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

[keewee]

I noticed every once in a while (like the last block) there will be almost 10BTC worth of transfer fees! I think it's awesome but does anyone know why that happens? a typo when someone did a transfer? or are people just being very nice to miners

Just noticed this myself. Nice 

18141   2013-05-22 02:50:08   2:18:08   17606119   1464   0.00309898   none   237286   34.36614106    95 confirmations left

[Mowcore]

I was lucky with that fat one, managed to squeeze 124 shares in towards the end after noticing my pc was asleep when getting up for work! 0.0028, that's more than I get for normal rounds haha, could of been a few pence more had it been on though

[stslimited]

I was lucky with that fat one, managed to squeeze 124 shares in towards the end after noticing my pc was asleep when getting up for work! 0.0028, that's more than I get for normal rounds haha, could of been a few pence more had it been on though

haha I know I only got partial in that round, but still had more and I was like WHAAAT if that block gets orphaned I am going to be pissed

[minerg0d]

So does a GPU miner like myself gain anything by using a higher user difficulty in Slush's pool?

[autonomous42]

So does a GPU miner like myself gain anything by using a higher user difficulty in Slush's pool?

No, not that I know of. I've tried it and all you get is fewer shares/min. The adjustable difficulty is really for miners of FPGA and ASIC because those high-throughput devices would clog the server. By setting a higher difficulty, the machine deals with fewer shares but they are worth n*1 shares in slush's stats.

[Lanidarc]

I noticed every once in a while (like the last block) there will be almost 10BTC worth of transfer fees! I think it's awesome but does anyone know why that happens? a typo when someone did a transfer? or are people just being very nice to miners

Hey, I noticed this a few times, and wondered myself. So I went on blockchain.info and looked at some of the transactions. You can see some Tx look like they have been run through a poor mixing job like this:
 
http://i43.tinypic.com/dgqhxw.jpg

So here we see Wallet 15r1c move 590 BTC to a couple other wallets, incurring 1.014 BTC Tx fee, which then manage to get the coin to Wallet 1KNCQ who gives it back to 15r1c all in the same second, which means they all get rolled up in the same block, incurring a total of 1.39454 BTC worth of Tx Fees. And so on and so forth.... This is but an example of why some blocks have HUGE Tx Fees.

You go around looking at some of these wallets, and you can see some pretty amazing amounts of coin doing neat tricks!

There's lot's of Tx mixers out there, but these blokes prolly used a horse like this one

http://i1276.photobucket.com/albums/y462/staffpicks/Animated_GIFs/horsears_zpsc0a8b98c.gif

[tempero]

How do you know those are transfer fees and not just change addresses?

[eleuthria]

So here we see Wallet 15r1c move 590 BTC to a couple other wallets, incurring 1.014 BTC Tx fee, which then manage to get the coin to Wallet 1KNCQ who gives it back to 15r1c all in the same second, which means they all get rolled up in the same block, incurring a total of 1.39454 BTC worth of Tx Fees. And so on and so forth.... This is but an example of why some blocks have HUGE Tx Fees.

You go around looking at some of these wallets, and you can see some pretty amazing amounts of coin doing neat tricks!

Where are you finding 1.014 TX fees?  That looks like a normal wallet sending coins.  When you send coins, the remainder goes to a change address.  What you were doing was basically just following the change addresses.  The fees on each TX were 0.0005, which is the standard TX fee for coins without high priority (low confirmation count).

I've detected problems in bitcoind 0.8.1 where high number of transactions in memory pool caused 100% CPU load on the pool server. Because of this, submitting of new blocks were delayed for tens of seconds and caused high invalid rate.

Sipa (the bitcoin developer) implemented fix for this problem (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2677) which I just tested and implemented to the pool server. I'm watching the pool closely, but the CPU load dropped from 100% back to 2-3%, so everything looks fine so far...

Thank you for posting a link to that patch slush.  I had been seeing a lot of similar issues lately (though I wasn't getting the orphan rates, since my pool servers stop accepting/submitting shares when they already see a new block, even if no work has been provided yet).  Was using some workarounds the p2pool guys have used, but it still required a lot of monitoring and bitcoind restarts.

[Lanidarc]

How do you know those are transfer fees and not just change addresses?

Well how do you explain 34 BTC blocks? This was my completely noob rudimentary attempt... 

[DryMartini]

Is this really correct or a bug?
https://blockchain.info/blocks/ASICMiner

Has AsicMiner found all recent blocks all over the pools? Scary stuff.

[Kruncha]

Is this really correct or a bug?
https://blockchain.info/blocks/ASICMiner

Has AsicMiner found all recent blocks all over the pools? Scary stuff.

No, just the last block http://blockchain.info/

K.

[vs3]

I noticed every once in a while (like the last block) there will be almost 10BTC worth of transfer fees! I think it's awesome but does anyone know why that happens? a typo when someone did a transfer? or are people just being very nice to miners

Just noticed this myself. Nice 

18141   2013-05-22 02:50:08   2:18:08   17606119   1464   0.00309898   none   237286   34.36614106    95 confirmations left

It seems there is going to be some more fun with that block:
18141    2013-05-22 02:50:08    2:18:08    17606119    none    none    none    237286    59.82222506    62 confirmations left

note the current reward (which was a non-zero just some hours ago) and the current block value ... which doesn't match what coinbase says.

* vs3 going for popcorn and getting ready to watch the show

[Mowcore]

About that fat block, the 31 BTC one. Just got back from work and it is now 59 odd instead of 31 BTC and now all my shares are gone with no reward. 62 confirms left, block 18141 /237286. I know the issue with no reward until the block has confirmed for awhile, I have no problem waiting for those, just never seen this before! lol. It might have something to do with bitcoind I guess 

[slush]

Pool skipped storing the block #237278, unfortunately the monitoring didn't woke me up at night. To fix it and be as fair as possible, I added the block reward into round 18141 (closed by block #237286) and recalculated block rewards. That's the reason for such high block value of #237286 ...

[slush]

Btw bitcoind's fix works very well, no problems so far.

[valladex]

cheers slush, just woke up to a momentary fright followed by a huge smile.

[hasher87]

18141    2013-05-22 02:50:08    2:18:08    17604905    664    0.00269354    237286    59.82222506

awesome rate with an awesome block at an awesome time duration. now if only we could have this every single time  

[Mowcore]

Thanks mate!

[Miracek]

Thanks Slush, one more reason I know this is the right pool for my measly couple of Hashes   

[stslimited]

can someone explain pool difficulty to me?


I have 12963MH/s from my one worker, and I set 9-16gh/s from the pool's dropdown menu and it says difficulty 8

my stratum proxy says also says

"proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share from 'worker1' accepted, diff 8"



can someone explain what the benefit of this is? vs a difficulty of 1?

how does this effect my payout, how does it help the pool, pros cons etc