Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 08:19:13 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 [77] 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 ... 201 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [OLD] Eligius: ASIC, no registration, no fee CPPSRB BTC + 105% PPS NMC, 877 #  (Read 417743 times)
GuiltySpark343
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98



View Profile
May 02, 2013, 02:10:45 AM
 #1521

I really like Eligius, but concerned that we have received no further word from Luke-Jr or WizKid. Their last post was 24+ hrs ago, and they didn't really have any useful info Sad Do they care?

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
Ƀ:17wbDetEw2aESM5oWXbm5ih9NSdDruyWNT
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481012353
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481012353

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481012353
Reply with quote  #2

1481012353
Report to moderator
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
May 02, 2013, 02:13:02 AM
 #1522

I really like Eligius, but concerned that we have received no further word from Luke-Jr or WizKid. Their last post was 24+ hrs ago, and they didn't really have any useful info Sad Do they care?
Unfortunately, I have no updates. I suspect our current server's host is at fault for at least some of these problems.
We have been working on setting up a new server - originally just for testing out upgrades, but if Hetzner is going to be failboat, we may just have to move entirely.

Edit: Part of the reason I suspect Hetzner is that in the process of trying to move the webserver, I am seeing a bottleneck limiting upload to like 20-30 kB/s to the new server. This is clearly way lower than we should be getting.

BitMinerN8
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 626


Mining since May 2011.


View Profile
May 02, 2013, 02:16:00 AM
 #1523

I really like Eligius, but concerned that we have received no further word from Luke-Jr or WizKid. Their last post was 24+ hrs ago, and they didn't really have any useful info Sad Do they care?
Unfortunately, I have no updates. I suspect our current server's host is at fault for at least some of these problems.
We have been working on setting up a new server - originally just for testing out upgrades, but if Hetzner is going to be failboat, we may just have to move entirely.

Edit: Part of the reason I suspect Hetzner is that in the process of trying to move the webserver, I am seeing a bottleneck limiting upload to like 20-30 kB/s to the new server. This is clearly way lower than we should be getting.

Thanks for the update.
BitMinerN8
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 626


Mining since May 2011.


View Profile
May 02, 2013, 01:49:38 PM
 #1524

I also am seeing a stat that has issues, under "Estimated Position in Payout Queue" ... Maintaining your 3 hour hashrate average, this will take at least another 13 hours and 33 minutes at current network difficulty of 10076292.88.

The hours keep increasing, even though I have maintained my current hashrate for almost 2 days now.  Undecided
klotzenhotz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
May 02, 2013, 01:56:56 PM
 #1525

I also am seeing a stat that has issues, under "Estimated Position in Payout Queue" ... Maintaining your 3 hour hashrate average, this will take at least another 13 hours and 33 minutes at current network difficulty of 10076292.88.

The hours keep increasing, even though I have maintained my current hashrate for almost 2 days now.  Undecided

The same here. I'm working for the last missing 0.02 BTC to payout for three days with almost 400 MHash... usually this should be done in a single day.

Update: No progress, but suddenly "Error: Username xxxxxxxx not found in database".
Subo1977
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 345


View Profile
May 02, 2013, 06:08:54 PM
 #1526

Any Updates for the Problems ?

I provide a 1000Mbit+ Torrent-Seedbox in FR and a 500Mbit Box in NL for orginal Blockchain Bootstrap.dat download. and also for Armoryclient Torrent

Tips are welcome:  15MuGdPSXU62fEFE9XbBZN3UvJMHBDVBoy
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
May 02, 2013, 09:04:28 PM
 #1527

We're working on provisioning a new poolserver ASAP - wizkid057 has to be gone for a bit, so I'll probably be finishing it up.

On a side note, I created a bugfix for the poclbm (GUIMiner) bug with stratum, but m0mchil refuses to merge the fix.
If you prefer poclbm and/or stratum, you can post your complaint/encouragement here...

nathanrees19
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 02:28:24 AM
 #1528

We're working on provisioning a new poolserver ASAP - wizkid057 has to be gone for a bit, so I'll probably be finishing it up.

On a side note, I created a bugfix for the poclbm (GUIMiner) bug with stratum, but m0mchil refuses to merge the fix.
If you prefer poclbm and/or stratum, you can post your complaint/encouragement here...

Your pool sends a fractional difficulty below 1 and you have the nerve to say that poclbm is broken?
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 02:33:29 AM
 #1529

We're working on provisioning a new poolserver ASAP - wizkid057 has to be gone for a bit, so I'll probably be finishing it up.

On a side note, I created a bugfix for the poclbm (GUIMiner) bug with stratum, but m0mchil refuses to merge the fix.
If you prefer poclbm and/or stratum, you can post your complaint/encouragement here...

Your pool sends a fractional difficulty below 1 and you have the nerve to say that poclbm is broken?
It sends standard pdifficulty 1, as close as stratum allows approximating it.
poclbm doesn't send any shares meeting the difficulty set as it should per the stratum protocol, so yes, it is broken.

nathanrees19
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 02:44:14 AM
 #1530

standard pdifficulty

pdifficulty is not the standard.
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 02:49:24 AM
 #1531

standard pdifficulty
pdifficulty is not the standard.
Not sure where you've been mining all this time, but until very recently, all pools used pdifficulty 1.
In any case, Eligius is completely stratum-spec-compliant here.

roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


View Profile
May 03, 2013, 02:52:19 AM
 #1532

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

Pools "often do" pdiff, but it seems bdiff is what bitcoin actually does internally. Wouldn't that make bdiff the defacto standard? Since pdiff ends up slightly higher, there's no harm done. Anything hitting the pdiff target also meets the bdiff target. But isn't bdiff the true standard?

RoyalMiningCo: Pools retired. Was fun!
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 03:06:07 AM
 #1533

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

Pools "often do" pdiff, but it seems bdiff is what bitcoin actually does internally. Wouldn't that make bdiff the defacto standard? Since pdiff ends up slightly higher, there's no harm done. Anything hitting the pdiff target also meets the bdiff target. But isn't bdiff the true standard?
There's two different standards, but bdiff only makes sense in the context of Bitcoin because of its floating-point block target.
Pdiff makes more sense for pools, miners, and blockchain-independent difficulty measurements, especially since it can be easily compressed down to a single byte (by counting the number of zero bits).

nathanrees19
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 03:06:51 AM
 #1534

standard pdifficulty
pdifficulty is not the standard.
Not sure where you've been mining all this time, but until very recently, all pools used pdifficulty 1.
In any case, Eligius is completely stratum-spec-compliant here.

The spec doesn't specify a minimum difficulty, but you'll note that the default difficulty is 1, not 0.9999847412109375, making 1 an implied minimum.
nathanrees19
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 03:07:10 AM
 #1535

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

Pools "often do" pdiff, but it seems bdiff is what bitcoin actually does internally. Wouldn't that make bdiff the defacto standard? Since pdiff ends up slightly higher, there's no harm done. Anything hitting the pdiff target also meets the bdiff target. But isn't bdiff the true standard?

This exactly.
nathanrees19
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 03:08:54 AM
 #1536

especially since it can be easily compressed down to a single byte (by counting the number of zero bits).

In other words, pdiff is a hack.
roy7
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


View Profile
May 03, 2013, 03:19:44 AM
 #1537

especially since it can be easily compressed down to a single byte (by counting the number of zero bits).

In other words, pdiff is a hack.

slush called it a mistake everyone copied from him. Smiley

RoyalMiningCo: Pools retired. Was fun!
Tia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
May 03, 2013, 03:56:09 AM
 #1538

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

Pools "often do" pdiff, but it seems bdiff is what bitcoin actually does internally. Wouldn't that make bdiff the defacto standard? Since pdiff ends up slightly higher, there's no harm done. Anything hitting the pdiff target also meets the bdiff target. But isn't bdiff the true standard?
There's two different standards, but bdiff only makes sense in the context of Bitcoin because of its floating-point block target.
Pdiff makes more sense for pools, miners, and blockchain-independent difficulty measurements, especially since it can be easily compressed down to a single byte (by counting the number of zero bits).
I am not fully comprehending the difference you suggest between a Pdiff of some number close to 1 (but technically under it) vs. 1 vs. bdiff  What difference does having Pdiff less than one vs. not? There must be some reason you'd want to do it that way, so out with it in layman's terms please.  Grin
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 05:40:35 AM
 #1539

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

Pools "often do" pdiff, but it seems bdiff is what bitcoin actually does internally. Wouldn't that make bdiff the defacto standard? Since pdiff ends up slightly higher, there's no harm done. Anything hitting the pdiff target also meets the bdiff target. But isn't bdiff the true standard?
There's two different standards, but bdiff only makes sense in the context of Bitcoin because of its floating-point block target.
Pdiff makes more sense for pools, miners, and blockchain-independent difficulty measurements, especially since it can be easily compressed down to a single byte (by counting the number of zero bits).
I am not fully comprehending the difference you suggest between a Pdiff of some number close to 1 (but technically under it) vs. 1 vs. bdiff  What difference does having Pdiff less than one vs. not? There must be some reason you'd want to do it that way, so out with it in layman's terms please.  Grin

Pdiff 1 = target 0x00000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, or 32 zero-bits
Pdiff 2 = target 0x000000007FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, or 33 zero-bits
Pdiff 4 = target 0x000000003FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, or 34 zero-bits
etc

But Bitcoin stores the target in a floating-point number type with 23 bits of precision, so it truncates them:

Bdiff 1 = target 0x00000000FFFF0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Bdiff 2 = target 0x000000007FFF0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Bdiff 4 = target 0x000000003FFF0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
etc

Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
May 03, 2013, 05:47:26 AM
 #1540

especially since it can be easily compressed down to a single byte (by counting the number of zero bits).
In other words, pdiff is a hack.
On the contrary, bdiff is a hack.

Anyhow, the point is that poclbm has this bug that affects any pool that wants to continue using the standard pdiff 1 target.

Pages: « 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 [77] 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 ... 201 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!