KNK
|
|
June 03, 2013, 05:15:26 PM |
|
Based on the time it took to catch-up there is enough room for more miners
|
|
|
|
stephengillon
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
June 03, 2013, 05:18:12 PM |
|
it goes between 11 and 9 all the time.
seems more so during the day (north america)
or more sense night in europe
|
|
|
|
nottm28
|
|
June 03, 2013, 05:20:17 PM |
|
Anyone else seeing the earlier problem recurring? 1 of my 4 workers is submitting shares ok but website not updating for this one worker - 12 mins now...
[EDIT] hmm - restarted the worker and it's updating on the website now...
|
donations not accepted
|
|
|
Lucko
|
|
June 03, 2013, 05:27:29 PM |
|
Recent luck attracts more users? 12 GH/s now
Slush went up from 8% of total network hashrate to 10%
In ideal conditions more = better
But will it blend? (server loads)
Luck makes pool look bigger also... Speed is estimated. Pool doesn't ask users what is there speed. It estimate it based on shares. Same goes for network share. If pool is lucky it will get bigger...
|
|
|
|
Lucko
|
|
June 03, 2013, 05:29:07 PM |
|
Anyone else seeing the earlier problem recurring? 1 of my 4 workers is submitting shares ok but website not updating for this one worker - 12 mins now...
[EDIT] hmm - restarted the worker and it's updating on the website now...
You had stratum error. If you restart the worker it starts recording shares but you still need to wait to get the missing shares back.
|
|
|
|
KNK
|
|
June 03, 2013, 05:37:56 PM |
|
Luck makes pool look bigger also... Speed is estimated. Pool doesn't ask users what is there speed. It estimate it based on shares. Same goes for network share. If pool is lucky it will get bigger...
That's not the case if you ask organofcorti There is something which is partially true (IMHO) by the way: 'Pool doesn't ask users what is their speed' - true, but most of the miners are sending their hashrate anyway, then the problem is that the value can not be trusted so the pool should either confirm the value or ignore it completely with the second being easier. For the network it is completely true, as it does not interact with the miners or pools, but deducts their hashrate from their submissions.
|
|
|
|
Lucko
|
|
June 03, 2013, 07:56:16 PM |
|
...but most of the miners are sending their hashrate anyway, then the problem is that the value can not be trusted so the pool should either confirm the value or ignore it completely with the second being easier.
Thanks, didn't know that...
|
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
June 03, 2013, 09:22:44 PM |
|
...but most of the miners are sending their hashrate anyway, then the problem is that the value can not be trusted so the pool should either confirm the value or ignore it completely with the second being easier.
Thanks, didn't know that... regardless. if you say the hashrate going from 10543.740 Ghash/s 2 weeks ago to 11543.740 Ghash/s is because of luck then you are declaring ALL miners are having increased luck which is not how probability works. Cluster performance looks like it is showing the actual hashrate to the assumed hashrate. for example 2 of my 6 miners are presently lower than their normal hashrate, one is well above and the last 3 are dead on. Now the pool is hitting 12543.740 Ghash/s a week after it when up 1000 gh/s it has gone up another 1000 gh/s. the only answer has to be that 1000 gh/s of miners joined Slush 2 weeks ago and 1000 gh/s of miners joined this week. All I know is every 1000 gh/s increase negates one of my miners grrr... I just added 2 to make up for the 1000 from 2 weeks ago!
|
|
|
|
diskodasa
|
|
June 03, 2013, 09:32:58 PM |
|
The rule: Higher pool luck = higher payments, lower pool luck = lower payments!
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:07:39 PM |
|
hah Block 239570 our next was 2 seconds and we invalidated our own block.....
|
|
|
|
big6willy9
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:10:47 PM |
|
hah Block 239570 our next was 2 seconds and we invalidated our own block.....
Could you explain this please?
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:10:56 PM |
|
The rule: Higher pool luck = higher payments, lower pool luck = lower payments!
If that is the only rule LUCK dictates u should mine BTCGUILD as they find 50+ blocks a day aka must have good luck. so BTCGUILD Luck > Slush Luck. However Slush Pool > BTCGUILD = Higher Payments
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:12:30 PM |
|
hah Block 239570 our next was 2 seconds and we invalidated our own block.....
Could you explain this please? 18373 2013-06-03 22:57:34 0:00:02 16141 7 0.01064283 239570 25.23781000 97 confirmations left 18372 2013-06-03 22:57:32 1:18:06 13727369 3341 0.00607761 239570 25.23781000 97 confirmations left 18373 took 2 seconds and got submitted while 18372 was and became invalid... I surmise.... Sucks I lost .01+ btc. OH WELL
|
|
|
|
rsbriggs
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:16:33 PM |
|
Which is being invalid 239570? The first block or the 2 seconds block? Not is matter - 2 shares in second block for about same rewarding both blocks. Hoping could not happen both invalid.
|
|
|
|
minerapia
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:17:48 PM Last edit: June 04, 2013, 06:35:29 AM by minerapia |
|
2 second block, is a bug. It has exactly same block value, which is hardly a coincidence. first one is in the main chain anyway (2 sec one is the invalid one).
|
donations -> btc: 1M6yf45NskQxWXknkMTzQ8o6wShQcSY4EC ltc: LeTpCd6cQL26Q1vjc9kJrTjjFMrPhrpv6j
|
|
|
goatmonkey
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:29:31 PM |
|
Maybe that's the fix for the block we didn't get before.
|
|
|
|
minerapia
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:30:12 PM |
|
The rule: Higher pool luck = higher payments, lower pool luck = lower payments!
If that is the only rule LUCK dictates u should mine BTCGUILD as they find 50+ blocks a day aka must have good luck. so BTCGUILD Luck > Slush Luck. However Slush Pool > BTCGUILD = Higher Payments Luck is not defined as blocks per day. Its defined as blocks / hashrate per day
|
donations -> btc: 1M6yf45NskQxWXknkMTzQ8o6wShQcSY4EC ltc: LeTpCd6cQL26Q1vjc9kJrTjjFMrPhrpv6j
|
|
|
minerapia
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:32:58 PM |
|
Maybe that's the fix for the block we didn't get before.
I doubt that as 2 secs is way too short to be fair. Someone just got the exact same work as someone else, and they got it solved 2 secs apart from eachother.
|
donations -> btc: 1M6yf45NskQxWXknkMTzQ8o6wShQcSY4EC ltc: LeTpCd6cQL26Q1vjc9kJrTjjFMrPhrpv6j
|
|
|
EasyQuest
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 198
Merit: 100
Brony Bitcoin, Litecoin Miner
|
|
June 03, 2013, 11:41:22 PM |
|
18373 2013-06-03 22:57:34 0:00:02 16141 12 0.01845956 239570 25.23781000 95 confirmations left 18372 2013-06-03 22:57:32 1:18:06 13727369 9524 0.01714880 239570 25.23781000 95 confirmations left
Never seen that happen before. Oh, 2 second blocks are possible but pool has to be very luck for that to happen.
|
|
|
|
|