[~32 TH] HHTT - Selected Diff/Stratum/PPLNS/Paid Stales/High Availability/Tor

[JorgePasada]

What is going to hurt?

Three days without blocks but we went through...

spiccioli

Lot of power came on recently. Good stuff, I know about 4thash I talked over from gigas pool.

[1685409555]

1685409555

[1685409555]

1685409555

[1685409555]

1685409555

[1685409555]

1685409555

[JWU42]

Any chance FD would add MM for NMC, DVC, IXC?  Over a month all those add up...

[JorgePasada]

Any chance FD would add MM for NMC, DVC, IXC?  Over a month all those add up...

You're talking merged mining?

[painge]

This is going to hurt...

spiccioli

Damn...Long dry spell.

[JWU42]

Any chance FD would add MM for NMC, DVC, IXC?  Over a month all those add up...

You're talking merged mining?

Correct...

[fireduck]

At this difficulty, I'm not sure this pool is sustainable at this hash rate.

80 hours per block (average) is way too much variance.  I feel like I am losing money mining here and it is my own pool.

But the last thing I want to do is shut it down.  There are not enough pools and too much mining power is in too few.

[JWU42]

@FD,

I wish I had an answer to the "problem".  I would enjoy mining here again but cannot stomach the variance either.  I wish there were 2-3 other pools in the .5-1.5 Ph/s range.  With the upcoming shipments from HF and Cointerra (along with more from KNC) any pool less than 1 Ph/s will be too much variance 

[fireduck]

@FD,

I wish I had an answer to the "problem".  I would enjoy mining here again but cannot stomach the variance either.  I wish there were 2-3 other pools in the .5-1.5 Ph/s range.  With the upcoming shipments from HF and Cointerra (along with more from KNC) any pool less than 1 Ph/s will be too much variance 

Yep.  I am happy that I contributed an open source stratum server implementation, which I know some people have picked up.  I'm glad I helped drive the change to higher difficulty mining.  I also demonstrated building high availability cloud based services. 

The bottom line is that I'm not going to let this pool just drain money in hosting costs.  I'm not going to tell people to mine on it when the variance is just to damn high.  I'm not going to switch back to PPS to take a bunch of risk myself to mitigate the variance.  So that probably means ceasing operations at some point soon.

[JWU42]

@FD,

Are you willing to look at implementing MM (NMC, IXC, DVC)?  Having those can add enough extra income to offset the fees.

With Ghash, Eligius and Guild all offering NMC it makes it hard to choose a pool not offering at least NMC MM.

[fireduck]

@FD,

Are you willing to look at implementing MM (NMC, IXC, DVC)?  Having those can add enough extra income to offset the fees.

With Ghash, Eligius and Guild all offering NMC it makes it hard to choose a pool not offering at least NMC MM.

Do you think if I added merged mining that I would get enough hashing power for the pool to be viable?  According to dustcoin, that currently only brings a 1.6% increase in revenue which I think isn't enough of a carrot when measured against the terrible variance.

[JWU42]

@FD,

Are you willing to look at implementing MM (NMC, IXC, DVC)?  Having those can add enough extra income to offset the fees.

With Ghash, Eligius and Guild all offering NMC it makes it hard to choose a pool not offering at least NMC MM.

Do you think if I added merged mining that I would get enough hashing power for the pool to be viable?  According to dustcoin, that currently only brings a 1.6% increase in revenue which I think isn't enough of a carrot when measured against the terrible variance.

At this point I hate to say - probably not enough of a carrot.  That said, without NMC it makes it very tough to mine here (ignoring variance) as I am giving up ~1.6% in NMC and have fees too (no fees at Eligius and GHash).

I think many people forget you split the block fees with the block finder.  That is a great incentive for folks with several TH (i.e., those that might have a higher probability to find a block).

As I said above, I wish I had a solution that didn't simply put tons of risk on you (i.e., PPS).

[MoreBloodWine]

What does it take to run this pool, you make eit sound like a bad investment but the one HHTT payment address at last checked showed over 80+ BTC in it. As long as the pool finds 4 blocks month, what you as the operator gets out of those four should b more than enough to run the server it's on I'd imagine.

As for merged mining, I say give it a shot beause at this point it couldnt hurt.

[JWU42]

What does it take to run this pool, you make eit sound like a bad investment but the one HHTT payment address at last checked showed over 80+ BTC in it. As long as the pool finds 4 blocks month, what you as the operator gets out of those four should b more than enough to run the server it's on I'd imagine.

As for merged mining, I say give it a shot beause at this point it couldnt hurt.

Have you not looked at the total history?

Total loss of > 818BTC

[MoreBloodWine]

What does it take to run this pool, you make eit sound like a bad investment but the one HHTT payment address at last checked showed over 80+ BTC in it. As long as the pool finds 4 blocks month, what you as the operator gets out of those four should b more than enough to run the server it's on I'd imagine.

As for merged mining, I say give it a shot beause at this point it couldnt hurt.

Have you not looked at the total history?

Total loss of > 818BTC

No, but I just did a check, Final Balance 98.0948075 BTC

at current BTC-e prices the pool has a current value of $68,600 assuming $700 per BTC.

I'm still curious though just how "bad" it could be to host the pool on w/e server it's on.

I gota cloud VPS with 70+gb of space a decen number of CPU cores and available memory and it cost me $100 a month. I don't pretend to know what it costs to host a pool but even on a $200 a month server, that's easily made as a pool opp with ducks settings and assuming a minimum of four bloks a month found

[RoadTrain]

Well if variance is too high you could just make it a p2pool proxy, just like multipool does.
I think in the end most small pools will operate on top of p2pool.

[TechByPC]

I sent a PM, but I thought I'd post it here for everyone else's comment also along with a few other thoughts.

The two things that would make me mine continuously on HHTT are a larger value of N for PPLNS and merged mining for namecoin. In that order. I love the AWS setup, the minimalistic website, and the ability to define my difficulty. The vardiff adjustment on some other pools is too willing to change the setting every few minutes and create rejects. I would prefer to mine here, but I want to know that my effort will be counted for something in the case of pool hoppers increasing the pool's hash rate temporarily or my own miners going offline at a bad time. N should be at least large enough to cover several found blocks at bad luck. Namecoin mining doesn't do much, but it makes up for the higher fees on some other pools, and if it is done at even a high fee PPS it shows there is at least some progress being made.

I think the larger value of N would appeal to people from BTC Guild and the merged mining would appeal to people from Eligius who also like the lack of registration there. The AWS setup offers benefits that Eligius doesn't have for reporting and stats.

Merging other coins is a lot of work for not much benefit, but it would give an edge over Eligius and BTC Guild. Courting the interests of some hardware manufacturers or group buy coordinators might also be beneficial. For example, if you could figure out how to make it easy to split a group's hash power out to multiple payment addresses, maybe as a premium service, that seems to be something that a lot of group buy coordinators are spending a lot of time with.

[fireduck]

What does it take to run this pool, you make eit sound like a bad investment but the one HHTT payment address at last checked showed over 80+ BTC in it. As long as the pool finds 4 blocks month, what you as the operator gets out of those four should b more than enough to run the server it's on I'd imagine.

As for merged mining, I say give it a shot beause at this point it couldnt hurt.

It costs about $1000/mo to run.  It could probably be done cheaper.

The 80 BTC isn't really profit, it is my money in a pile to pay people as needed so that miners don't have to wait 120 confirmations to get paid.

[fireduck]

No, but I just did a check, Final Balance 98.0948075 BTC

at current BTC-e prices the pool has a current value of $68,600 assuming $700 per BTC.

I'm still curious though just how "bad" it could be to host the pool on w/e server it's on.

I gota cloud VPS with 70+gb of space a decen number of CPU cores and available memory and it cost me $100 a month. I don't pretend to know what it costs to host a pool but even on a $200 a month server, that's easily made as a pool opp with ducks settings and assuming a minimum of four bloks a month found

You are right, it can be run pretty cheaply.  However, why would a miner stay with a pool when it is more likely that the difficulty will change under you before you even get a block?

[fireduck]

Well if variance is too high you could just make it a p2pool proxy, just like multipool does.
I think in the end most small pools will operate on top of p2pool.

That is an interesting idea.  I might look into that.

[MoreBloodWine]

I'd like to see he pool survive bu no sure if it will now...

last_month last_week last_day last_hour last_5_min
27094.235 19630.003 7967.795 6337.613 5650.846