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

[allinvain]

ok this ain't right. I refresh my profile page to look at the numbers every now and then when I'm on the computer. I know a round is over when my total creeps up a little bit then I'll look at the stats page to see how much I got for that round since it'll vary because I'm using the comp. Twice today I saw my total actually decline. Any reason that's happening Slush?

Only reason for declining total reward is invalid block or payout. Nothing else.

Hey slush, out of curiosity, do you ever intend to pay for invalid blocks like Tycho?

[slush]

Hey slush, out of curiosity, do you ever intend to pay for invalid blocks like Tycho?

I prefer lower fees and following bitcoin rules, so - no.

[Jaime Frontero]

Hey slush, out of curiosity, do you ever intend to pay for invalid blocks like Tycho?

I prefer lower fees and following bitcoin rules, so - no.

agreed.  i'm happy as it is.  you definitely have the sweetspot pool:  big enough to crunch blocks fairly quickly, but not so big the payouts are tiny.  you're quite welcome to my fees.

[allinvain]

If total pool hash rate rises further would you consider splitting the pool in two? Would this cause higher or lower variance?

[marcus_of_augustus]

we have lift off...

The dc's are annoying, but my main concern is when the pool goes down for however long it does my card goes from 71c to mid 40c and having that every now and then worries me about my hardware. I want a steady temp on my gpu no 70 and 40ish back to 70. I am sure its not good for the gpu.

This is a valid concern. What I do is run a secondary instance of the miner program on the same GPU pointing at another pool with a much lower aggression, -f or whatever, so it sits in the background and when the primary pool crashes it gets all the available processor and ramps up ... net result temp. on GPU is constant.

Deepbit.net is good pool to point your secondary process at since it pays per share and doesn't penalise for disconnects mid-round and it makes few bitcents now and then ...

[Meni Rosenfeld]

If total pool hash rate rises further would you consider splitting the pool in two? Would this cause higher or lower variance?

A bigger pool has less variance.
Hence, splitting the pool will increase variance, with no effect on expectation.

and doesn't penalise for disconnects mid-round

slush's pool doesn't penalize for disconnects mid-round.

[marcus_of_augustus]

slush's pool doesn't penalize for disconnects mid-round.

but your earlier shares depreciate so you lose out ... arguing over semantics here aren't you?

[Meni Rosenfeld]

slush's pool doesn't penalize for disconnects mid-round.

but your earlier shares depreciate so you lose out ... arguing over semantics here aren't you?

Your earlier shares depreciate even if you stay connected. They don't depreciate because you disconnected. And your newer shares have the same expectation with either scoring method.

And this isn't semantics. If the question is "If I often disconnect from the pool, does this mean I'm better off with deepbit?" then the factual, objective answer is a resounding "no".

[marcus_of_augustus]

slush's pool doesn't penalize for disconnects mid-round.

but your earlier shares depreciate so you lose out ... arguing over semantics here aren't you?

Your earlier shares depreciate even if you stay connected. They don't depreciate because you disconnected. And your newer shares have the same expectation with either scoring method.

And this isn't semantics. If the question is "If I often disconnect from the pool, does this mean I'm better off with deepbit?" then the factual, objective answer is a resounding "no".

Well that wasn't question, but you go right ahead and make up the answers to your own questions because that is how you operate ....

What factual, objective definition of "often" are you using here btw?

What factual, objective answer would you give if the disconnection, is "not often"?

[Jarredm]

If total pool hash rate rises further would you consider splitting the pool in two? Would this cause higher or lower variance?

Is this necessary?  I have been running at a consistant total M/Hash average for around a week now and in that time the pool's rate has risen 80 G/Hashes in that time, however my payouts seem to have stayed steady.

[allinvain]

If total pool hash rate rises further would you consider splitting the pool in two? Would this cause higher or lower variance?

Is this necessary?  I have been running at a consistant total M/Hash average for around a week now and in that time the pool's rate has risen 80 G/Hashes in that time, however my payouts seem to have stayed steady.

Well I'm not sure if it's necessary. I hear many people talk about the so called "sweet spot" as far as a pool's total hash rate is concerned, and I also hear people say that it doesn't matter how high the hash rate is cause the higher it is the lower the variance. But wouldn't slower miners be put at a disadvantage because they can't get their shares in fast enough before the round is over?

Maybe some expert can jump in here and enlighten me/us.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

slush's pool doesn't penalize for disconnects mid-round.

but your earlier shares depreciate so you lose out ... arguing over semantics here aren't you?

Your earlier shares depreciate even if you stay connected. They don't depreciate because you disconnected. And your newer shares have the same expectation with either scoring method.

And this isn't semantics. If the question is "If I often disconnect from the pool, does this mean I'm better off with deepbit?" then the factual, objective answer is a resounding "no".

Well that wasn't question, but you go right ahead and make up the answers to your own questions because that is how you operate ....

Then enlighten me. What does it mean that "slush's pool penalizes for disconnecting mid-round"? Or maybe it doesn't mean anything and you're just spewing out meaningless FUD?

If total pool hash rate rises further would you consider splitting the pool in two? Would this cause higher or lower variance?

Is this necessary?  I have been running at a consistant total M/Hash average for around a week now and in that time the pool's rate has risen 80 G/Hashes in that time, however my payouts seem to have stayed steady.

Well I'm not sure if it's necessary. I hear many people talk about the so called "sweet spot" as far as a pool's total hash rate is concerned, and I also hear people say that it doesn't matter how high the hash rate is cause the higher it is the lower the variance. But wouldn't slower miners be put at a disadvantage because they can't get their shares in fast enough before the round is over?

Maybe some expert can jump in here and enlighten me/us.

The slower miners will get their shares in the next round. "Sweet spot" is a myth.

[max in montreal]

whats the proper way to log in and start mining using phoenix and slush pool? I think i am having problems with worker/login/password...i am trying to use:

phoenix -u  http://username.worker.workerspassword@mining.bitcoin.cz:8332/ -k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=7 FASTLOOP=false WORKSIZE=128

[commlinx]

whats the proper way to log in and start mining using phoenix and slush pool? I think i am having problems with worker/login/password...i am trying to use:

phoenix -u  http://username.worker.workerspassword@mining.bitcoin.cz:8332/ -k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=7 FASTLOOP=false WORKSIZE=128

Try a colon before the password:

phoenix -u  http://username.worker:workerspassword@mining.bitcoin.cz:8332/ -k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=7 FASTLOOP=false WORKSIZE=128

[slush]

The slower miners will get their shares in the next round. "Sweet spot" is a myth.

Amen.

[slush]

I have been running at a consistant total M/Hash average for around a week now and in that time the pool's rate has risen 80 G/Hashes in that time, however my payouts seem to have stayed steady.

You're right, once the pool find at least few blocks per day (say 15 blocks and more), people should get very steady payout, total pool hashrate is not relevant.

[marcus_of_augustus]

The slower miners will get their shares in the next round. "Sweet spot" is a myth.

Amen.

As long as that "next round" comes along before the next difficulty increase ... get over it ... fast rounds introduce new variance for small miners in huge pools.

[slush]

http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=1976.msg50002#msg50002

Yeah.  I remember that.  I was just hoping he would share his C with us (well... me actually ).

C=300

[ensign_lee]

{edit, nvm}

[zale]

When I started a few days ago slushs pool was at 380Ghash/s, now its over 500.
I wonder what the cause of this is. Many many new miners? People upgrading their rigs? Both?