Bitcoin Forum
December 13, 2017, 12:50:10 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 ... 376 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]  (Read 832962 times)
kano
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 22, 2012, 03:01:29 AM
 #2101

yeah today ended at 14 which is just a bit above normal of 11 or 12.  I am almost paid off just in time for the half block split and then the asics come out in dec or jan.

 that reminds me i am thinking of getting a BTCFPGA  a 54 GH/s model for $1069.99.  link is here;


https://www.bitcoinasic.net/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=51



  so my question to the dr  will this plug n play? 

 I would use it with one of my pc's
Since this is a pool thread Smiley
I'll answer that.
Yes it will plug and play ... with cgminer.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
1513126210
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513126210

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513126210
Reply with quote  #2

1513126210
Report to moderator
1513126210
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513126210

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513126210
Reply with quote  #2

1513126210
Report to moderator
1513126210
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513126210

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513126210
Reply with quote  #2

1513126210
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513126210
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513126210

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513126210
Reply with quote  #2

1513126210
Report to moderator
1513126210
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513126210

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513126210
Reply with quote  #2

1513126210
Report to moderator
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
November 22, 2012, 07:21:37 AM
 #2102

I believe cgminer and bfgminer will have bASIC support before the devices ship.

As for BitMinter client, I will try to get remote access to a bASIC as early as possible. If I don't get this from the bASIC guys then I will probably not have a working implementation on day 1. But I probably could within a day or two.

I started a thread to get info on the new protocol that will be used to control the bASICs: https://www.btcfpga.com/forum/index.php?topic=99

If the protocol specs are released early then it means only some (hopefully short) time for debugging is needed with an actual device.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
kano
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 22, 2012, 09:20:55 AM
 #2103

For bASIC it may or may not be this document by TheSeven:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PjtBgOGL-SS74aMoFw5-tHwwggeBmxGe3grGquFNQTE/edit?pli=1

He posted that link in the #btcfpga channel so I presume anyone is allowed to know about it.

I don't know - but if he does the MCU and has enough time I guess that will be it.
However, I know that hasn't started yet so I'd doubt there is time for it between now and whenever they are supposed to be released.
... unless the release date is quite a way in the future.
(and I no longer have ANY information at all about when any of the devices will be released other than what everyone else now knows)

I'd also be pretty much certain that each of the ASICs will work differently.
(bASIC, BFL SC, Avalon and ASICMINER)

As for delivery dates ... yeah I've given up on any of them meeting their targets Tongue

Cheesy ... and here I was hoping to get a WiiU on release day in Aus (30-Nov) Cheesy

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
loshia
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610


View Profile
November 22, 2012, 11:12:39 AM
 #2104



Awesome Smiley Let me know if you see anything strange. After a block change (long poll) bfgminer sometimes says the server is issuing old work. It shouldn't, of course, but I may have a bug there.

Also, we are now making version 2 blocks. It will probably be a while before v2 blocks are required though, as 50BTC and DeepBit have not made the switch yet.

You can see the v1 to v2 transition as it happens at http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php


Doc,

Apart of the bad luck there are to many orphan and stale blocks. Do you think that making version 2 blocks can have something in common? I am just wandering because before that orphan and stales were very low compared to now.

10X

Please help the Led Boy aka Bicknellski to make us a nice Christmas led tree and pay WASP membership fee here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=643999.msg7191563#msg7191563
And remember Bicknellski is not collecting money from community;D
WhitePhantom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 354


View Profile
November 22, 2012, 04:16:22 PM
 #2105

12 blocks and counting.  I think we're back!  Woot!

Edit: Oops, just noticed that two were orphans.  Sorry Doc.  Sad
nelisky
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554


View Profile
November 24, 2012, 09:18:10 PM
 #2106

I can't say for sure how long it has been, but from a day or two ago I have 0 accepted (and 0 rejected) shares? Wtf? cgminer reports the speed accurately (2.4.1 on openwrt) but that's that, basically.

Are you seeing accepted shares in cgminer, but not on website under "my account" -> "workers" ?

You are sure you are using the correct credentials in your cgminer config?

If you send me your BitMinter user name I can have a look at things on the server side. You can email me at operator@bitminter.com


No accepted shares on either cgminer or website, and yes, I'm sure the credentials are correct (unchanged). I'll email you the username.

Following up on this issue, the problem lays in endianess. I will submit a pull request for this to cgminer, it is working fine for both default work fetching and GBT, haven't tested on stratum yet.
MinorMiner
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 72


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 04:34:24 AM
 #2107

Looking forward to testing stratum to Bitminter for a while to make sure things run well then that will be one less thing to worry about with ASICs arriving (whenever they do).

I do hope the luck gets better though. it's been kinda painful over the last week.

Hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving ( that celebrate it ) Smiley

All contributions gratefully received 1G6Wia22Jnpz2DUisA5EoAC6KJ7MHm6QyP
philipma1957
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


A new tool for prediction https://bitvol.info/


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 08:35:05 AM
 #2108

well 17,18,19,20 = 29 blocks 2 stale 2 orphan.   


next 21,22,23,24 = 49 blocks  3 orphan .

  .  quite a bit of stales and orphans last 8 days.   for 4 days we should do in the low forties .  I never tracked stale or orphan frequency, but now that i have built up to 7k hash I am tracking a bit closer.

Please support sidehack with his new miner project Send to : 1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
I mine alt coins with https://simplemining.net I see BTC as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2366


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2012, 08:49:21 AM
 #2109

If you were having a problem with cgminer + GBT on this pool, I'd like to recommend upgrading to cgminer 2.9.5 which has fixes for rare large coinbases which were causing a cgminer crash.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
ZERO FEE Pooled mining at ckpool.org 1% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2012, 10:20:09 AM
 #2110

Stratum is almost ready for testing.

And yes, we have had too many orphans lately.

I think it's time to start limiting the number of transactions we include in a block. It would make the blocks smaller, which would make them propagate faster through the bitcoin p2p network, and reduce their chance of being orphaned.

Our latest orphan at height 209437 had 722 transactions. I see EclipseMC also got an orphan today with 695 transactions.

Suggestions for pool transaction rules? Max X transactions per block and max Y minimum-fee transactions per block? Anyone know what other pools are doing?

It's a shame to have to limit transactions, but we can't keep throwing away money so that SatoshiDice can make money faster. Not that they are doing anything wrong by using Bitcoin, but this is how it is from our perspective.

Edit: if you want to comment on this and don't have access to post outside the newbie section, write in the BitMinter newbie thread instead: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=22432.0

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
lumberjack
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41


##VALUE!##


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 10:55:26 AM
 #2111

Pondering some of Gavin's suggestions on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=95837.0

Perhaps some combination of 'Create Smaller Blocks' and 'Punish High-Frequency Users' settings? Maybe:

blockmaxsize=100000
blockminsize=0
blockprioritysize=50000
mintxfee=0.0005

19iyXxefXKKUyZgw3KLGRvpFcP8HDWt8UD
sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1444

https://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2012, 11:03:04 AM
 #2112

I think it's time to start limiting the number of transactions we include in a block. It would make the blocks smaller, which would make them propagate faster through the bitcoin p2p network, and reduce their chance of being orphaned.

Are you sure this works?

Last time I did a shallow analysis of this, I found that while there was a connction between block size and the chance of getting orphanded, the larger orphaned block was almost always newer than the winning block.  Which means that the orphan block is larger because it has been accumulating more transactions while the older block was busy propagating through the network.

Smaller blocks means we have to wait longer for normal transactions to get confirmed by the network.  SatoshiDice transactions have a fee, and will win over standard no-fee transactions from normal clients, MtGox, etc.

Quote
Suggestions for pool transaction rules? Max X transactions per block and max Y minimum-fee transactions per block? Anyone know what other pools are doing?

It's a shame to have to limit transactions, but we can't keep throwing away money so that SatoshiDice can make money faster. Not that they are doing anything wrong by using Bitcoin, but this is how it is from our perspective.
By reducing the number of no-fee transactions we actually give higher priority to SatoshiDice transactions.  Blocking transactions to or from 1dice addresses with fee < 1 BTC is a better solution, IMHO.

Sjå https://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
Warning: "Bitcoin" XT, Classic, Unlimited and the likes are scams. Don't use them, and don't listen to their shills.
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2012, 11:32:39 AM
 #2113

For comparison, what some p2pool users are using: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg1326067#msg1326067

blockmaxsize=100000
blockminsize=0
blockprioritysize=2000
mintxfee=0.0005

Are you sure this works?

Yes. The slower a block propagates through the bitcoin peer-to-peer network the higher the chance it is orphaned. That's because others will be making blocks that compete with yours because they haven't seen your block yet. And the bigger the block the longer bitcoin nodes take before accepting the block as valid and passing it on to other nodes.

So I would think that reducing the block's transactions by X kilobytes will reduce the chance of the block being orphaned by Y percent. But I can't say what X and Y are.

Smaller blocks means we have to wait longer for normal transactions to get confirmed by the network.  SatoshiDice transactions have a fee, and will win over standard no-fee transactions from normal clients, MtGox, etc.

I haven't looked at what the SatoshiDice transactions usually carry in fees. But yes, slower processing of transactions is the downside to limiting how many transactions we include in each block.

This is unfortunate for Bitcoin. And I think it is too early for a real market-effect when it comes to processing transactions. The new coins you mint are much more valuable than any transaction fee. The incentive for a miner is to just toss all the transactions and maximize the chance of keeping those new coins. If pools did that, though, it would be a disaster for bitcoin.

So why risk our 50 BTC for an extra 0.1 BTC in fees? Because otherwise we destroy bitcoin (and the value of those 50 BTC). But we must keep this risk manageable.

By reducing the number of no-fee transactions we actually give higher priority to SatoshiDice transactions.  Blocking transactions to or from 1dice addresses with fee < 1 BTC is a better solution, IMHO.

I like the idea of a "market" for transactions and their fees. Giving priority to the transactions that pay us also is the way for us to make the most profit.

But blocking SatoshiDice transactions is a valid suggestion, I think. Even if we lose some (insignificant amount of) coins doing so, it means newbies can try out bitcoin and see fast transactions. The fees are so insignificant anyway. What is best for bitcoin - slowing down newbies or SatoshiDice? It may be more important to give new users a good impression of bitcoin than to support the SatoshiDice spam.

Of course the real problem is that bitcoin in its current state does not scale beyond minor usage. That's something the bitcoin devs can hopefully fix in the long run. But in the short run I need to take care of the miners in this pool and keep the pool from going bankrupt paying orphans.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
kano
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 12:19:12 PM
 #2114

Ah another pool looking to increase their pay by making BTC worse rather than fixing their pool.
Puts you in exactly the same class as Eligius - that's what Eligius did,
Well I guess this is another pool that people should avoid.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
November 25, 2012, 12:38:24 PM
 #2115

Ah another pool looking to increase their pay by making BTC worse rather than fixing their pool.
Puts you in exactly the same class as Eligius - that's what Eligius did,
Well I guess this is another pool that people should avoid.

Miners are unhappy losing money. And the pool is in the red. I'm paying for the privilege of running this pool. When I run out of bitcoins, I'll have to shut the pool down.

So Deepbit, Eligius and many p2pool miners already use transaction limits below the bitcoin defaults. Probably more do as well. I think this is a good way to improve the situation until bitcoin scales better.

How do you propose to "fix the pool"? The pool is already well connected on the bitcoin peer-to-peer network. Directly connected to most pools. But if you have suggestions how we can get other pools accepting our blocks faster without reducing the amount of transactions, I'm all ears.

Well I guess this is another pool that people should avoid.

I guess most miners will instead avoid pools with many orphans. But this is why I want to hear opinions. If you mine on this pool and you think processing SatoshiDice transactions faster is worth losing some of your mining income, please speak up.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
loshia
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 02:39:51 PM
 #2116

Doc,

As i said a couple of times you are my number 1 among all pools. So I am ok whatever you and community decide to do, in order to make this pool stay alive. If number of transactions depends on our payouts frequency (if it related to it at all), i am ok you to change it..If we have to pay something in reasonable amount like fee to reduce orphans it is ok also at least for me

Kano,

You have been very helpful to me several times. You know what you are doing for sure. And you are good also for sure. I see that for some reason you and Doc do not like each other very much. I will ask both of you to arrange your personal things in private. Stating here that we shall avoid this pool seems not good thing to do at all. From the other hand Doc has to respond something and shit begins to happen.

At the end nothing good will came out of your fight. I can bet on that. If you have something to propose to Doc how to avoid orphans just do it. Some of the users here have invested a lot in hardware and every % maters. From the other hand Doc deserves at least not to loose any money because of his hard work. We have to find a way out all together

Peace Smiley








Please help the Led Boy aka Bicknellski to make us a nice Christmas led tree and pay WASP membership fee here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=643999.msg7191563#msg7191563
And remember Bicknellski is not collecting money from community;D
meowmeowbrowncow
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322



View Profile
November 25, 2012, 02:56:05 PM
 #2117

Ah another pool looking to increase their pay by making BTC worse rather than fixing their pool.
Puts you in exactly the same class as Eligius - that's what Eligius did,
Well I guess this is another pool that people should avoid.

Miners are unhappy losing money. And the pool is in the red. I'm paying for the privilege of running this pool. When I run out of bitcoins, I'll have to shut the pool down.

So Deepbit, Eligius and many p2pool miners already use transaction limits below the bitcoin defaults. Probably more do as well. I think this is a good way to improve the situation until bitcoin scales better.

How do you propose to "fix the pool"? The pool is already well connected on the bitcoin peer-to-peer network. Directly connected to most pools. But if you have suggestions how we can get other pools accepting our blocks faster without reducing the amount of transactions, I'm all ears.

Well I guess this is another pool that people should avoid.

I guess most miners will instead avoid pools with many orphans. But this is why I want to hear opinions. If you mine on this pool and you think processing SatoshiDice transactions faster is worth losing some of your mining income, please speak up.



Bitcoin was never a freebie rather a pay for use system.  Pools must operate profitably.  If not, there is a more serious flaw in Bitcoin that should be addressed.

If the tx fees are insignificant, many other pools with lesser tx's and faster propagation then an equilibrium should be found by BitMinter following suit.


Re: Kano.  While finding this equilibrium is not ideal - it is necessary if pool coffers are running dry.


"Bitcoin has been an amazing ride, but the most fascinating part to me is the seemingly universal tendency of libertarians to immediately become authoritarians the very moment they are given any measure of power to silence the dissent of others."  - The Bible
willphase
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 04:29:15 PM
 #2118

one option would be to dynamically scale the donations for instant payout depending on the number of orphaned blocks - the numbers could be made public and you could also make it so people can set a 'max' amount - and if it exceeds the max then they revert to 0% donations and having to wait for 120 blocks.  It would probably be worth adding an additional donate option that is independent of this for people to make a completely voluntary donation of bitcoins.

Then it puts the decision in the miners' hands, and hopefully means Doc doesn't keep losing bitcoins to keep the service going.

Will

LazyOtto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 04:43:28 PM
 #2119

And yes, we have had too many orphans lately.

I think it's time to start limiting the number of transactions we include in a block.
Can you absolutely rule out the possibility that something changed in BitMinter's pool processing about two weeks ago?

About that time is when the number of orphans changed from the typical very low, less than 1.5%, to the recent rate of nearly one per day.

Just for a comparison, I looked at Ozcoin. Their most recent orphan was on 2012/08/24. They also accept all transactions into blocks and include transaction fees in payouts.

-- edit --
And, yes, Ozcoin is dealing with about half the hashrate as BitMinter.
kano
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2296


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 25, 2012, 05:38:02 PM
 #2120

There are a number of issues here.

#1 as LazyOtto has stated above but to expand on it: what changed with bitcoin that suddenly means you are getting more orphans?
You are blaming bitcoin (saying you must reduce your txn count your pool processes)

Show a record of the number of transactions per block you have been confirming and the number of orphans you have been getting and show a statistical proof that your pool isn't getting more than the other pools.

You see, if your pool IS getting more orphans than the other pools and the other pools are processing a similar or greater number of transactions as you are - then the issue is squarely with your pool.

So go look at EMC or OzCoin or Slush or ... show proof that the problem for everyone with similar sized blocks and not you - then I'll shut up.
I already asked organofcorti to do this for all pools so we could have graphs showing the pools that shouldn't be mined at but he thought it was too difficult to identify blocks for all pools.
Pity, it's dead simple for about 50% of the blocks.

For your pool it's dead easy also.

#2 so when I get these 60/72 whatever GH/s ASIC devices so I can implement mining on them in cgminer, your argument says that if I mine solo I should only mine 0 txn blocks.

I would only be one person, me, so the number of blocks I would find would be small (e.g. at the moment 100GH/s is about one block every 40hours)
I wouldn't want to risk losing a block when I'd be such a small hash rate? RIght? Wrong.

Bitcoin is about confirming transactions.
If you don't think that is the case then indeed you've never read Satoshi's paper or understood what you are doing.

Personally, I even mine solo on a pair of 6950 GPU cards (coz I decided for their final month I'd bet on being lucky and finding a block rather than the rather small payout they'd get pool mining) and no they aren't mining 0 txn blocks.
They are mining whatever bitcoind throws at them by default.

#3 money - you say the pool is losing it. Why? Because you are paying out orphans to attract miners? If that's the case then you are your own problem.
If not, then the other problem could be PPS.
Pools that run PPS put a high margin on them for this exact reason. If you don't charge enough on PPS you risk happening exactly what you are describing.
Where is this 'lost' money going?

... and don't forget that in less than a week each block is gonna pay only 25BTC ...

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 ... 376 »
  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!