sundownz
|
|
July 20, 2013, 02:51:46 PM |
|
I have 39 workers running -- 21 of them are running okay and 18 of them are having connection problems.
Very odd... also my "Estimated Reward" for the current block in process is about 75x higher than normal.
Should I assume that block is Invalid ?
|
|
|
|
chunglam
Donator
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 229
Merit: 106
|
|
July 20, 2013, 02:56:00 PM |
|
19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 37043 0.00043301 247567 25.18610000 95 confirmations left 19193 2013-07-20 12:21:10 1:19:38 13616177 5916 0.01071005 247548 25.15320000 76 confirmations left 19192 2013-07-20 11:01:32 1:56:36 38748497 38910 0.02470141 247539 25.11490000 67 confirmations left
Something is wrong with the last two block reward calculation. #19192 is normal, #19193 may be normal because of pool connection issue but #19194 is definitely wrong
|
|
|
|
paraipan
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 1004
Firstbits: 1pirata
|
|
July 20, 2013, 02:56:28 PM |
|
Same thing here... 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 127616 0.00132161 247567 25.18610000 95 confirmaciones pendientes 19193 2013-07-20 12:21:10 1:19:38 13616177 40802 0.07386617 247548 25.15320000 76 confirmaciones pendientes 19192 2013-07-20 11:01:32 1:56:36 38748497 115968 0.07346108 247539 25.11490000 67 confirmaciones pendientes 19191 2013-07-20 09:04:56 1:23:38 27791450 78912 0.07612334 247522 25.16930256 50 confirmaciones pendientes If this keeps going the same way I'm out. Btw, Slush I know you're a busy person, me too, but don't forget to attend your pool and answer questions we ask, you're living on mining revenues. Your payout scheme is pulling results out of it's arse!
|
BTCitcoin: An Idea Worth Saving - Q&A with bitcoins on rugatu.com - Check my rep
|
|
|
nottm28
|
|
July 20, 2013, 02:57:45 PM |
|
Should I assume that block is Invalid ?
If it gets 100 confirmations then it's yours - slush spots about 95% of these and fixes them but people have been known to benefit (or lose) from these block mis-calculations - the best I ever got was around 8 times normal payout for a block that went to 100 confirmations - but I've had several where I got next to nothing and the 100 confirmations passed - this time I'm down - but for you it's all good unless slush sees it [EDIT] for the long term slush miner - it all evens out
|
donations not accepted
|
|
|
paraipan
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 1004
Firstbits: 1pirata
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:01:36 PM |
|
...
[EDIT] for the long term slush miner - it all evens out
Negative
|
BTCitcoin: An Idea Worth Saving - Q&A with bitcoins on rugatu.com - Check my rep
|
|
|
paraipan
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 1004
Firstbits: 1pirata
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:09:26 PM |
|
Seems like Slush is reading the forum but stays in "radio silence" , rounds were re-calculated: 19195 2013-07-20 14:28:49 0:05:05 8794745 27264 0.04342803 247569 25.07941640 96 confirmaciones pendientes 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 127616 0.07916491 247567 25.18610000 94 confirmaciones pendientes 19193 2013-07-20 12:21:10 1:19:38 13616177 40802 0.07386617 247548 25.15320000 75 confirmaciones pendientes 19192 2013-07-20 11:01:32 1:56:36 38748497 115968 0.07346108 247539 25.11490000 66 confirmaciones pendientes 19191 2013-07-20 09:04:56 1:23:38 27791450 78912 0.07612334 247522 25.16930256 49 confirmaciones pendientes 19190 2013-07-20 07:41:18 5:51:17 116255011 350144 0.08462781 247506 26.57599786 33 confirmaciones pendientes
|
BTCitcoin: An Idea Worth Saving - Q&A with bitcoins on rugatu.com - Check my rep
|
|
|
nottm28
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:11:33 PM |
|
Ok 96% then slush
|
donations not accepted
|
|
|
chunglam
Donator
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 229
Merit: 106
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:15:55 PM |
|
19195 2013-07-20 14:28:49 0:05:05 8794745 9542 0.01586825 247569 25.07941640 96 confirmations left 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 37043 0.02297916 247567 25.18610000 94 confirmations left
Now #19194 is correct but #19195 is wrong again
9542 / 8794745 * 25.079 = 0.0272
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:16:07 PM |
|
I have 39 workers running -- 21 of them are running okay and 18 of them are having connection problems.
Very odd... also my "Estimated Reward" for the current block in process is about 75x higher than normal.
1 or 2 of his servers isnt communicated with the main one. I changed my ip's of the miners that were showing shares on the website to a different server and now they are showing shares again
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:18:03 PM Last edit: July 20, 2013, 03:34:03 PM by bspurloc |
|
19195 2013-07-20 14:28:49 0:05:05 8794745 9542 0.01586825 247569 25.07941640 96 confirmations left 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 37043 0.02297916 247567 25.18610000 94 confirmations left
Now #19194 is correct but #19195 is wrong again
9542 / 8794745 * 25.079 = 0.0272
mines wrong as it should be over 5000 shares not 2136 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 2136 0.00132505
|
|
|
|
chunglam
Donator
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 229
Merit: 106
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:34:48 PM |
|
19195 2013-07-20 14:28:49 0:05:05 8794745 9542 0.02666612 247569 25.07941640 93 confirmations left
Corrected. The formula should be
9542 / 8794745 * 25.079 * 0.98 = 0.0266
But what is the reason of these calculation errors? Manual processing? Pool software should handle this kind of calculation with 100% accuracy.
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:36:00 PM |
|
19195 2013-07-20 14:28:49 0:05:05 8794745 9542 0.01586825 247569 25.07941640 96 confirmations left 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 37043 0.02297916 247567 25.18610000 94 confirmations left
Now #19194 is correct but #19195 is wrong again
9542 / 8794745 * 25.079 = 0.0272
mines wrong as it should be over 5000 shares not 2136 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 2136 0.00132505 all my miners connecting to 95.211.52.40 were not showing shares on the website so I changed them to 54.215.3.101
|
|
|
|
nottm28
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:46:02 PM |
|
19195 2013-07-20 14:28:49 0:05:05 8794745 9542 0.02666612 247569 25.07941640 93 confirmations left
Corrected. The formula should be
9542 / 8794745 * 25.079 * 0.98 = 0.0266
But what is the reason of these calculation errors? Manual processing? Pool software should handle this kind of calculation with 100% accuracy.
My best guess is some kind of connectivity issue between the back end pool servers when the shares for a round are being calculated/shared out - slush has addressed it several times and I believe he has made code changes - not only to try and stop it happening - but also to alert him when it does happen - all conjecture of course. Only one man truly knows and like a poster said earlier - he only lurks here now rather than post here. To be honest I don't blame him either - if it's something really important he can use his home page. As soon as he raises his head here all you see is: 1) Hey slush what about namecoins 2) Hey slush my calculation for block xxx is wrong, I only got 0.0000001 BTC and is should have been 0.0000002 - I'm using a 6 core CPU btw... 3) PPS is better than the slush calculation 4) PPLNS is better than the slush calculation 5) What is the slush calculation 6) ad infinitum
|
donations not accepted
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
July 20, 2013, 03:59:00 PM |
|
19195 2013-07-20 14:28:49 0:05:05 8794745 9542 0.01586825 247569 25.07941640 96 confirmations left 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 37043 0.02297916 247567 25.18610000 94 confirmations left
Now #19194 is correct but #19195 is wrong again
9542 / 8794745 * 25.079 = 0.0272
mines wrong as it should be over 5000 shares not 2136 19194 2013-07-20 14:23:44 2:02:34 39788670 2136 0.00132505 all my miners connecting to 95.211.52.40 were not showing shares on the website so I changed them to 54.215.3.101 now 2 miners connecting to .101 are showing not connected for x minutes the X is a random number each reload. So that says a backend server is not caught up with the others and since all my miners are going to .101 I have to assume he enabled some round robin back end and still 1 server isnt behaving.
|
|
|
|
ralfr
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 4
Merit: 0
|
|
July 20, 2013, 08:12:22 PM |
|
I'm pretty new to Bitcoin mining and using three Satoshi Sticks (USB ASICs). cgminer indicates an average hash rate of 325 Mh/s per AMU. I've been connected to Slush's pool for a few hours, but on the "My accounts" page the "Mhash/s" stats say
285.69 Mh/s
with this number slowly increasing on page refreshes.
Questions: - Why is this number significantly lower than 3 x 325 Mh/s? - Will it keep increasing over time until it reaches the real rate, which cgminer indicates on my local machine? - Why is this so?
Thanks for helping a Bitcoin mining newbie with this. :-)
-- Ralf | 1Bn35qkUS4X51hjszLzhVMHcmFb2GQXLEZ
|
|
|
|
arklan
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1778
Merit: 1008
|
|
July 20, 2013, 08:20:50 PM |
|
I'm pretty new to Bitcoin mining and using three Satoshi Sticks (USB ASICs). cgminer indicates an average hash rate of 325 Mh/s per AMU. I've been connected to Slush's pool for a few hours, but on the "My accounts" page the "Mhash/s" stats say
285.69 Mh/s
with this number slowly increasing on page refreshes.
Questions: - Why is this number significantly lower than 3 x 325 Mh/s? - Will it keep increasing over time until it reaches the real rate, which cgminer indicates on my local machine? - Why is this so?
Thanks for helping a Bitcoin mining newbie with this. :-)
-- Ralf | 1Bn35qkUS4X51hjszLzhVMHcmFb2GQXLEZ
it's determining hashrate via sucessfully submitted shares over a given time, i think ten minutes. thus, as you submit more shares, the relative speed increases. yes, it will continue to do so until it reflects the real rate.
|
i don't post much, but this space for rent.
|
|
|
nottm28
|
|
July 20, 2013, 08:24:49 PM |
|
I'm pretty new to Bitcoin mining and using three Satoshi Sticks (USB ASICs). cgminer indicates an average hash rate of 325 Mh/s per AMU. I've been connected to Slush's pool for a few hours, but on the "My accounts" page the "Mhash/s" stats say
285.69 Mh/s
with this number slowly increasing on page refreshes.
Questions: - Why is this number significantly lower than 3 x 325 Mh/s? - Will it keep increasing over time until it reaches the real rate, which cgminer indicates on my local machine? - Why is this so?
Thanks for helping a Bitcoin mining newbie with this. :-)
-- Ralf | 1Bn35qkUS4X51hjszLzhVMHcmFb2GQXLEZ
This is all good ralf, the average is over the last ten rounds and when you check tomorrow, you should see similar slush rates to cgminer. The only (minor) thing that I would say is that you should expect 333 MH/s per device - the fact you are only getting on 325 is not devastating but does indicate the miners are not getting enough power (amperage). If you have them plugged into a cheap usb hub - try plugging them direct into any spare PC slots... Welcome btw
|
donations not accepted
|
|
|
mdopro1
|
|
July 21, 2013, 12:52:28 AM |
|
I've joined with single 7850 GPU and making 0.01 BTC a day which isn't bad. There were two minor incidents that I'd like an answer to.
First, yesterday I heard my GPU cranking really loud and upon inspection I was getting several hundred stale (connections?) in GUIMiner. At this time my account showed 0 hash rate. So I restarted my miner and everything came back to normal. I'd like to understand what happened there and what I can do to avoid it or possibly burning out my GPU.
Second, today everything was humming along and at the end of my work day I checked my account and it sowed last share 7 hours ago. I don't think I had made any contribution during this time. However my GUIMiner was clicking just normal showing 352 MH/S - In statistics, I have no shares from 19195 to 19199 while GUIMiner seem to be running normal. So I'd also like to find out what happened here?
I'm getting some USB ASIC chips on Monday and plan on changing over to BFGMiner. Is this the right thing to do with slush's pool?
Appreciate any input and keep up the good work.
|
New Bitcoin fund doubling platform has launched! Receive Automated Payment Every 2 Hours Appealing alternative with Sophisticated algorithms. https://Btc-Funds.com
|
|
|
angryrob
|
|
July 21, 2013, 02:27:12 AM Last edit: July 21, 2013, 02:37:30 AM by angryrob |
|
Second, today everything was humming along and at the end of my work day I checked my account and it sowed last share 7 hours ago. I don't think I had made any contribution during this time. However my GUIMiner was clicking just normal showing 352 MH/S - In statistics, I have no shares from 19195 to 19199 while GUIMiner seem to be running normal. So I'd also like to find out what happened here?
I had this same problem today. One of Slush's servers is having connection problems or something (i'm not sure) but basically whenever I connect to stratum.bitcoin.cz it fails, but someone else posted some slush IP's and the one that currently works is 54.215.3.101 so in GUIminer i set that as my host, stop and restart, and then it started accepting shares and they were being credited to my account (where as before guiminer would generate shares but i received no credit)
|
|
|
|
n0creativity
Member
Offline
Activity: 65
Merit: 10
|
|
July 21, 2013, 02:56:23 AM |
|
Second, today everything was humming along and at the end of my work day I checked my account and it sowed last share 7 hours ago. I don't think I had made any contribution during this time. However my GUIMiner was clicking just normal showing 352 MH/S - In statistics, I have no shares from 19195 to 19199 while GUIMiner seem to be running normal. So I'd also like to find out what happened here?
I had this same problem today. One of Slush's servers is having connection problems or something (i'm not sure) but basically whenever I connect to stratum.bitcoin.cz it fails, but someone else posted some slush IP's and the one that currently works is 54.215.3.101 so in GUIminer i set that as my host, stop and restart, and then it started accepting shares and they were being credited to my account (where as before guiminer would generate shares but i received no credit) Just as a forewarning... I dont think using the direct IP is necessarily a good long term option. From what I understand, Slush uses Amazon AWS. AWS offers load balancing, geolocating\geocaching, and failover based on availability zones. If AWS is like the Azure platform (which I work with for my job), IP addresses are not dedicated. When you set it up, you point your regular public DNS to your AWS FQDN and then the AWS system handles DNS\Routing from there which is what allows the above Amazon services to function with little to no setup. By specifying a server IP address, you are circumventing this feature. This may temporarily resolve an issue such as today when a specific load balancing server is down or a specific geolocation\availability zone is malfunctioning in a way that AWS doesn't recognize the malfunction and remove the specific server from the rotation. However, long term you don't get the benefits of those options, which would be crucial if the specific server you chose fails. Also, without dedicated IP's, there is no guarantee that server will continue to be located there after an IP lease renewal or a server reboot. I could be totally wrong about this, but this is why I wont use direct IPs. I experienced the issues earlier today and I resolved them by bouncing NIC's on all my machines to reset my connection and flush old\invalid DNS data. I also bounced the proxy software on 2 of my machines that use that. I never stopped CGMINER or GUIMINER (on my windows machine... I know I know but CGMINER throws fits on that machine) and the network bounce took less than a minute. Just my $0.02
|
|
|
|
|