Bitcoin Forum
March 29, 2024, 10:36:35 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 [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 ... 1154 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool  (Read 4381799 times)
crashoveride54902
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 504


Dream become broken often


View Profile
February 04, 2013, 09:34:15 PM
 #5761

16112 n 16114 invaild Sad guess that makes up for our 50btc block...

Dreams of cyprto solving everything is slowly slipping away...Replaced by scams/hacks Sad
1711708595
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711708595

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711708595
Reply with quote  #2

1711708595
Report to moderator
If you see garbage posts (off-topic, trolling, spam, no point, etc.), use the "report to moderator" links. All reports are investigated, though you will rarely be contacted about your reports.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711708595
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711708595

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711708595
Reply with quote  #2

1711708595
Report to moderator
1711708595
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711708595

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711708595
Reply with quote  #2

1711708595
Report to moderator
1711708595
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711708595

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711708595
Reply with quote  #2

1711708595
Report to moderator
hmmmstrange
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 669
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 05, 2013, 03:14:43 AM
 #5762

Btw round #16099, block value over 50 BTC. Say wow!

I vote to return the 25BTC, as it was clearly a mistake.
enkidu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 05, 2013, 03:51:04 AM
 #5763

Is there anywhere in the pool's web interface (or elsewhere) for one's account to determine how much of the pool's rewarded btc is coming from 'minted' bitcoins versus transaction fees?  If not, this visibility would be nice to have.

Thanks!
Enk
deeplink
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500


In cryptography we trust


View Profile
February 05, 2013, 11:18:23 AM
 #5764

Is there anywhere in the pool's web interface (or elsewhere) for one's account to determine how much of the pool's rewarded btc is coming from 'minted' bitcoins versus transaction fees?  If not, this visibility would be nice to have.

In the table on the statistics page.

Column "Block value"
subtract 25 (minted bitcoins)
Remainder is transaction fees

You can also download the Greasemonkey script Pimped mining which among other things shows you some nice totals and averages.
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/98553

Spoiler: current avg block value is 26 BTC (25 minted + 1 BTC fees) obviously the 50 BTC block has increased the avg block value because it used to be below 25.5 BTC
enkidu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 05, 2013, 08:11:26 PM
 #5765

Thanks deeplink - that is good enough for my purposes!
slush (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097



View Profile WWW
February 06, 2013, 09:43:49 AM
 #5766

Round 16156 has been marked as invalid by mistake, it is fixed now and block rewards are paid already.

JayPhizzt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 08, 2013, 09:44:53 PM
 #5767

Just switched to this pool and trying to get things going, but for some reason when I try to start mining I get "errno 10061", what's that about?

I'm using the latest version of guiminer and I've installed the stratum proxy. Also, I'm mining on a dual-GPU card if that matters(5970).
kkurtmann
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 475
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
February 09, 2013, 12:00:27 AM
 #5768

im using GUIMiner v2012-11-18 and it connects fine for me and you dont need the proxy

https://www.buytrezor.com?a=55c37b866c11   well sir, I like it!
cosurgi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 298
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 10, 2013, 06:56:35 PM
 #5769

guys, I was away quite long, and sorry for not checking if this question has already been answered Smiley I only want to make sure, this is just a simple check Smiley

slush, you of course did lower your pool fee from 1 BTC to 0.5 BTC after block reward went down from 50 to 25, right?

and sorry again for asking such stupid questions Wink

hmmmstrange
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 669
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 11, 2013, 06:56:08 AM
 #5770

guys, I was away quite long, and sorry for not checking if this question has already been answered Smiley I only want to make sure, this is just a simple check Smiley

slush, you of course did lower your pool fee from 1 BTC to 0.5 BTC after block reward went down from 50 to 25, right?

and sorry again for asking such stupid questions Wink

(25 BTC + block fees - 2% fee) * (shares found by user's workers) / (total shares in current round)

So yes he's taking ~0.506 BTC per block.
slush (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097



View Profile WWW
February 11, 2013, 06:52:12 PM
 #5771

slush, you of course did lower your pool fee from 1 BTC to 0.5 BTC after block reward went down from 50 to 25, right?

yep

slush (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097



View Profile WWW
February 13, 2013, 11:46:25 AM
Last edit: February 13, 2013, 03:59:35 PM by slush
 #5772

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.

tnkflx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 349
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 13, 2013, 02:24:33 PM
 #5773

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 (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097



View Profile WWW
February 13, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
 #5774

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: 922
Merit: 1003



View Profile
February 13, 2013, 03:40:17 PM
 #5775

... 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?
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
February 13, 2013, 03:46:38 PM
 #5776

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.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
slush (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1097



View Profile WWW
February 13, 2013, 03:51:51 PM
 #5777

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: 698
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 15, 2013, 07:33:47 AM
 #5778

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
10,000 dollars in one place talking - Dudes, hooray, Bitcoin against us just one, but we are growing in numbers!
tnkflx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 349
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 15, 2013, 08:40:48 AM
 #5779

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: 2058
Merit: 1007


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 15, 2013, 09:19:11 AM
 #5780

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
Pages: « 1 ... 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 [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 ... 1154 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!