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

[Tazza]

Also, I know it has been explained several times before in this thread, but I am no CS major, so most of the lingo used is Greek to me. But looking at my stats I see several blocks where I have 2,3,4 or 5 shares listed, but with no reward. And other blocks with the same amount of shares but with rewards. Is this normal?

Hi Steve,

Yep - it's normal. In order to stop people jumping from one pool to another each share is 'weighted' so that those submitted towards the end of a block being found are effectively worth more. Because you're only submitting a few shares each round what's happening is the system sees your last share was submitted x minutes/hours ago and thinks you've buggered off to another pool even though you haven't. The rounds where you have been rewarded are those in which your last share was close enough to the end of the round to still count.

It happens to me every now and again when my net connection will drop out for a bit at the end of a round (Mobile broadband so it has a tendency to do that) and I'll get zero reward as well.

Cheers

[1714172583]

1714172583

[1714172583]

1714172583

[1714172583]

1714172583

[macsheadroom]

My reward was half what it should have been, hopefully it will be corrected.

21009    2013-12-01 01:32:02    0:04:19    22915150            2396    0.00260434    272399    25.03550690    94 confirmations left
21008    2013-12-01 01:27:43    0:50:06    265077329    26418    0.00226590    272398    25.02827623    93 confirmations left
21007    2013-12-01 00:37:37    7:48:38    2147483647    122738    0.00122464    272385    25.20690867    80 confirmations left
21006    2013-11-30 16:48:59    0:47:42    251032842    26584    0.00260305    272318    25.03404462    13 confirmations left
21005    2013-11-30 16:01:17    0:36:01    189004238    19118    0.00256829    272313    25.07062858    8 confirmations left
21004    2013-11-30 15:25:16    2:20:08    739833931    76904    0.00248505    272307    25.18938665    2 confirmations left
21003    2013-11-30 13:05:08    0:57:13    308486793    32274    0.00294020    272288    25.25633454    confirmed

[bspurloc]

Pondering what the issue with reported hash rate and hash rate slush shows with Blades...
All my Asic USB Miners are dead on their reported hash rate and the slush report.
for example one group of eruptors 22 report 7300mh/s and slush shows 7202.33 which is essentially the same taking into account luck...
However my blades are all consistently 600-2000mh/s wrong.
these 2 grouped together should be 18gh/s yet slush has been showing 15619.041 for days.
10.89/ 8.06/ 7.81Gh/s | A:8791 R:191+0(2.3%) HW:476/.80%
11.97/11.10/10.44Gh/s | A:66460 R:1463+0(2.2%) HW:24273/3.9%
Another blade is running at 8gh/s but consistently shows 7511.846.
I guess that one isnt as bad.

 just seems odd the blades have a bigger loss compared to 22 eruptors. Is that normal?

They might be restarting if they are not cool enough. I had issues with my router and eventually went with a crossover cable from my laptop to switch to blades, you might want to try a different way of networking the blades. Other than that, on startup it usually takes the pool's web UI a while to "catch up". If you have a good wind tunnel and solid network connection it should be fine running through the proxy.

In regards to other discussion here, I'm almost double the minimum threshold with no payout.

nah they arent restarting. one is in a server room cool as anything the other 2 have more than enough fans on them.... funny thing is now slush has 1 of them exactly at their hashing power.
Up Time:   4d,09h,48m,54s
all 3 have been online 3-4 days. this isnt a network issue. the network issue is why 2 are only at 8gh/s which I havent figured out why these stupid blades have issues with highend switches. and why or lets say WHERE they found 10mbit chips instead of 100mbit. must have been a huge unused stockpile somewhere in China they are using on these blades.

[bspurloc]

just seems odd the blades have a bigger loss compared to 22 eruptors. Is that normal?

It might be that your internet bandwidth is throttling the throughput.  I recently noticed that my set-up on cable broadband slows from around 8.6GH to 2.5GH in the early evening when all the World of Warcraft players and video downloaders get busy, before creeping slowly upwards to its normal level by around midnight; I tried swapping to an ADSL broadband connection and got no more than 4.5GH even off-peak.

I use a Jalapeno and two block eruptors mining through BFGminer; the reported hash rates for all three devices vary in proportion.

well slsuh auto adjusts the diffs to a setting that is supposed to cut down on traffic. but these blades only have 10mbits chips on them so its impossible for them to overload a 100mbit circuit since they themselves cant move that much traffic

[bspurloc]

Pondering what the issue with reported hash rate and hash rate slush shows with Blades...
All my Asic USB Miners are dead on their reported hash rate and the slush report.
for example one group of eruptors 22 report 7300mh/s and slush shows 7202.33 which is essentially the same taking into account luck...
However my blades are all consistently 600-2000mh/s wrong.
these 2 grouped together should be 18gh/s yet slush has been showing 15619.041 for days.
10.89/ 8.06/ 7.81Gh/s | A:8791 R:191+0(2.3%) HW:476/.80%
11.97/11.10/10.44Gh/s | A:66460 R:1463+0(2.2%) HW:24273/3.9%
Another blade is running at 8gh/s but consistently shows 7511.846.
I guess that one isnt as bad.

 just seems odd the blades have a bigger loss compared to 22 eruptors. Is that normal?

OH!!!! NEVER MIND! haha....
I see what is wrong!! I have one of the blades pointing to an account that has Eruptors on it. However the reason I didnt notice this is because the blades on single accounts were showing lower on Slush than what they are actually doing. It must have been really bad luck as both are noW at the exact hash rate as they claim to be doing... hence why I just noticed my error!

[nybbler905]

My reward was half what it should have been, hopefully it will be corrected.

21009    2013-12-01 01:32:02    0:04:19    22915150            2396    0.00260434    272399    25.03550690    94 confirmations left
21008    2013-12-01 01:27:43    0:50:06    265077329    26418    0.00226590    272398    25.02827623    93 confirmations left
21007    2013-12-01 00:37:37    7:48:38    2147483647    122738    0.00122464    272385    25.20690867    80 confirmations left
21006    2013-11-30 16:48:59    0:47:42    251032842    26584    0.00260305    272318    25.03404462    13 confirmations left
21005    2013-11-30 16:01:17    0:36:01    189004238    19118    0.00256829    272313    25.07062858    8 confirmations left
21004    2013-11-30 15:25:16    2:20:08    739833931    76904    0.00248505    272307    25.18938665    2 confirmations left
21003    2013-11-30 13:05:08    0:57:13    308486793    32274    0.00294020    272288    25.25633454    confirmed

the point was, some of us got ' nothing ' for shares submitted even with usb asic for that 7+ hour stretch of # 21007.  There is an issue....

[Lucko]

My reward was half what it should have been, hopefully it will be corrected.

21009    2013-12-01 01:32:02    0:04:19    22915150            2396    0.00260434    272399    25.03550690    94 confirmations left
21008    2013-12-01 01:27:43    0:50:06    265077329    26418    0.00226590    272398    25.02827623    93 confirmations left
21007    2013-12-01 00:37:37    7:48:38    2147483647    122738    0.00122464    272385    25.20690867    80 confirmations left
21006    2013-11-30 16:48:59    0:47:42    251032842    26584    0.00260305    272318    25.03404462    13 confirmations left
21005    2013-11-30 16:01:17    0:36:01    189004238    19118    0.00256829    272313    25.07062858    8 confirmations left
21004    2013-11-30 15:25:16    2:20:08    739833931    76904    0.00248505    272307    25.18938665    2 confirmations left
21003    2013-11-30 13:05:08    0:57:13    308486793    32274    0.00294020    272288    25.25633454    confirmed

Yes after being away from pool for 5 mouths pool is still as unreliable as it was when I given up on Slush... You at lest got something I got non for 7+ hours... And I would now say that Slush is unable or unwilling to fix his pool. I hope auto payment is working... I was reading it is not... Grate job Slush...

[TiborB]

For some (including me) shares/reward for round 21007 still show 'none'. I have seen recalculations/fixes in the past before the block is confirmed, but currently there are only 11 confirmations left...

21007    2013-12-01 00:37:37    7:48:38    2147483647    none    none    272385    25.20690867    11 confirmations left
This is the block where the total number of shared might have overflowed a 32bit integer - this is only speculation, but the total of shares is shown as exactly 2³¹-1.

After my post on this issue last night and sending a PM within this forum, I was patiently waiting for this to get fixed, but now I have also sent a mail to pool operators and hope they will take action.

Regards,
   T

[Humax]

21012   2013-12-01 06:42:52   2:36:50   822353445   235376   0.00659462   272440    25.04495605
21011   2013-12-01 04:06:02   0:34:20   181000803     48822   0.00715762   272413    25.11093992
21010   2013-12-01 03:31:42   1:59:40   639039598   171289   0.00651526   272410    25.14099989
21009   2013-12-01 01:32:02   0:04:19   22915150       5768   0.00608615   272399    25.03550690
21008   2013-12-01 01:27:43   0:50:06   265077329    70864   0.00605277   272398    25.02827623
21007   2013-12-01 00:37:37   7:48:38   2147483647    none       none     272385    25.20690867   

Fix this please!

[bobsmoke]

just because of recent mitm attacks...
Is the Thumprint for Slush pool SSL certificate the following:  ‎d6 fa 35 fb 99 84 21 07 0c 84 2c 2d ba ce 57 4a 42 d6 3e 63

[KNK]

just because of recent mitm attacks...
Is the Thumprint for Slush pool SSL certificate the following:  ‎d6 fa 35 fb 99 84 21 07 0c 84 2c 2d ba ce 57 4a 42 d6 3e 63

Confirmed.

[TiborB]

21012   2013-12-01 06:42:52   2:36:50   822353445   235376   0.00659462   272440    25.04495605
21011   2013-12-01 04:06:02   0:34:20   181000803     48822   0.00715762   272413    25.11093992
21010   2013-12-01 03:31:42   1:59:40   639039598   171289   0.00651526   272410    25.14099989
21009   2013-12-01 01:32:02   0:04:19   22915150       5768   0.00608615   272399    25.03550690
21008   2013-12-01 01:27:43   0:50:06   265077329    70864   0.00605277   272398    25.02827623
21007   2013-12-01 00:37:37   7:48:38   2147483647    none       none     272385    25.20690867   

Fix this please!

Just to wrap up: this issue has been fixed - I have the impression there was a recalculation with proportional method.
Kudos go to the pool operators.

Regards,
   T

[osoverflow]

I don't want namecoin for its monetary value, but for its usability value. The ability to set fixed value on a p2p decentralized network that has a bitcoin-like security is very useful and important to develop additional services.

It it is another thing that can do something similar, I would love to know about it.

namecoin just checks the result from bitcoin mining and if it is good, applies it to the namecoin block tree. BTCguild does namecoin along with bitcoin on pplns. namecoins are worth about 6% of a bitcoin. I send the namecoins i make to BTC-e to convert them to bitcoins. then i have to wait until i meet the minimum transfer amount to send them to my wallet. I wouldn't care if i stopped getting namecoins.

[stevegreer]

Also, I know it has been explained several times before in this thread, but I am no CS major, so most of the lingo used is Greek to me. But looking at my stats I see several blocks where I have 2,3,4 or 5 shares listed, but with no reward. And other blocks with the same amount of shares but with rewards. Is this normal?

Hi Steve,

Yep - it's normal. In order to stop people jumping from one pool to another each share is 'weighted' so that those submitted towards the end of a block being found are effectively worth more. Because you're only submitting a few shares each round what's happening is the system sees your last share was submitted x minutes/hours ago and thinks you've buggered off to another pool even though you haven't. The rounds where you have been rewarded are those in which your last share was close enough to the end of the round to still count.

It happens to me every now and again when my net connection will drop out for a bit at the end of a round (Mobile broadband so it has a tendency to do that) and I'll get zero reward as well.

Cheers

Thanks for the answer! That makes sense I reckon. Kinda stinks though that my CPU has been plugging away for hours and I have nothing to show for it. So, just out of curiosity, since I noticed that there are quite a few people making comments about not getting rewards even though they know their miners have been hashing away, say in a situation like that, if the pool ends up completing the block, but most everyone's stats shows "none" for rewards, then where do the 25 bitcoins go? I'm sure someone must end up with them, right?

So one last rookie question. If I do decide to get more into this, obviously continuing mining with my CPU will NEVER be profitable. At about what hash rate have most of you seen the BTC start rolling in? I'm not delusional enough to think that I will ever make a fortune off of this, but I wouldn't mind seeing at least a couple hundred bucks or so over the course of a month or three in order to make it feel like my efforts are not in vain. Right now my meager 0.00000142 BTC just ain't cutting it! 

[bobsmoke]

Hello pool operators, something strange with the reward for block 272726

21027 2013-12-02 23:04:34   5:49:17 1993521951 2763811    0.00040730 272726 25.00902152

Anyone with the same issue?

[Kaos116]

Hello pool operators, something strange with the reward for block 272726

21027 2013-12-02 23:04:34   5:49:17 1993521951 2763811    0.00040730 272726 25.00902152

Anyone with the same issue?

Yes,

21027 2013-12-02 23:04:34 5:49:17 1993521951 55349 0.00000857 272726  25.00902152 93 confirmations left 

My average reward is about .00075

[stevegreer]

Well I got 5 shares with 0.00000000 reward. Maybe I should try my hand at mining LTC instead. 

[aurel57]

I think I know where some of your all rewards went:

21029 2013-12-03 00:03:45 0:30:25   174346782   24910   0.00330256      272735  25.00901001 100 confirmations left  
21028 2013-12-02 23:33:20 0:28:46   166468331   22419   0.00312927      272729  25.29332793 94 confirmations left  
21027 2013-12-02 23:04:34 5:49:17   1993521951 283540 0.04650264   272726  25.00902152 91 confirmations left  
21026 2013-12-02 17:15:17 0:42:40   241981189   33992   0.00334302      272690  25.19850076 55 confirmations left  
21025 2013-12-02 16:32:37 10:39:33 3490407934 525276  0.00391581      272687  25.06788253 52 confirmations left

[Kalgor]

Looks to have a problem as well

21028   2013-12-02 23:33:20   0:28:46   166468331   12075   0.00169616   272729   25.29332793    95 confirmations left
21027   2013-12-02 23:04:34   5:49:17   1993521951   155506   0.00002186   272726   25.00902152    92 confirmations left
21026   2013-12-02 17:15:17   0:42:40   241981189   19734   0.00221505   272690   25.19850076    56 confirmations left

[xZork]

Same here,

21027    2013-12-02 23:04:34    5:49:17    1993521951    44587    0.00000631    272726    25.00902152    86 confirmations left

Mind sending some of that this way aurel?