|
h2odysee (OP)
|
 |
August 08, 2013, 04:47:54 PM |
|
would it make sense to split the pool in 2 or 3 ports?
so u could direct one port to such coins?
what if the pool grows and u have 1, 2 or 3 ghash?
I wouldn't make additional ports. I would redirect each miner individually, based on their past reject rate. Just an idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
jayjay2244
Member
 Offline
Activity: 116
Merit: 10
|
|
August 08, 2013, 08:14:36 PM |
|
I haven't had a payment yet, hashed for over a day at 330kh
your balance should be at least 0.01 btc, is it? only 0.0067  about 5% stales aswell. |
|
|
|
xminerx
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 172
Merit: 100
quickest cross blockchain transactions
|
|
August 08, 2013, 10:14:13 PM |
|
Did u change these values in cgminer.conf?
queue 0
scantime 5
expiry 5
You will get a ton of rejects if you don't as the pool mines alot of coins with fast block times. I dont see any difference mining coins with higher block times with those settings.
Is this also useful for people with low hashrates? I'm going to give it a try on my 340 Kh/s. Pool is indeed back up after a couple hours of downtime. You can give it a try. But with your hash rate, it is not worth it because of the 512 difficulty level. Please report back the trial results. As most people had predicted, it didn't seem to make a large difference. Still an average reject rate of approximately 16%. |
|
|
|
Hydroponica
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
fml
|
|
August 08, 2013, 10:32:58 PM |
|
Did u change these values in cgminer.conf?
queue 0
scantime 5
expiry 5
You will get a ton of rejects if you don't as the pool mines alot of coins with fast block times. I dont see any difference mining coins with higher block times with those settings.
Is this also useful for people with low hashrates? I'm going to give it a try on my 340 Kh/s. Pool is indeed back up after a couple hours of downtime. You can give it a try. But with your hash rate, it is not worth it because of the 512 difficulty level. Please report back the trial results. As most people had predicted, it didn't seem to make a large difference. Still an average reject rate of approximately 16%. Funny, because I gave Multipool a try, and they let you set your own difficulty, and I notice profits are quite a bit higher  |
|
|
|
xminerx
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 172
Merit: 100
quickest cross blockchain transactions
|
|
August 08, 2013, 10:51:21 PM |
|
Funny, because I gave Multipool a try, and they let you set your own difficulty, and I notice profits are quite a bit higher Not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I tried using the queue/scan-time/expiry commands to see whether I could decrease my rejected rate on my 340 Kh/s system, and it turned out it didn't really matter in my case. |
|
|
|
Hydroponica
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
fml
|
|
August 08, 2013, 11:59:14 PM |
|
Funny, because I gave Multipool a try, and they let you set your own difficulty, and I notice profits are quite a bit higher Not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I tried using the queue/scan-time/expiry commands to see whether I could decrease my rejected rate on my 340 Kh/s system, and it turned out it didn't really matter in my case. Oops, my bad. I was talking about the fact that share diff is at 512 for everyone. Try out Multipool |
|
|
|
|
clintar
|
|
August 09, 2013, 02:12:53 AM |
|
Haven't the rejects pretty much dropped the last hour? Is that because of whatever we are mining?  |
|
|
|
|
ranlo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1007
|
|
August 09, 2013, 02:15:17 AM |
|
Haven't the rejects pretty much dropped the last hour? Is that because of whatever we are mining? I usually have up to 18% rejects. Over the past hour it has been 0.00% (not a single reject) with 6.5 MH/s. It's a bit odd. |
|
|
|
|
h2odysee (OP)
|
|
August 09, 2013, 02:16:03 AM |
|
Haven't the rejects pretty much dropped the last hour? Is that because of whatever we are mining? Yeah. The current coin has a slow block rate. Although I've never seen our reject rate this low. It's making me slightly worried, but nothing seems broken. |
|
|
|
|
h2odysee (OP)
|
|
August 09, 2013, 02:25:46 AM |
|
I did make one change to the profit calculation, to take the phantom rejects into account (stales I guess), that you see in this graph: http://middlecoin.com/rejectvshashrate.htmlSo we won't be switching as often to low difficulty coins. I guess that's helping our reject rate a little. |
|
|
|
smtn512
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
|
August 09, 2013, 07:06:19 AM |
|
For higher difficulty coins such as novacoin, or more specifically, litecoin, do you think this pool has enough hash power present to actually find a block within the given timeframe before another switch? At current difficulty and an estimated hashrate of 750Mh we have a 51.5% chance to find a litecoin block within 1 hour. I dont know how feesable it would be to foward our hashrate to a litecoin pool large enough to find blocks (or pay regardless) within the timeframe we are mining ltc. Just a thought, maybe you already do this, I dont know. Awesome work on the pool in general and I look forward to seeing it continue to improve!
|
|
|
|
|
|
h2odysee (OP)
|
|
August 09, 2013, 04:27:40 PM |
|
I dont know how feesable it would be to foward our hashrate to a litecoin pool large enough to find blocks (or pay regardless) within the timeframe we are mining ltc.
I looked into that, and it's not as easy as it sounds. If we were to do that, we would have a higher rejection percentage, because of the lag time from my pool to the proxied pool, probably of around 1%. Also, I believe the LTC pools with zero fees don't pay out transaction fees in blocks, so we'd lose some there too. It would be nice to reduce LTC variance, but not at that cost and effort. |
|
|
|
|
flound1129
|
|
August 09, 2013, 05:05:05 PM |
|
For higher difficulty coins such as novacoin, or more specifically, litecoin, do you think this pool has enough hash power present to actually find a block within the given timeframe before another switch? At current difficulty and an estimated hashrate of 750Mh we have a 51.5% chance to find a litecoin block within 1 hour. I dont know how feesable it would be to foward our hashrate to a litecoin pool large enough to find blocks (or pay regardless) within the timeframe we are mining ltc. Just a thought, maybe you already do this, I dont know. Awesome work on the pool in general and I look forward to seeing it continue to improve!
750 MH is without question enough hashrate to mine litecoin. |
Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
|
|
|
smtn512
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
|
August 09, 2013, 05:52:53 PM |
|
It would be nice to reduce LTC variance
With this in mind. Would you mind informing us how your pools pay? I'm guessing either proportional or PPLNS. Just curious what happens to our round shares if some time mining LTC is unable to find a block, if they are all kept and paid at the end of a round (proportional) or not. 750 MH is without question enough hashrate to mine litecoin.
I agree that for consistent mining that this hashrate is enough to pay consistently. I am not sure if it is enough for a pool that changes its direction multiple times a day. As I stated before, we have just over a 50% chance to find a block in one hour at this hashrate and difficulty. If we jump before finding a block of LTC then our work during that time *may* be in vain, pending the answer for the question I asked above. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jriker1
|
|
August 09, 2013, 06:35:10 PM
Last edit: August 09, 2013, 06:55:27 PM by Jriker1 |
|
Seems to me whatever we are mining now its slow paying out. I've almost doubled my hash rate and don't think I'm even going to get close to the payout I've seen even in the worse of times before doubling my cards. Not seeing a lot of movement/growth on the unexchanged balances.
JR
|
|
|
|
|
|
h2odysee (OP)
|
|
August 09, 2013, 06:49:47 PM |
|
With this in mind. Would you mind informing us how your pools pay? I'm guessing either proportional or PPLNS. Just curious what happens to our round shares if some time mining LTC is unable to find a block, if they are all kept and paid at the end of a round (proportional) or not.
It's proportional. If I see people pool hopping, it will become PPLNS or some variation, but so far it hasn't been an issue. |
|
|
|
smtn512
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
|
August 09, 2013, 08:33:23 PM |
|
It's proportional.
Good to hear! That makes me feel a little better about the fluctuating pay. Some days when we mine litecoin for a time and we dont find a block, the payout for the day wont be fantastic, when that block eventually is found the difference is made up. Continue the great work, friend! |
|
|
|
|
|
flound1129
|
|
August 10, 2013, 12:03:42 AM |
|
It would be nice to reduce LTC variance
With this in mind. Would you mind informing us how your pools pay? I'm guessing either proportional or PPLNS. Just curious what happens to our round shares if some time mining LTC is unable to find a block, if they are all kept and paid at the end of a round (proportional) or not. 750 MH is without question enough hashrate to mine litecoin.
I agree that for consistent mining that this hashrate is enough to pay consistently. I am not sure if it is enough for a pool that changes its direction multiple times a day. As I stated before, we have just over a 50% chance to find a block in one hour at this hashrate and difficulty. If we jump before finding a block of LTC then our work during that time *may* be in vain, pending the answer for the question I asked above. It doesn't really work like that. You will find one LTC block for every X shares submitted (on average) whether the shares are submitted consecutively or broken into different time periods. Shares don't build toward anything. Only the winning share matters, the rest become wasted effort every time a new block is found on the network. |
Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
|
|
|
massnerder
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
No power in the 'verse can stop me.
|
|
August 10, 2013, 12:52:54 AM |
|
Love the idea behind this pool, but still looks like there are some bugs to be worked out. I mined here for a little over a week and did ok, but not as good as just mining LTC. Have set this place as my failover pool and will continue to look in on it every so often.
|
|
|
|
|
smtn512
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
|
August 10, 2013, 02:50:54 AM |
|
It doesn't really work like that. You will find one LTC block for every X shares submitted (on average) whether the shares are submitted consecutively or broken into different time periods. Shares don't build toward anything. Only the winning share matters, the rest become wasted effort every time a new block is found on the network.
I understand that the shares don't add up to anything that actually finds a block, but depending on the payout method, they do add up to how our accounts are credited when the block is found. Hence my question about the payout methods the pool uses. Now that I know its proportional I know that we all will be paid something for any contributions made towards finding a block. If, for example, PPLNS was used the shares submitted in the beginning of a round might not be paid anything depending on how long the round takes. This was the potential "wasted work" I was curious about, work that we might not be paid for. |
|
|
|
|
|
