safeminer
Member
 Offline
Activity: 110
Merit: 10
|
 |
September 18, 2013, 05:28:34 PM |
|
One 3 GH/s miner oder ten with 0,3 GH/s is no difference.
No miner will choke on anything, they always do exactly the same work, no matter how you set your worker diff.
Only thing happening is with higher diff, cgminer will send less shares to the pool server (cause all calculated hashes with diff lower than what you did set get dropped), and your shares will get you more score. So, set the diff higher for less network load but higher variance.
Thanks for the clarification |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
-Redacted-
|
|
September 18, 2013, 10:17:58 PM |
|
What is up with these invalid blocks ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
trasla
|
|
September 18, 2013, 10:39:39 PM |
|
What is up with these invalid blocks ??
258617 is claimed by BTCGuild 258589 is claimed by EclipseMC What happened is: We found a block nearly at the same time as someone else, and they were lucky enough to have the next block found based upon their block instead of ours. So our blocks are orphaned (not part of the main chain) and thus invalid. Its bad luck, but happens from time to time, because the info that some block was found does not appear at instant speed at all nodes. The time needed for the block to propagate through the network leaves a small time window for another block with same block # to be found. |
|
|
|
|
|
-Redacted-
|
|
September 18, 2013, 11:25:33 PM
Last edit: September 19, 2013, 01:00:13 AM by -Redacted- |
|
I know what orphaned blocks are, but when I used to mine at Slush, they were very, very rare - you'd hardly see one per month. They seem to be a lot more common here on Slush these days - sometimes multiples in the same day... Has Slush not updated his Bitcoind nodes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
trasla
|
|
September 18, 2013, 11:35:58 PM |
|
I know what invalid blocks are, but when I used to mine at Slush, they were very, very rare - you'd hardly see one per month. They seem to be a lot more common here on Slush these days - sometimes multiples in the same day...
Well, besides bad luck and the usual variance, the probability for an orphaned block is higher if the average rate to find blocks for the whole network is higher. Maybe the rise in total network hash-rate wasnt that high back then? Could be a combination of slightly higher average orphan rate plus a little bad luck which makes it appear as if this happens way more often atm  |
|
|
|
|
|
tom99
|
|
September 19, 2013, 12:57:26 AM |
|
invalid again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Redacted-
|
|
September 19, 2013, 12:59:13 AM |
|
I'm about ready to just return to BTCGuild or EMC...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trongersoll
|
|
September 19, 2013, 01:31:28 AM |
|
I'm about ready to just return to BTCGuild or EMC...
wouldn't it stand to reason that when the hashrate goes up rapidly that the orphan rate would too. Maybe this is a horse race and the pools are neck & neck. Slush'e luck is good right now so it is time for people to move to other pools and trash our luck. *singing* The luck goes up, the luck goes down, and the toilet water goes round and Round. |
|
|
|
|
ma_bit
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 18
Merit: 0
|
|
September 19, 2013, 10:32:24 AM |
|
What is up with these invalid blocks ??
258617 is claimed by BTCGuild 258589 is claimed by EclipseMC What happened is: We found a block nearly at the same time as someone else, and they were lucky enough to have the next block found based upon their block instead of ours. So our blocks are orphaned (not part of the main chain) and thus invalid. Its bad luck, but happens from time to time, because the info that some block was found does not appear at instant speed at all nodes. The time needed for the block to propagate through the network leaves a small time window for another block with same block # to be found. and what is wrong with block # 20053 ~ 258135 |
|
|
|
|
TheXev
Member
Offline
Activity: 79
Merit: 10
|
|
September 19, 2013, 12:55:25 PM |
|
Slush, if you read this, can you have FAQBot rejoin the IRC channel. He parted when the chaos broke out yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
mbbc
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
September 19, 2013, 08:29:24 PM |
|
While merged mining is not supported anymore, is there any chance of getting my remaining NMC's out of the pool?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trongersoll
|
|
September 19, 2013, 08:34:39 PM |
|
While merged mining is not supported anymore, is there any chance of getting my remaining NMC's out of the pool?
only if it more than .05 NMC if so, just change the distribution threshold. |
|
|
|
|
mbbc
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
September 19, 2013, 08:38:16 PM |
|
While merged mining is not supported anymore, is there any chance of getting my remaining NMC's out of the pool?
only if it more than .05 NMC if so, just change the distribution threshold. It's actually below 0.05 NMC.  |
|
|
|
|
|
nottm28
|
|
September 19, 2013, 08:42:54 PM |
|
While merged mining is not supported anymore, is there any chance of getting my remaining NMC's out of the pool?
only if it more than .05 NMC if so, just change the distribution threshold. It's actually below 0.05 NMC. Maybe you should just let that few pence go - difficult as it sounds... |
donations not accepted
|
|
|
|
Trongersoll
|
|
September 19, 2013, 08:43:07 PM |
|
While merged mining is not supported anymore, is there any chance of getting my remaining NMC's out of the pool?
only if it more than .05 NMC if so, just change the distribution threshold. It's actually below 0.05 NMC. then there isn't really that much value to worry about. I suppose that if Slush ever comes out of his self imposed exile, he'll fix it. in the mean time, think of it as forced saving.  |
|
|
|
|
T3NU0US
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
September 20, 2013, 01:10:57 AM |
|
Soo... this strange thing happened. In the midst of a block I get this:
20108 2013-09-19 13:33:14 2:12:55 128756841 3964 0.00000022 258846 26.12812726 24 confirmations left
Then the 6 blocks after I get none. All the while, my cockroaches are silently churning hashes. I restarted the nest and things appear to be working okay now.
Any ideas what would cause that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2GOOD
|
|
September 20, 2013, 01:26:22 AM |
|
Soo... this strange thing happened. In the midst of a block I get this:
20108 2013-09-19 13:33:14 2:12:55 128756841 3964 0.00000022 258846 26.12812726 24 confirmations left
Then the 6 blocks after I get none. All the while, my cockroaches are silently churning hashes. I restarted the nest and things appear to be working okay now.
Any ideas what would cause that?
you probably went on backup pool at the end of the block, and since slush is using score system the last shares of the block has more value than thge prev. for example if you are hashing 2 hours but missed the last 12minutes from that block - this would happen |
|
|
|
T3NU0US
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
September 20, 2013, 01:32:12 AM |
|
Soo... this strange thing happened. In the midst of a block I get this:
20108 2013-09-19 13:33:14 2:12:55 128756841 3964 0.00000022 258846 26.12812726 24 confirmations left
Then the 6 blocks after I get none. All the while, my cockroaches are silently churning hashes. I restarted the nest and things appear to be working okay now.
Any ideas what would cause that?
you probably went on backup pool at the end of the block, and since slush is using score system the last shares of the block has more value than thge prev. for example if you are hashing 2 hours but missed the last 12minutes from that block - this would happen How on earth would that happen? For all intents and purposes I missed out on 7 full blocks while I was away. No power outage. No ISP interuptions. It gave me not.  |
|
|
|
|
|
gourmet
|
|
September 20, 2013, 02:57:44 AM
Last edit: September 20, 2013, 03:26:45 AM by gourmet |
|
One 3 GH/s miner oder ten with 0,3 GH/s is no difference.
Where are you from, Sir? ;-) (I'd say Germany is the right answer.) :-) |
|
|
|
|
|
gourmet
|
|
September 20, 2013, 06:14:00 AM |
|
Something strange:
I've returned to this forum (opened the browser with the last session) and appeared to be on page 605 of this thread. But there had been also 606 in the list of pages already. So I clicked on the link after reading unread posts on page 605. After loading the link, I am on page 605 again and there's no page 606 any more. It looks as if some posts had disappeared in between. Is that possible?
[edit] This post became the first post on page 606 now. [/edit]
|
|
|
|
|
|
