Bitcoin Forum
September 29, 2016, 01:32:19 PM *
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 ... 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 [291] 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 ... 1104 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3857648 times)
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 13, 2013, 11:46:25 AM
 #5801

Plan of removing the getwork support

I'm very excited by the adoption of the Stratum protocol and Stratum-based miners. During the last months, Stratum infrastructure improved to the production state.

Stratum hashrate on the pool is growing every day and I expect that with ASIC miners it will jump near to 100% pretty soon. Getwork protocol is simply impractical and I expect that all people who're serious with mining already updated their mining rigs with Stratum-enabled software.

Just for curiosity, Getwork-based backend currently handles around 20% of the hashrate, but produces almost 2x higher traffic and server load than the Stratum-based backend.

Currently the Stratum protocol is seamlessly implemented in cgminer, bfgminer, poclbm and GUIminer (for OpenCL cards). There's also Stratum proxy for all other miners who don't have native support of Stratum. HOWTO and Windows binaries for Stratum proxy are here: http://mining.bitcoin.cz/mining-proxy-howto

Because there's no obvious reason for supporting obsolete Getwork protocol anymore, I decided to release the plan for removing the getwork backend. Currently the fee on both getwork and stratum backend is the same - 2%. Once the hashrate of stratum backend reaches 90% of total pool hashrate, the fee for getwork miners will rise to 10%. Once the hashrate on stratum backend reaches 99% of total pool hashrate, the getwork backend will be turned off permanently.

You can check current Stratum adoption on Statistics page (item "Hashrate on Stratum interface (30 min average)"). The change of getwork fees will be done manually and I'll announce it on the website.

This change will NOT affect people using Stratum miners in any way. I believe the most people will understand that supporting obsolete pool backend simply cost too much for no benefit and that I want to remove getwork support to have more time for other development.

1475155939
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475155939

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475155939
Reply with quote  #2

1475155939
Report to moderator
1475155939
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475155939

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475155939
Reply with quote  #2

1475155939
Report to moderator
1475155939
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475155939

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475155939
Reply with quote  #2

1475155939
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
tnkflx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 346


View Profile
February 13, 2013, 02:24:33 PM
 #5802

I guess by witching to stratum, mining Namecoins will also be obsolete?

They've been obsolete for a while now Smiley

| Operating electrum.be & us.electrum.be |
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 13, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
 #5803

I guess by witching to stratum, mining Namecoins will also be obsolete?

Current Stratum backend has no namecoin support, so - yes. From my view the Namecoin project is dead. Although there was some buzz, press coverage and support from Bitcoin community, Namecoin developers were unable to finalize DNS infrastructure and they also didn't solve major architectural weaknesses.

I'd like to see some alt-chain for storing timestamped, key-value data like Namecoin, but in current state the Namecoin project is unmaintained and I have no plans with adding NMC support back to the pool.

Epoch
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 916



View Profile
February 13, 2013, 03:40:17 PM
 #5804

... and I expect that all people who're serious with mining already updated their mining rigs with Stratum-enabled software.

If Stratum was all roses and rainbows I'd be happy to use Stratum. Unfortunately, it hasn't been that way for me. I may be in the minority, but I've had a lot of trouble trying to get Stratum working on my setup (currently bfgminer 2.10.5, win7/64, bfl fpga's only). The pools in my rotation include bitminter, ozcoin, and slush.

I'll investigate further, and this is probably best posted in the bfgminer/cgminer threads, but if I use the "--no-stratum" flag in my command line mining works fine for days/weeks. If I remove it (and mining defaults to Stratum), mining will work for a few hours but eventually all of my FPGAs will get into a 'WAIT' state from which they never recover until restarting the mining software. I don't know what triggers this condition, or if it is a problem with bfgminer or the pools' Stratum implementation.

The reality is that, for whatever reason, I've had better success with getwork/vardiff than with Stratum; ozcoin and bitminter, for example, ask for difficulty-8 shares from me which reduces pool traffic to them by a factor of 8 ... doesn't this serve to accomplish a similar result (in terms of load/traffic to the pool) as Stratum does?

BTC: 1DJVUnLuPA2bERTkyeir8bKn1eSoRCrYvx
NMC: NFcfHSBBnq622pAr1Xoh9KtnBPA5CUn6id
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
February 13, 2013, 03:46:38 PM
 #5805

Congratulations on the plan to eliminate getwork slush.  I've been waiting for the day I can implement a similar plan to phase it out entirely.

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

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 13, 2013, 03:51:51 PM
 #5806

I'll investigate further, and this is probably best posted in the bfgminer/cgminer threads, but if I use the "--no-stratum" flag in my command line mining works fine for days/weeks. If I remove it (and mining defaults to Stratum), mining will work for a few hours but eventually all of my FPGAs will get into a 'WAIT' state from which they never recover until restarting the mining software. I don't know what triggers this condition, or if it is a problem with bfgminer or the pools' Stratum implementation.

Hm, this sounds like a bug in the miner. Can you report it to bfgminer/cgminer developers, please? I've been playing with the pool core for long time and as I can say, it is rock solid. My connection between proxy and the pool wasn't interrupted for weeks.


Quote
... I've had better success with getwork/vardiff than with Stratum; ozcoin and bitminter, for example, ask for difficulty-8 shares from me which reduces pool traffic to them by a factor of 8 ...

If there's some bug in miner in validating shares, then 8x lower probability of hitting the bug obviously lead to higher stability. Actually there was a bug in cgminer/bfgminer in submitting corrupted shares, which leaded to reconnecting to the pool time to time, but I though it has been fixed in recent version...

jkminkov
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 530


View Profile
February 15, 2013, 07:33:47 AM
 #5807

Plan of removing the getwork support

Once the hashrate of stratum backend reaches 90% of total pool hashrate, the fee for getwork miners will rise to 10%.

nice plan, pickpocketing clueless miners.

Bleutrade
600 dollars in one place talking - Dudes, hooray, Bitcoin against us just one, but we are growing in numbers!
tnkflx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 346


View Profile
February 15, 2013, 08:40:48 AM
 #5808

Plan of removing the getwork support

Once the hashrate of stratum backend reaches 90% of total pool hashrate, the fee for getwork miners will rise to 10%.

nice plan, pickpocketing clueless miners.

You shouldn't be clueless if you mine...

| Operating electrum.be & us.electrum.be |
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 15, 2013, 09:19:11 AM
 #5809

Plan of removing the getwork support

Once the hashrate of stratum backend reaches 90% of total pool hashrate, the fee for getwork miners will rise to 10%.

nice plan, pickpocketing clueless miners.

Clueless miners? If you mean n00b, I doubt it. GUIminer does stratum natively.

If you mean long term miners who have no idea of what changes have occurred, then honestly they shouldn't be mining. A miner needs to keep him or herself up to date and be prepared to learn constantly. As a miner you can't just "set and forget".

If you mean CPU botnets, well I personally see that as a good thing.

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

Activity: 530


View Profile
February 15, 2013, 09:45:18 AM
 #5810

learning through paid education, that is what I see here.

Bleutrade
600 dollars in one place talking - Dudes, hooray, Bitcoin against us just one, but we are growing in numbers!
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
February 15, 2013, 09:48:24 AM
 #5811

learning through paid education, that is what I see here.

Last I heard, slush promoted Stratum heavily to users who aren't already using it.  Same as BTC Guild, and I'm sure almost every other pool that implemented Stratum or GBT.  There is absolutely no reason for a miner to still cling to the outdated getwork protocol.  Worst case scenario they should run the Stratum Proxy.  The only resistance I've seen from running native miners are people on Phoenix.  If you can run phoenix, you can run the proxy, it is not difficult (easier than setting up phoenix, thats for sure), and offers immediate performance benefits.

This isn't a case of pushing brand new technology too fast.  It's a case of miners actively refusing to modernize and update to a protocol that is better in every single way.

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

Activity: 387


Save A Life, Adopt a Pet Today!


View Profile WWW
February 15, 2013, 02:09:37 PM
 #5812

Plan of removing the getwork support

Once the hashrate of stratum backend reaches 90% of total pool hashrate, the fee for getwork miners will rise to 10%.

nice plan, pickpocketing clueless miners.

If you have ever been on his pool - there are HUGE RED warnings if you are using getwork.  There are notes everywhere!

Not only would you have to be clueless - you would have to be blind to miss this requirement and how to handle it.

Not only that, Slush will help anyone who asks.  And has been warning people for a considerable amount of time.

He is NOT picking pockets.  And he is probably one of the nicest and most helpful people (especially to newbies) that I have "met" since i have been involved with mining.

Back off man.
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 15, 2013, 05:45:58 PM
 #5813

Thank you for support :-). My motivation is to consolidate the infrastructure, not to rob pool clueless miners...

cosurgi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 298


View Profile
February 17, 2013, 06:12:32 PM
 #5814

Jeff Garzik says that using vardiff=32 (variable, self adjusting difficulty) implemented in the pool stops Avalon ASIC from restarting, probably too high network load caused problems.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=140539.msg1501877#msg1501877

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=140539.msg1510263#msg1510263

I'm afraid that we need vardiff, to remain competitive.

slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2013, 10:49:00 AM
 #5815

I'm working on vardiff, it will be available very soon. Of course I'm fully aware that ASICs won't work on dif1 very well.

hmmmstrange
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 668


View Profile
February 20, 2013, 02:34:16 AM
 #5816

Having 6 non-stratum blocks in a row is a little unnerving.
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 20, 2013, 12:19:36 PM
 #5817

Having 6 non-stratum blocks in a row is a little unnerving.

Where?

cosurgi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 298


View Profile
February 20, 2013, 03:35:30 PM
 #5818

Having 6 non-stratum blocks in a row is a little unnerving.

Where?
#16446 - #16451

slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 20, 2013, 03:38:13 PM
 #5819

#16446 - #16451

? Only block 222002 (16446) is version 1, the rest are version 2. Why do you think it is version 1?

slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
February 20, 2013, 03:44:35 PM
 #5820

OVH (datacentre where the pool is hosted) has some problems with datacentre connectivity, they're working on it, but pool seems to be unreachable for most of people now :-(.

Pages: « 1 ... 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 [291] 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 ... 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!