slush pool as my primary BTC mining pool, and I currently run 2 underclocked Antminer S1's on the pool at 130 GH/s. As far as I know, Slush pool DOES NOT merge mine any alt coin of sorts, so this is where my problem arises... I know that the Bitcoin network difficulty is at 47427554950 and I would need a "BestShare" greater than that number to find a block. One of my Antminer S1's report a "FoundBlock" and this isn't the first time this has happened at Slush pool for me, however my "BestShare" is only 66,379,851... My main questions are: Why does this happen? Does Slush actually merge mine and just not tell the users? Is my Antminer S1 just being glitchy? Does the "1" under "Stale" explain this? I did a little bit of research and the only altcoin that I found that can be merge mined with BTC AND has a difficulty below 66,379,851 is i0coin... Did my miner find an i0coin block, because it is possible to "merge mine" with Bitcoin? Here is an image for reference:



Thanks again for any help!
~Mike

Looking at your image, you may have slush as your main pool, but your S1 has also been mining elsewhere during the session it reports a block as having been found (i.e your second pool). If indeed one of your secondary pools is an altcoin one, then that is where you found the block (as clearly your best share is not big enough to be a BTC block).
Additionally, I do not believe that a stale share can also be flaged as a found block, so that is that with that.

bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
March 14, 2015, 08:31:09 PM
 #20755

Yep, that should solve that.  Good to see there's still life out there is Slushland

Mike0029
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20


View Profile
March 14, 2015, 09:04:10 PM
 #20756

I still don't fully understand mining, so pardon my ignorance if this has been answered or addressed already, or if this is in the wrong thread. Thanks for any insight into the issue. I use Slush pool as my primary BTC mining pool, and I currently run 2 underclocked Antminer S1's on the pool at 130 GH/s. As far as I know, Slush pool DOES NOT merge mine any alt coin of sorts, so this is where my problem arises... I know that the Bitcoin network difficulty is at 47427554950 and I would need a "BestShare" greater than that number to find a block. One of my Antminer S1's report a "FoundBlock" and this isn't the first time this has happened at Slush pool for me, however my "BestShare" is only 66,379,851... My main questions are: Why does this happen? Does Slush actually merge mine and just not tell the users? Is my Antminer S1 just being glitchy? Does the "1" under "Stale" explain this? I did a little bit of research and the only altcoin that I found that can be merge mined with BTC AND has a difficulty below 66,379,851 is i0coin... Did my miner find an i0coin block, because it is possible to "merge mine" with Bitcoin? Here is an image for reference:

http://s21.postimg.org/9rdz8c737/Found_Block.jpg

Thanks again for any help!
~Mike

Looking at your image, you may have slush as your main pool, but your S1 has also been mining elsewhere during the session it reports a block as having been found (i.e your second pool). If indeed one of your secondary pools is an altcoin one, then that is where you found the block (as clearly your best share is not big enough to be a BTC block).
Additionally, I do not believe that a stale share can also be flaged as a found block, so that is that with that.

Thanks for the quick reply! I could see it being my third pool at ispace.co.uk, however that one has a "LSTime" (LastShareTime?) of Never, and the second one is just my Slush info again (I have it twice in the miner in case I change the primary pool, I can just copy and paste Slush info back into primary pool since it has been reliable for me)... Image again, showing the pool URLs:

http://s9.postimg.org/din8abd23/Found_Block.jpg
bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
March 14, 2015, 09:08:56 PM
 #20757

Don't hide your worker details. Promote them!  If someone uses them all they're doing is mining for you.

Everyone should mine on Slush using worker bigbitmine.donate

Every little helps!

pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
March 14, 2015, 09:09:39 PM
 #20758

Looking at your image, you may have slush as your main pool, but your S1 has also been mining elsewhere during the session it reports a block as having been found (i.e your second pool). If indeed one of your secondary pools is an altcoin one, then that is where you found the block (as clearly your best share is not big enough to be a BTC block).
Additionally, I do not believe that a stale share can also be flaged as a found block, so that is that with that.

Thanks for the quick reply! I could see it being my third pool at ispace.co.uk, however that one has a "LSTime" (LastShareTime?) of Never, and the second one is just my Slush info again (I have it twice in the miner in case I change the primary pool, I can just copy and paste Slush info back into primary pool since it has been reliable for me)... Image again, showing the pool URLs:



Well, well ..... hello there!

Mike0029
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20


View Profile
March 14, 2015, 09:31:17 PM
 #20759

Don't hide your worker details. Promote them!  If someone uses them all they're doing is mining for you.

Everyone should mine on Slush using worker bigbitmine.donate

Every little helps!

Gotcha! I just blotched everything out, because that's what I have seen others do on these forums when they post pictures of their Antminer GUI... Here it is again, with my worker details, as you can see pool #1 and #2 are exactly the same...

http://s23.postimg.org/ruyc74m1j/Found_Block.jpg

So, yeah, I have no idea what is going on... then again I don't know if "LSTime" means "LastShareTime"... that was just a guess...

~Mike0029
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
March 14, 2015, 09:41:21 PM
 #20760

Don't hide your worker details. Promote them!  If someone uses them all they're doing is mining for you.

Everyone should mine on Slush using worker bigbitmine.donate

Every little helps!

Gotcha! I just blotched everything out, because that's what I have seen others do on these forums when they post pictures of their Antminer GUI... Here it is again, with my worker details, as you can see pool #1 and #2 are exactly the same...



So, yeah, I have no idea what is going on... then again I don't know if "LSTime" means "LastShareTime"... that was just a guess...

~Mike0029

I think you suspected right in the first instance. The "block" share was found on slush ..... but it was stale, i.e submitted after the work was timed-out (or after someone else had already submitted the same share)!

On the stale share being logged as a found block, I believe that is a bug in cgminer (or it may indeed be by design!), but the best place to ask that question would be in the cgminer thread. I say it may be a bug because despite clearly not being logged as your best share (and is definitely higher in size than your best share), it has been marked (and logged) as a found block, despite it being stale. So yeah, head over to ckolivas' thread and throw that his way ....

edit: Very strange as you seem to have good connectivity to the pool, aka only 1 stale share in 2 days + ...... very strange indeed that it had to be the found block that turned out to be timed-out!

Pages: « 1 ... 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 [1038] 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 ... 1104 »
  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!