bitHopper: Python Pool Hopper Proxy

[hawks5999]

Can anybody give an estimate on what % increase they are seeing in revenue through using this tool?

[1714002332]

1714002332

[1714002332]

1714002332

[1714002332]

1714002332

[c00w]

Well in terms of revenue it should mathematically be 28% more if you are hopping all the time. Earlier someone said they got ~20% more. At the worst case you'll get the same revenue you'd get normally and be stuck mining at eligius all day.

Stats are slowly in the process of going up. There is a stat dump file which records shares, difficulty, and server.

I originally wanted the stats to be integrated into the server but I might just write a program which allows you to enter you rewards from each server and calculates its efficiency.

EDIT: I did some quick calculations on btcguild and I have 9362 shares. I expected to get 0.299 btc for those shares. I got 0.384 for those shares. So I got about 28% more that I should have. Which is actually pretty amazing.

[ahitman]

How is efficiency calculated? I was under the impression that one should expect to get:

(Payout per block / difficulty) * number of shares submitted     

As difficulty is the average number of shares that are needed to solve a block so each share should be worth 50BTC / 1,564,057 = 0.000031968BTC per share? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

If that right then I would guess efficiency is how much you get over that expected amount?

[c00w]

Efficiency can mean a number of things. A lot of people use it as hashes/getwork request.

In terms of payouts yes. Expected payout = shares/difficulty * 50 for normal mining. Payout per share = 50/difficulty.

I would probably just display the efficiency as actual/estimated * 100.

[Sukrim]

Can anybody give an estimate on what % increase they are seeing in revenue through using this tool?

I got a crazy 200% increase as I hopped in on a very lucky round yesterday that gave nearly a day's earning within an hour or so...

I'd need more stats to give a definite answer though, I currently just slapped together a bit in excel/google spreadsheets but then gave up since it's useless after the next difficulty change anyways to read directly from APIs and dumping stats seems already to be implemented.

(Edit: @c00w: Of course feel free to include my code for triplemining, I just don't have a github account and am not that used to git anyways, so I just posted a diff instead of making a proper pull request)

Edit2: triplemining is not a ponzi scheme, it is a 1 level pyramid scheme with actually no gains for the operator - so not much better/worse than any other referral thingie out there. the other 1% that is distributed via a "lottery" is just increasing variance a bit... In the end you can just mine solo there without referring ppl and have 1% fees (+ potentially a long time until you get that other 1% back) or maybe even create 2 accounts (1 referred by the other) and gain back a little bit of this 1%. The only thing thats not cool imho is the spam it produced lately, other than that it's a solid proportional pool just waiting to be hopped!
Writing this stuff is btw. really easy - jsut tell me/us a few more pools and I'll try to add them.

[enmaku]

OK so maybe I'm just too impatient but --statsdump creates an empty file and hasn't populated anything yet. How often does this file get written to?

[ahitman]

Do you have an plan for what will be logged? I have a suggestion: It would be good to have logged the number of shares sent to which pool, as well as which worker completed the work (maybe log the username of the worker that connected to the proxy with each share) to help with troubleshooting and statistics.

Log for each share:
Timestamp, Pool, Worker Name, pool round shares as per api at the time share was sent, difficulty

As for the hopping aspect log:
Timestamp, pool hopped to, pool share count

A log to a text file or two would be great for now, just so we can get it into a spreadsheet or parse it somehow with a different program.

Thats what I'd like to see, any other info that should be logged?

EDIT: Maybe for each share also record what block number we were on at the time, although now that I think about it every share will end up being for a different block then when it was submitted...

[c00w]

Hi,

Statsdump is a sort of median step. It had a bug which should be fixed. On server change it dumps shares, server, and difficulty.

I'm trying to rig something up with btcguild. Then mtred then we'll see.
EDIT: btcguild rigged. Add your api key to passwords.py or you will get my stats.
-c00w

[c00w]

It looks like bitclockers is using a payment scheme based on hashing rate not number of shares. I'm disabling it for now. And I got its efficiency statistics written.

EDIT: bitp is coded as well.

[jkminkov]

It looks like bitclockers is using a payment scheme based on hashing rate not number of shares. I'm disabling it for now. And I got its efficiency statistics written.

it's proportional scheme, # shares = hash rate

[c00w]

Its hash rate when the block is found. And my efficiency is about 76%. If yours is higher or you want to use it go right ahead. I'm disabling it because I'd rather mine on eligius.

[roos]

new pool.py exits without any output

[c00w]

new pool.py exits without any output

Run python bitHopper.py.

Pool.py is now only for the pool functions.

[roos]

new pool.py exits without any output

Run python bitHopper.py.

Pool.py is now only for the pool functions.

Well, i might be 100% ignorant, but i cant find bitHopper.py in the git.

Edit: found it now, stupid cache

[nob]

another question:

i'm using bithopper for some days and never mined on bitcoins.lc

is this right? or a bug?

looks kinda weird to me

[koopa]

Thanks for the latest version c00w - just updated to it. However, I come bearing errors

When bithopper attempts to jump to BTC Guild , the connection seems flaky at best, usually the following error is reported just before the connection dies and bithopper switches to another pool:

Code:

[11:18:54] LP triggered from server btcg
Unhandled error in Deferred:
Unhandled Error
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1076, in gotResult
    _inlineCallbacks(r, g, deferred)
  File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1020, in _inlineCallbacks
    result = g.send(result)
  File "C:\path\to\bithopper\c00w-bitHopper-8324470\work.py", line 66, in jsonrpc_lpcall
    d = update(body)
  File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1141, in unwindGenerator
    return _inlineCallbacks(None, f(*args, **kwargs), Deferred())
--- <exception caught here> ---
  File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\twisted\internet\defer.py", line 1020, in _inlineCallbacks
    result = g.send(result)
  File "C:\path\to\bithopper\c00w-bitHopper-8324470\lp.py", line 25, in update_lp
    except ResponseFailed:
exceptions.NameError: global name 'ResponseFailed' is not defined
[11:18:59] RPC request [] submitted to BTC Guild
[11:18:59] RPC request [] submitted to BTC Guild
Caught, jsonrpc_call insides
TCP connection timed out: 10060: A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond..
[11:19:02] Server change to mtred, telling client with LP
[11:19:03] LP triggered serving miner
[11:19:03] LP triggered serving miner
[11:19:03] LP triggered serving miner
[11:19:03] LP triggered serving miner
[11:19:03] LP Call eu.mtred.com:8337/LP
caught, Final response/writing
Request.finish called on a request after its connection was lost; use Request.notifyFinish to keep track of this.
caught, Final response/writing
Request.finish called on a request after its connection was lost; use Request.notifyFinish to keep track of this.
Caught, jsonrpc_call insides
TCP connection timed out: 10060: A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond..
[11:19:14] RPC request [] submitted to mtred

Could bithopper be triggering some sort of flood protection over at BTC Guild? Is there a way around it?

Cheers.

*Edit - LP errors are cropping up on other pools, connection to BTC Guild seems a little more stable now.

[organofcorti]

@c00w

just installed most recent from git. Thx for stats!

I've been trying to add ozco.in I've done it successfully previously. Now bitHopper reports the round shares for ozco.in but wont change over to it when it has the fewest. Is there something in the new bitHopper I have to change?

tia

[phelix]

Well in terms of revenue it should mathematically be 28% more if you are hopping all the time. Earlier someone said they got ~20% more. At the worst case you'll get the same revenue you'd get normally and be stuck mining at eligius all day.

Stats are slowly in the process of going up. There is a stat dump file which records shares, difficulty, and server.

I originally wanted the stats to be integrated into the server but I might just write a program which allows you to enter you rewards from each server and calculates its efficiency.

EDIT: I did some quick calculations on btcguild and I have 9362 shares. I expected to get 0.299 btc for those shares. I got 0.384 for those shares. So I got about 28% more that I should have. Which is actually pretty amazing.

I cross posted this over on the btcguild thread.

       

[OCedHrt]

LP isn't working with the new cgminer.

[Sukrim]

I've been trying to add ozco.in I've done it successfully previously. Now bitHopper reports the round shares for ozco.in but wont change over to it when it has the fewest. Is there something in the new bitHopper I have to change?

tia

Show/share your code, otherwise it's a bit hard to tell where you are missing something.

Its hash rate when the block is found. And my efficiency is about 76%. If yours is higher or you want to use it go right ahead. I'm disabling it because I'd rather mine on eligius.

That means they use a PPLNM system (pay per last n minutes). Interesting, but as far as I can see quite hopping proof. It increases variance though, so let's see how thir users react...
Disabling it is the right choice here, the pool can't be hopped that way.