Bitcoin Forum
December 02, 2016, 06:35:29 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 ... 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 [363] 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 ... 1105 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3924760 times)
agento2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 05:37:04 AM
 #7241

All backends seems fine, I'm not aware of any problem. Also most block rewards are fine, so there's no indicator anything is wrong with the pool. I wouldn't be surprised it is yet another routing problem on the internet, as I saw many times in few last weeks :-/.

Although I have an office near the explosion place, I'm fine!

17759    2013-04-30 01:20:57    5:01:48    34198356    208898    0.00000000    233836    25.46175733    84 confirmations left

Seems 17759 is also pretty odd. I have 208898 shares but zero earnings. Is that normal?

How long would it typically take for you to generate 208k shares? if it's significantly less than 5 hours that would indicate a connection issue at the end of the round which could cause it, otherwise it's probably a miscalculation.
I was disconnected towards the end due to a strong thunderstorm passing over the area.

Does this mean if I get disconnected towards the end I don't get anything for the shares I produced?

Depends on how long the outage was. Score is an exp function so your earning degrade to 0. I'm not sure how long it takes. I have been thinking listing the shares on the stats page isn't the best metric. Have score and total score would be better since those are what your earnings are actually calculated on.

14BAmoY3JopfDS8EJWZSgfNK2saLD4aXCt
1480703729
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480703729

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480703729
Reply with quote  #2

1480703729
Report to moderator
1480703729
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480703729

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480703729
Reply with quote  #2

1480703729
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
genpayne
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 06:17:31 AM
 #7242

Depends on how long the outage was. Score is an exp function so your earning degrade to 0. I'm not sure how long it takes. I have been thinking listing the shares on the stats page isn't the best metric. Have score and total score would be better since those are what your earnings are actually calculated on.

I know why the functions are there, but its effects do seem a little harsh. Maybe it could be reduced a little? Otherwise those with massive rigs could switch do the opposite of the normal problem, run them on a PPS pool, then they notice its been 45 minutes here switch.

Available for small programming jobs. PM me a Spec and I'll give you a price!
If I have made your day - 1HectorMHoC8ZxGe6wm5pLh2Szs2gbeFvr
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2013, 06:26:19 AM
 #7243

Depends on how long the outage was. Score is an exp function so your earning degrade to 0. I'm not sure how long it takes. I have been thinking listing the shares on the stats page isn't the best metric. Have score and total score would be better since those are what your earnings are actually calculated on.

I know why the functions are there, but its effects do seem a little harsh. Maybe it could be reduced a little? Otherwise those with massive rigs could switch do the opposite of the normal problem, run them on a PPS pool, then they notice its been 45 minutes here switch.

You can't predict the end of a round, and you can't mine the end of a round and expect more coins than normal.

The only way you can earn more than expected is by mining the first few minutes of a round and then mine else where. On average that will earn you a bit more than PPS.

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

Activity: 28



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 06:43:07 AM
 #7244

Surely if the rounds been going on one pool for 45 minutes, Then no matter how long the round continues, thats 45 minutes where you are being paid on a PPS. You then earn a few shares from the pool with considerable value. If the round ends within a couple minutes, its not much but you're miners haven't lost much.
If its a few hours, then for the 45 minutes you have been making coins while everyone else here has shares which value is now void.

Now whether 45 minutes is the sweet spot I don't know, and without looking into the maths properly / how much you get per share at a PPS i can't be certain you would earn more, but It seems probable.

Will work it out later. Hopefully you are right and the numbers will prove me wrong!
I mine on a fairly low power system. 40Mhash. If my last share is 30s from the end of the round I seem to get twice as much as if its 2 minutes!

Available for small programming jobs. PM me a Spec and I'll give you a price!
If I have made your day - 1HectorMHoC8ZxGe6wm5pLh2Szs2gbeFvr
PuertoLibre
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


Master BFL Shill


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 07:27:21 AM
 #7245

Surely if the rounds been going on one pool for 45 minutes, Then no matter how long the round continues, thats 45 minutes where you are being paid on a PPS. You then earn a few shares from the pool with considerable value. If the round ends within a couple minutes, its not much but you're miners haven't lost much.
If its a few hours, then for the 45 minutes you have been making coins while everyone else here has shares which value is now void.

Now whether 45 minutes is the sweet spot I don't know, and without looking into the maths properly / how much you get per share at a PPS i can't be certain you would earn more, but It seems probable.

Will work it out later. Hopefully you are right and the numbers will prove me wrong!
I mine on a fairly low power system. 40Mhash. If my last share is 30s from the end of the round I seem to get twice as much as if its 2 minutes!
Ok, I am surprised that the scoring system works that way....

It means even if I am an ASIC miner if I have an outage of 90minutes due to a storm then I lose all my shares value. Everyone else profited from my shares. So down time is my enemy.

How does the score system work? (I am sorry for my ignorance!)

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

The thing that came to mind though is the following after being surprised by this part of the score system:

If I run really high difficulty shares...let say 512...and I therefore submit larger shares but less frequently...is this the reason why I earn alot less?

I noticed if I submit very low difficulty shares with a very high frequency...my score seems to stay very low (closer to 100 than 1 billion. Yet, if I submit shares at 512 difficulty every minute, my score goes into the hundreds of millions over time. I assume from watching this that my delay in submitting very high difficulty shares is actually hurting me in my score. Is this correct? If so, then this deeply discourages using high difficulty...right? I can see this turning into an ASIC-festival of people submitting diff1 shares. With BFL coming out and delivering (a minute amount) of ASICs...I assume this is going to be a bandwidth problem in the future, correct?

I eventually decided to run at diff-1 because the super short rounds didn't give me much of any chance as an ASIC to submit the higher difficulty shares.

I find myself scratching my head as what is the right thing to do. It seems to discourage any lapse in submitting shares, even if only a minute between submissions.

I also understood that a low score in 4 digits is better than a high score in the billions. Correct?
genpayne
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 07:37:13 AM
 #7246

Surely if the rounds been going on one pool for 45 minutes, Then no matter how long the round continues, thats 45 minutes where you are being paid on a PPS. You then earn a few shares from the pool with considerable value. If the round ends within a couple minutes, its not much but you're miners haven't lost much.
If its a few hours, then for the 45 minutes you have been making coins while everyone else here has shares which value is now void.

Now whether 45 minutes is the sweet spot I don't know, and without looking into the maths properly / how much you get per share at a PPS i can't be certain you would earn more, but It seems probable.

Will work it out later. Hopefully you are right and the numbers will prove me wrong!
I mine on a fairly low power system. 40Mhash. If my last share is 30s from the end of the round I seem to get twice as much as if its 2 minutes!
Ok, I am surprised that the scoring system works that way....

It means even if I am an ASIC miner if I have an outage of 90minutes due to a storm then I lose all my shares value. Everyone else profited from my shares. So down time is my enemy.

How does the score system work? (I am sorry for my ignorance!)

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

The thing that came to mind though is the following after being surprised by this part of the score system:

If I run really high difficulty shares...let say 512...and I therefore submit larger shares but less frequently...is this the reason why I earn alot less?

I noticed if I submit very low difficulty shares with a very high frequency...my score seems to stay very low (closer to 100 than 1 billion. Yet, if I submit shares at 512 difficulty every minute, my score goes into the hundreds of millions over time. I assume from watching this that my delay in submitting very high difficulty shares is actually hurting me in my score. Is this correct? If so, then this deeply discourages using high difficulty...right? I can see this turning into an ASIC-festival of people submitting diff1 shares. With BFL coming out and delivering (a minute amount) of ASICs...I assume this is going to be a bandwidth problem in the future, correct?

I eventually decided to run at diff-1 because the super short rounds didn't give me much of any chance as an ASIC to submit the higher difficulty shares.

I find myself scratching my head as what is the right thing to do. It seems to discourage any lapse in submitting shares, even if only a minute between submissions.

I also understood that a low score in 4 digits is better than a high score in the billions. Correct?

Read this to see the exact formula's used. I haven't time to eleborate more on that now considering I have an exam in under an hour, but I shall work out the calculations later.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg50002#msg50002
It seems to me the formula was set when the difficulty was lower, making the share time also lower.
So now the round times are longer I think it could possibly be flawed. Without any actual maths put into this all it is is speculation so I could be completely wrong.

But yes, I have no idea how things effect ASIC. Best  to read that and work it out for yourself.


Available for small programming jobs. PM me a Spec and I'll give you a price!
If I have made your day - 1HectorMHoC8ZxGe6wm5pLh2Szs2gbeFvr
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2013, 07:50:27 AM
 #7247

Surely if the rounds been going on one pool for 45 minutes, Then no matter how long the round continues, thats 45 minutes where you are being paid on a PPS. You then earn a few shares from the pool with considerable value. If the round ends within a couple minutes, its not much but you're miners haven't lost much.
If its a few hours, then for the 45 minutes you have been making coins while everyone else here has shares which value is now void.

Now whether 45 minutes is the sweet spot I don't know, and without looking into the maths properly / how much you get per share at a PPS i can't be certain you would earn more, but It seems probable.

Will work it out later. Hopefully you are right and the numbers will prove me wrong!
I mine on a fairly low power system. 40Mhash. If my last share is 30s from the end of the round I seem to get twice as much as if its 2 minutes!
Ok, I am surprised that the scoring system works that way....

It means even if I am an ASIC miner if I have an outage of 90minutes due to a storm then I lose all my shares value. Everyone else profited from my shares. So down time is my enemy.

How does the score system work? (I am sorry for my ignorance!)

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

The thing that came to mind though is the following after being surprised by this part of the score system:

If I run really high difficulty shares...let say 512...and I therefore submit larger shares but less frequently...is this the reason why I earn alot less?

I noticed if I submit very low difficulty shares with a very high frequency...my score seems to stay very low (closer to 100 than 1 billion. Yet, if I submit shares at 512 difficulty every minute, my score goes into the hundreds of millions over time. I assume from watching this that my delay in submitting very high difficulty shares is actually hurting me in my score. Is this correct? If so, then this deeply discourages using high difficulty...right? I can see this turning into an ASIC-festival of people submitting diff1 shares. With BFL coming out and delivering (a minute amount) of ASICs...I assume this is going to be a bandwidth problem in the future, correct?

I eventually decided to run at diff-1 because the super short rounds didn't give me much of any chance as an ASIC to submit the higher difficulty shares.

I find myself scratching my head as what is the right thing to do. It seems to discourage any lapse in submitting shares, even if only a minute between submissions.

I also understood that a low score in 4 digits is better than a high score in the billions. Correct?

Read this to see the exact formula's used. I haven't time to eleborate more on that now considering I have an exam in under an hour, but I shall work out the calculations later.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg50002#msg50002
It seems to me the formula was set when the difficulty was lower, making the share time also lower.
So now the round times are longer I think it could possibly be flawed. Without any actual maths put into this all it is is speculation so I could be completely wrong.

But yes, I have no idea how things effect ASIC. Best  to read that and work it out for yourself.




Here's some reading for you both:

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2012/04/41-slushs-pool.html
http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2012/08/42-slushs-score-method-and-miner.html
http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2012/09/43-slushs-score-method-and-miner.html

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

Activity: 28



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 07:57:55 AM
 #7248


Probably shouldn't comment since I haven't had a chance to read those yet, but I did mention above about how I thought the system was outdated.
Judging by the hash rates in the top of those they aren't very recent.
If im wrong, please dont hang me! I'll apologise for my ignorance once I have had time to look at things properly.

Available for small programming jobs. PM me a Spec and I'll give you a price!
If I have made your day - 1HectorMHoC8ZxGe6wm5pLh2Szs2gbeFvr
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2013, 08:26:51 AM
 #7249


Probably shouldn't comment since I haven't had a chance to read those yet, but I did mention above about how I thought the system was outdated.
Judging by the hash rates in the top of those they aren't very recent.
If im wrong, please dont hang me! I'll apologise for my ignorance once I have had time to look at things properly.

4.2 and 4.3 are the important ones - 4.1 is just background. They are from last year, but the score method is the same now as it was then.

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

Activity: 126


RavinTavin from MyFreeCams


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2013, 09:29:08 AM
 #7250

So thankful I finally got my poo/miner working together! I almost died

BTC DonationSee Profile Bellow Online Daily 7pm-1am  Eastern Time Zone. USA, times may vary Wink
http://profiles.myfreecams.com/RavinTavin <--- Click! 18+ Only
TiborB
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 83


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 10:23:22 AM
 #7251


Probably shouldn't comment since I haven't had a chance to read those yet, but I did mention above about how I thought the system was outdated.
Judging by the hash rates in the top of those they aren't very recent.
If im wrong, please dont hang me! I'll apologise for my ignorance once I have had time to look at things properly.

4.2 and 4.3 are the important ones - 4.1 is just background. They are from last year, but the score method is the same now as it was then.

Very good read indeed. I wonder how many of the forum members will take the time to read & understand (!) it. I see a rather wide spectrum of skills and attitude and many reoccurring questions that makes me assume the majority will just skip anything longer than a few paragraphs. Anyway, congratulations, I really recognize the full worth of these quality articles.

Cheers,
   T
ewitte
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 10:55:25 AM
 #7252

Understand yes - freak out when network interruption at the end of a block YES Cheesy

Donations
BTC - 13Lgy6fb4d3nSYEf2nkgBgyBkkhPw8zkPd
LTC - LegzRwyc2Xhu8cqvaW2jwRrqSnhyaYU6gZ
not.you
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 12:09:38 PM
 #7253


Probably shouldn't comment since I haven't had a chance to read those yet, but I did mention above about how I thought the system was outdated.
Judging by the hash rates in the top of those they aren't very recent.
If im wrong, please dont hang me! I'll apologise for my ignorance once I have had time to look at things properly.

4.2 and 4.3 are the important ones - 4.1 is just background. They are from last year, but the score method is the same now as it was then.

Very good read indeed. I wonder how many of the forum members will take the time to read & understand (!) it. I see a rather wide spectrum of skills and attitude and many reoccurring questions that makes me assume the majority will just skip anything longer than a few paragraphs. Anyway, congratulations, I really recognize the full worth of these quality articles.

Cheers,
   T


Yes I found those the other day and thought they were excellent as well.  (When is the next one coming out?)

I kept seeing blocks that had under-calculated (by a lot) and it was bugging me until I found those.

The TL;DR version is that in order to prevent pool hopping Slush's scoring mechanism rewards shares found later in the round more than shares found earlier in the round.  This mechanism as implemented also introduces variance in the pay out.  Sometimes you get more than expected for a block and sometimes you get less as compared to a purely proportional payout system.  To check, look at your highest and lowest rewards over time and you should find some lower and some higher than the value calculated by this formula: (Block Value * 0.98 * your shares) / total shares

If you are a full-time miner however, the long term effect of the variance will disappear and your long term reward will look almost identical to what it would if that formula above were actually being used.  The end result is that pool hopping from Slush's pool is only profitable to a very, very tiny degree and full time miners are not losing much reward to pool hoppers. 

Slush could lower that pool hopping profitability even more but it would raise the payout variance even more which would make some blocks look even worse.
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2013, 12:35:23 PM
 #7254


Probably shouldn't comment since I haven't had a chance to read those yet, but I did mention above about how I thought the system was outdated.
Judging by the hash rates in the top of those they aren't very recent.
If im wrong, please dont hang me! I'll apologise for my ignorance once I have had time to look at things properly.

4.2 and 4.3 are the important ones - 4.1 is just background. They are from last year, but the score method is the same now as it was then.

Very good read indeed. I wonder how many of the forum members will take the time to read & understand (!) it. I see a rather wide spectrum of skills and attitude and many reoccurring questions that makes me assume the majority will just skip anything longer than a few paragraphs. Anyway, congratulations, I really recognize the full worth of these quality articles.

Cheers,
   T


Yes I found those the other day and thought they were excellent as well.  (When is the next one coming out?)

I kept seeing blocks that had under-calculated (by a lot) and it was bugging me until I found those.

The TL;DR version is that in order to prevent pool hopping Slush's scoring mechanism rewards shares found later in the round more than shares found earlier in the round.  This mechanism as implemented also introduces variance in the pay out.  Sometimes you get more than expected for a block and sometimes you get less as compared to a purely proportional payout system.  To check, look at your highest and lowest rewards over time and you should find some lower and some higher than the value calculated by this formula: (Block Value * 0.98 * your shares) / total shares

If you are a full-time miner however, the long term effect of the variance will disappear and your long term reward will look almost identical to what it would if that formula above were actually being used.  The end result is that pool hopping from Slush's pool is only profitable to a very, very tiny degree and full time miners are not losing much reward to pool hoppers. 

Slush could lower that pool hopping profitability even more but it would raise the payout variance even more which would make some blocks look even worse.


Well, TiborB,  there's you answer - not.you read them and understood them Smiley

Good job understanding and explaining in simple terms what the effects of Slush's score method is. It is exploitable, although the possible cost to miners is minimal, and no-one is pool hopping anymore anyway. Slush's score was why this pool was my favourite for so long. The basic idea is simple, as not.you has explained, but it had hidden complexities that were waiting to be discovered. It's a great proving ground for your mathematical abilities, and without Meni Rosenfeld's help I would have fallen in battle.

As for when the next one is coming out ... um, I kind of lost track of time. Since there's so much interest in the pool atm, I'll get started on it.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
agento2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 01:38:31 PM
 #7255

Depends on how long the outage was. Score is an exp function so your earning degrade to 0. I'm not sure how long it takes. I have been thinking listing the shares on the stats page isn't the best metric. Have score and total score would be better since those are what your earnings are actually calculated on.

I know why the functions are there, but its effects do seem a little harsh. Maybe it could be reduced a little? Otherwise those with massive rigs could switch do the opposite of the normal problem, run them on a PPS pool, then they notice its been 45 minutes here switch.

sadly your argument is the opposite of what it's meant to be, you just described the very actions that the score system are trying to deter. And if people were doing that he would have to make the functions even harsher.

14BAmoY3JopfDS8EJWZSgfNK2saLD4aXCt
agento2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 01:45:57 PM
 #7256

Surely if the rounds been going on one pool for 45 minutes, Then no matter how long the round continues, thats 45 minutes where you are being paid on a PPS. You then earn a few shares from the pool with considerable value. If the round ends within a couple minutes, its not much but you're miners haven't lost much.
If its a few hours, then for the 45 minutes you have been making coins while everyone else here has shares which value is now void.

Now whether 45 minutes is the sweet spot I don't know, and without looking into the maths properly / how much you get per share at a PPS i can't be certain you would earn more, but It seems probable.

Will work it out later. Hopefully you are right and the numbers will prove me wrong!
I mine on a fairly low power system. 40Mhash. If my last share is 30s from the end of the round I seem to get twice as much as if its 2 minutes!
Ok, I am surprised that the scoring system works that way....

It means even if I am an ASIC miner if I have an outage of 90minutes due to a storm then I lose all my shares value. Everyone else profited from my shares. So down time is my enemy.

How does the score system work? (I am sorry for my ignorance!)

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

The thing that came to mind though is the following after being surprised by this part of the score system:

If I run really high difficulty shares...let say 512...and I therefore submit larger shares but less frequently...is this the reason why I earn alot less?

I noticed if I submit very low difficulty shares with a very high frequency...my score seems to stay very low (closer to 100 than 1 billion. Yet, if I submit shares at 512 difficulty every minute, my score goes into the hundreds of millions over time. I assume from watching this that my delay in submitting very high difficulty shares is actually hurting me in my score. Is this correct? If so, then this deeply discourages using high difficulty...right? I can see this turning into an ASIC-festival of people submitting diff1 shares. With BFL coming out and delivering (a minute amount) of ASICs...I assume this is going to be a bandwidth problem in the future, correct?

I eventually decided to run at diff-1 because the super short rounds didn't give me much of any chance as an ASIC to submit the higher difficulty shares.

I find myself scratching my head as what is the right thing to do. It seems to discourage any lapse in submitting shares, even if only a minute between submissions.

I also understood that a low score in 4 digits is better than a high score in the billions. Correct?

The score should be high i'm pretty sure. But as was said at some point in the recent past periodically resets just do to large numbers (computers can only count so high easily). And the score system sadly has no way of knowing if you have an outage or you just went to another pool for a while. Stratum was slush's answer to bandwidth issues. Your view that everyone else profited from your shares is a bit off too though I'm pretty sure. I haven't read enough on how pools actually work but I would guess that the older the share the less useful it is.

14BAmoY3JopfDS8EJWZSgfNK2saLD4aXCt
ewitte
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
April 30, 2013, 01:53:51 PM
 #7257

Depends on how long the outage was. Score is an exp function so your earning degrade to 0. I'm not sure how long it takes. I have been thinking listing the shares on the stats page isn't the best metric. Have score and total score would be better since those are what your earnings are actually calculated on.

I know why the functions are there, but its effects do seem a little harsh. Maybe it could be reduced a little? Otherwise those with massive rigs could switch do the opposite of the normal problem, run them on a PPS pool, then they notice its been 45 minutes here switch.

sadly your argument is the opposite of what it's meant to be, you just described the very actions that the score system are trying to deter. And if people were doing that he would have to make the functions even harsher.

That is the way it is though if your on a 4h block you can get 99% payout just being on the last hour.  There has to be some way of determining how long you were connected and calculate off that?Huh

Donations
BTC - 13Lgy6fb4d3nSYEf2nkgBgyBkkhPw8zkPd
LTC - LegzRwyc2Xhu8cqvaW2jwRrqSnhyaYU6gZ
Lucko
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 02:04:15 PM
 #7258

Ok, I am surprised that the scoring system works that way....

It means even if I am an ASIC miner if I have an outage of 90minutes due to a storm then I lose all my shares value. Everyone else profited from my shares. So down time is my enemy.

How does the score system work? (I am sorry for my ignorance!)
There are some resets of the scores also so after a reset you don't get any... 90 minutes is more then enough for reset to accrue... Probably more then once. So even 1000 ASIC wouldn't help... That why I was asking for pool to have a maintenance mode and that way I'm using backup PPS pool in time of maintenance... And also why backup pool is PPS. So I get something out... If the backup pool would use Slush method for short outage I would get close to 0. But then again I could be lucky... For some time I used PPLNS method but I got out about 10% of what I lost so PPS is probably much better... But then again I might be wrong...
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2013, 02:05:32 PM
 #7259

Ok, I am surprised that the scoring system works that way....

It means even if I am an ASIC miner if I have an outage of 90minutes due to a storm then I lose all my shares value. Everyone else profited from my shares. So down time is my enemy.

How does the score system work? (I am sorry for my ignorance!)
There are some resets of the scores also so after a reset you don't get any... 90 minutes is more then enough for reset to accrue... Probably more then once. So even 1000 ASIC wouldn't help... That way I was asking for pool to have a maintenance mode and that way I'm using backup PPS pool in time of maintenance... And also why backup pool is PPS. So I get something out... If the backup pool would use Slush method for short outage I would get close to 0. But then again I could be lucky... For some time I used PPLNS method but I got out about 10% of what I lost so PPS is probably much better... But then again I might be wrong...

Not how the "reset" works. It's more of a "renormalisation".

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

Activity: 917



View Profile
April 30, 2013, 02:47:19 PM
 #7260

I suspect you are being hasty in blaming stratum.  My CGMiner instances - 5 of them, have been running on slush's pool continuously for over a month with stratum without any downtime.
I merely described my personal experience; YMMV. The vast difference in possible hardware configurations between users, and the different effect that has on code execution in the software, makes this impossible to generalize.

I can say that, for me, mining on Slush using both stratum and getwork has been quite stable. I can also say that mining on some other pools (bitminter is one example) using stratum has not, while getwork has.

For example (again, not to generalize my own experience) my stratum instance crashed 3 times in the past 3 days; my 2 getwork instances have not.

BTC: 1DJVUnLuPA2bERTkyeir8bKn1eSoRCrYvx
NMC: NFcfHSBBnq622pAr1Xoh9KtnBPA5CUn6id
Pages: « 1 ... 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 [363] 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 ... 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!