[4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool

[slush]

Did you ever fix the problem of not being able to change worker passwords (memory cache)?

Yes, this is fixed. I implemented 10 minute timeout for  in-memory credentials. Not ideal, but I had to balance user comfort and performance.

[[Tycho]]

slush, would be nice if you implement forcing logoff to all browsers of the user who changes his password.
In a situation when someone's password is compromised, changing it and logging off won't kick the "evil guy" from site.

[jhonnyb]

Hello .

I have a question. I got 4 workers one GPU 8600GT turning out around 5000khash, another GPU - 7000 khash, 2 CPU turning out 4000khash resp. 2000khash. I usually get 0.01 BTC or lower per block found by the pool( ~0.3 BTC per day). Is this the normal payout :-/ ? Just asking .. cause it doesn't seem much for a day's work.

Thanks. have a nice day.

[theGECK]

Hello .

I have a question. I got 4 workers one GPU 8600GT turning out around 5000khash, another GPU - 7000 khash, 2 CPU turning out 4000khash resp. 2000khash. I usually get 0.01 BTC or lower per block found by the pool( ~0.3 BTC per day). Is this the normal payout :-/ ? Just asking .. cause it doesn't seem much for a day's work.

Thanks. have a nice day.

It seems very low to me, since when I was at 17Mhash, I was mining .5-.75BTC/day. From what I can tell, each miner needs it's own worker account. For these 4 miners, do you have four separate workers? If you do, have you checked out the "My Account" page to see if they are getting shares?

[jhonnyb]

I do have 4 worker accounts and they get regular updates in the "Last share at" column.
Last share at
2011-02-17 12:16:40    
2011-02-17 12:25:32
2011-02-17 11:46:57
2011-02-17 12:12:29    

they are 2 h behind either because of the time zone or slush's anti theft system:)

[epicenter]

Hello .

I have a question. I got 4 workers one GPU 8600GT turning out around 5000khash, another GPU - 7000 khash, 2 CPU turning out 4000khash resp. 2000khash. I usually get 0.01 BTC or lower per block found by the pool( ~0.3 BTC per day). Is this the normal payout :-/ ? Just asking .. cause it doesn't seem much for a day's work.

Thanks. have a nice day.

Here is an example [hope my math is correct]

From http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/ we can see about how many hashes per second the pool is doing, for example, right now: 64.040 Ghash/s
You are doing 5000 + 7000 + 4000 + 2000 = 18,000 kHash/s = 0.018 Ghash/s
Your % of the pools power = (100 / 64.040) * .018 = 0.0281074329%

From http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/graphs/ we can see the pool earned 1800 BTC on 2/15/2011
1800 * 0.000281074329 = 0.505933792 bitcoins

This assumes you did 18kHash for 24 hours straight on 2/15/2011, and the pool's power stayed the same the entire day (it doesn't), but it gives you a ballpark of what you can make.

[jhonnyb]

thanks for clarifying

[Mythoranium]

Hello! First of all, thank you for the great service!

I have a question, though:
The website says that you need a separate user/pass for every worker. What would happen if one would ignore that?
It's just that I accidentally did that when switching a miner on my workers - I was just copy/pasting the miners to different workers and forgot to change the credentials, and only later did I notice that on the stats page only one of my workers had produced any shares in the last couple of hours. However, when I went to change that, the miners seemed to be giving shares without problems. Is using different credentials merely a convenience so that I could differentiate between them on my accounts page, or is it possible that some shares would not get accepted?
What about if I were to run both a GPU miner and a CPU miner on the same worker? How about if I was running only a single-threaded miner on a multi-core system, so I would have to run multiple instances to utilize all the cores?

Thank you in advance to an explanations and, again, keep up the good work with the server.

[Ricochet]

What about if I were to run both a GPU miner and a CPU miner on the same worker? How about if I was running only a single-threaded miner on a multi-core system, so I would have to run multiple instances to utilize all the cores?

I can't say anything about the first question (I use different credentials for my GPU and CPU miners), but for the second one, pretty much every miner I've seen lately includes a "-threads=X" option to specify how many cores to use when CPU mining, so you shouldn't need to run multiple instances just to max out the CPU.  Check the documentation for your miner and see if there's an option for that.

[pla]

Hey all... new BitCoin fan, and I want to thank Slush for making it possible for lower-rate miners such as myself to get at least something.  (After a week of generating solo and seeing nothing, I found the online calculator and realized that I had no shot at ever seriously solving a block on my own).  

I have a question about the accounts page at mining.bitcoin.cz, though...

When I log in from my work machine, I see the correct wallet address (matching what I see in the official BitCoin GUI).  When I log in from home, I see something totally different.

Context - I first ran BitCoin from my work machine, and set up my mining account from there as well.  I keep my wallet on a thumbdrive, and last night tried setting up a miner on my home machine (that part seemed to work just fine).  But when I went to register a new worker, I saw the wrong wallet on my account page.  Wondering if I'd accidentally pasted garbage into that field at some point (or worse, if someone had hacked my account in under a day), I put my correct address back in and saved.  I then reloaded the page, and saw the "wrong" address still there, so figured it must only show a hashed value or something like that as a security measure.  But then this morning, I log in and see my "correct" wallet address.

So... Why do I see different addresses depending on where I log in from?

Oh, one more question (possibly miner-specific, but I think this actually comes from the pool server) - Most of the time, on finding a share, it tells me Server sent: {"result": true, "id": "1", "error": null}.  Every now and then it tells me Server sent: {"result": false, "id": "1", "error": null}.  Does that "false" in the JSON data actually mean anything?

Thanks!

[Mythoranium]

I can't say anything about the first question (I use different credentials for my GPU and CPU miners), but for the second one, pretty much every miner I've seen lately includes a "-threads=X" option to specify how many cores to use when CPU mining, so you shouldn't need to run multiple instances just to max out the CPU.  Check the documentation for your miner and see if there's an option for that.

Thank you for the reply!
Yes, I agree - it is usually unnecessary, although I think I saw a miner that didn't have the threading feature (yet). In this case it was more of a hypothetical question

[myrkul]

YAAAY! for slush! Finally I'm seeing btc roll (okay, trickle, but it's better than the 0 I was getting solo) in. One Thing: What happens to the payout amount that is less than your threshold? Say, you have 0.9991573 btc confirmed, and then another 0.00141324 comes in, tipping you over the 1.0 default threshold. The system kicks you your payment. What happens?

(note: I'm ignoring the pool fee here for ease of calculation)

a) you get sent 1.00057054 btc.

b) you get sent 1.0 btc and the system keeps the 0.00057054 in your pool.

c) you get sent 1.0 btc and the system eats the 0.00057054.

[Raulo]

b) you get sent 1.0 btc and the system keeps the 0.00057054 in your pool.

The correct answer is b).

Small detail. The pool checks the threshold every full hour. So if you cross the threshold at 10:05, you have to wait until 11:00 for the payment.

[myrkul]

b) you get sent 1.0 btc and the system keeps the 0.00057054 in your pool.

The correct answer is b).

Small detail. The pool checks the threshold every full hour. So if you cross the threshold at 10:05, you have to wait until 11:00 for the payment.

Oh good. Since I work with such relatively small amounts, I don't want to lose that .0005 btc. It adds up!
And I can handle waiting. One final question, which is probably answered elsewhere, but blame laziness for not wanting to track it down, If I want to receive a payment, does my bitcoin client need to be generating coins, or just listening to the network?

[ribuck]

If I want to receive a payment, does my bitcoin client need to be generating coins, or just listening to the network?

Neither. The payment is recorded in the block chain. Your bitcoin client only needs to join the network when you want to check your balance or spend the payment. And you don't need to be generating to do this.

[myrkul]

If I want to receive a payment, does my bitcoin client need to be generating coins, or just listening to the network?

Neither. The payment is recorded in the block chain. Your bitcoin client only needs to join the network when you want to check your balance or spend the payment. And you don't need to be generating to do this.

excellent. Bitcoins are awesome.

[slush]

The website says that you need a separate user/pass for every worker. What would happen if one would ignore that?

On the server side, every worker has queue of 12 last jobs (by default), which are needed to verify submitted jobs by worker. If you submit a share, but the job was already deleted on the server (by asking 12 next jobs from server in meantime), the share won't be accepted. So, if you're mining only by CPUs, you probably don't need separate workers, as CPU miners does not need such high number of parallel jobs. But I still recommend to use workers - it is easier to track miner problems and you don't need to investigate how much jobs is your worker asking (it does not need to correspond with number of CPU cores). If you are GPU miner, you should definitely use separate workers to not losing shares.

[theGECK]

Watching my "estimated reward" slowly go down under the new score system if I haven't found anything in a few minutes sure is depressing...

[Ricochet]

That happened with the old scoring system as well, just perhaps not to quite as strong a degree.  At least the estimated reward field is back to begin with, heh.

[hatboyzero]

I think there might be an overflow error with the scoring...  Look at the total score in the following vs. the contributed shares and CFD...

Current round started at:      2011-02-17 18:44:29 UTC
Current round duration:         1:16:43
Current shares CFD:             92.30 %
Current Bitcoin block#:         108777
Current server load:             300 getwork/s
Active workers:                   877
Total score of current round: 5354.9010
Shares contributed ":           66660
Approx. cluster perf:            60.268 Ghash/s