[1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]

[RJ2013]

Dr. H so we need to pull out our workers or keep them working? because im worried my 13GHash is just wasting their time...

[MajorMiner]

Site down for HOURS... Whats going on?

[whitefeather]

Dr. H so we need to pull out our workers or keep them working? because im worried my 13GHash is just wasting their time...

I believe that mining is going on uninterrupted. Yes, the website is down, and I'm not sure what time it went down, but I continued to receive payouts at these times (US Pacific Time) so I know that the mining operation is ongoing:

2013-05-27 20:11:06
2013-05-27 17:57:03
2013-05-27 15:02:44
2013-05-27 13:59:37
2013-05-27 13:50:01
2013-05-27 13:27:41
2013-05-27 10:04:07
2013-05-27 07:55:15 (payout for 2 blocks here)
2013-05-27 07:07:54
2013-05-27 01:50:10
2013-05-27 01:27:20

[RJ2013]

so you still receiving payment..cool then, i did'nt notice payout because my bitminter wallet is off, anyhow i just wait any see once the site is back...thanks

[Xian01]

This webpage downtime kinda sucks, huh ? Good to see automatic payouts are being made despite the page not being accessible. My miners have been dutifully plugging away despite the web outage.

Props to the Bitminter peeps for having things nicely segmented.

[nwfella]

Dr. H so we need to pull out our workers or keep them working? because im worried my 13GHash is just wasting their time...

I believe that mining is going on uninterrupted. Yes, the website is down, and I'm not sure what time it went down, but I continued to receive payouts at these times (US Pacific Time) so I know that the mining operation is ongoing:

2013-05-27 20:11:06
2013-05-27 17:57:03
2013-05-27 15:02:44
2013-05-27 13:59:37
2013-05-27 13:50:01
2013-05-27 13:27:41
2013-05-27 10:04:07
2013-05-27 07:55:15 (payout for 2 blocks here)
2013-05-27 07:07:54
2013-05-27 01:50:10
2013-05-27 01:27:20

+1
I started to panic a bit myself however once I loaded my payout wallet I can confirm that my lil-guys resulted in a $0.02 btc payout about 45 minutes ago!

[DrHaribo]

Webserver back up. Apologies for the instability. Some software I am using is not working right. I'm looking for a workaround.

[Paulizei]

Hi there, I'd really like to change to Bitminter. So far, I've just a test machine mining on this pool.

As I have a few smaller workers (120-180Mhps), my question is, if I will be able to see if they're working properly.

At the moment with only an Radeon 6450 (30Mhps), I can see shares continously beeing submitted, but speed calculation shows 0Mhps most of the time. For a few seconds it jumps up to 180Mhps.

Is this specific to (very, very) small miners, e.g. will my 120-180Mhps miners show more correctly? Any ideas?

Thanks in advandce

[deforse]

Hi, not only to you. I have a HD6870 an hashrate ah ~300. On the site it is shown somehow ~220, to ~350. I think it is normal. The site is calculating somewhere in the middle.

[Paulizei]

Hi, not only to you. I have a HD6870 an hashrate ah ~300. On the site it is shown somehow ~220, to ~350. I think it is normal. The site is calculating somewhere in the middle.

Thanks for your reply. I recognized that calulations are correct. But 'supervising' a bunch of small miners by the provided live stats (my account -> workers seems) not really praticable.

Is there any kind of workaround? Haven't had a closer look at cgminer api but perhaps the bitminter api works better?

[killerstorm]

How did it happen that BitMinter mined an empty block?

http://bitminter.com/block/btc/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

[kano]

Hi, not only to you. I have a HD6870 an hashrate ah ~300. On the site it is shown somehow ~220, to ~350. I think it is normal. The site is calculating somewhere in the middle.

Thanks for your reply. I recognized that calulations are correct. But 'supervising' a bunch of small miners by the provided live stats (my account -> workers seems) not really praticable.

Is there any kind of workaround? Haven't had a closer look at cgminer api but perhaps the bitminter api works better?

The pool API is based on the shares you submit, since that is all the pool knows, so it's accuracy over a short period of time is quite unreliable - finding shares is statistically random.

My cgminer API, on the other hand, reports the counted hashes done by the devices
(or with ICA and MMQ, it counts successful hashes and reasonably accurately estimates valid aborted hashes if configured correctly)

[matt4054]

How did it happen that BitMinter mined an empty block?

http://bitminter.com/block/btc/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

Maybe because FinCEN / DHS / whatever will now hunt down the miners including SR transactions and DrHaribo doesn't want to take any chances with this? just kidding. I would be interested too. Maybe their bitcoind had just restarted and there was no transaction to include in the block at that very moment?

[kano]

How did it happen that BitMinter mined an empty block?

http://bitminter.com/block/btc/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

Indeed ....

http://blockchain.info/block-index/386791/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

[sgravina]

How did it happen that BitMinter mined an empty block?

http://bitminter.com/block/btc/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

Indeed ....

http://blockchain.info/block-index/386791/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

This happened to a block eclipse mined about a month ago.  I'm curious.

[jamesg]

How did it happen that BitMinter mined an empty block?

http://bitminter.com/block/btc/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

Indeed ....

http://blockchain.info/block-index/386791/0000000000000102878eb2b5dbf4a440832df801543047600cc7916f4a8c15bb

This happened to a block eclipse mined about a month ago.  I'm curious.

When a block change happens, Bitminter creates a empty block template so that there is no need to wait on bitcoind's getblocktemplate call. This allows miners to receive faster block change notifications which in theory should reduce the time miners are working on invalid work.

With the latest release candidate of bitcoind though, the latency for getblocktemplate should be minimal, which should lessen the need to make empty blocks in the first place.

Another strategy, which is employed by eloipool, is to have the pool server constantly create new block templates and just pull off of the top of the stack when a template is needed.

[Paulizei]

Thanks for your reply. I recognized that calulations are correct. But 'supervising' a bunch of small miners by the provided live stats (my account -> workers seems) not really praticable.

Is there any kind of workaround? Haven't had a closer look at cgminer api but perhaps the bitminter api works better?

The pool API is based on the shares you submit, since that is all the pool knows, so it's accuracy over a short period of time is quite unreliable - finding shares is statistically random.

My cgminer API, on the other hand, reports the counted hashes done by the devices
(or with ICA and MMQ, it counts successful hashes and reasonably accurately estimates valid aborted hashes if configured correctly)

Thanks for your input, kano. Even my very, very slow 30Mhps-test-miner is running 24x7. Therefore calculations could be made on a reliable basis, I think. But even after some days figures on the live-stats page don't seem to become more realistic.

(I hope I don't start any shitstorm with this:) Mining with this tiny "rig" on other pools showed always nearly accurate figures there.

So I don't think submitting shares (and therefore providing enough data for exact speed calcs) is the point. At least to me (n00b) it seem's like it's more a question about the background processes running on DrHaribos servers.

With deforse mining at around 300Mbps and having the same issues it's seems not an good idea to change to this pool as I have about 8 miners with 120-180Mbps and need to see if all of them are doing their job, right?

[kano]

Hi, not only to you. I have a HD6870 an hashrate ah ~300. On the site it is shown somehow ~220, to ~350. I think it is normal. The site is calculating somewhere in the middle.

Thanks for your reply. I recognized that calulations are correct. But 'supervising' a bunch of small miners by the provided live stats (my account -> workers seems) not really praticable.

Is there any kind of workaround? Haven't had a closer look at cgminer api but perhaps the bitminter api works better?

The pool API is based on the shares you submit, since that is all the pool knows, so it's accuracy over a short period of time is quite unreliable - finding shares is statistically random.

My cgminer API, on the other hand, reports the counted hashes done by the devices
(or with ICA and MMQ, it counts successful hashes and reasonably accurately estimates valid aborted hashes if configured correctly)

 So write a good gui like the doctors and then come to poach this pool while you are at it make a nice simple litecoin pool  with  a sane easy set up and you will get plenty of customers. You post here a lot take my advice don't waste time posting, write some code that competes with the doctor.  In all the world no one has a pool that is  as simple as the the doctor's is to run.  Just him.  So if you really want the Doctors customers go write some code.  If you really want to be ahead of the curve do it for litecoin.  You could be the only pool in the world like the Doctors but for litecoin not bitcoin.

 There are millions of us with GPUS  just do it and stop posting here until you can come back and say "I did what philipma1957 told me to do I read this post and realized he was correct I was wasting time trying to steal the doctors pool by posting on his thread instead I wrote the greatest gui for both litecoin and bitcoin".

 I only write this because it is true if you can write 2 pools with easy gui like the doctors gui is you would steal his customers.  As you would be superior since you had one for litecoin and one for bitcoin.  Until you do this stop wasting time. I would never switch to your pool unless you wrote a gui like the doctors for both bitcoin and litecoin.   KANO  I am doing you a favor just think how many gpus will move from the doctor to run on your god-like litecoin pool.  In under 6 months there will be millions of gpus looking for a litcoin pool to run. (Asics)  

 So please stop posting here asking us to move to your pool until you do as I say.    Once you take your ego out of the picture you would realize I am giving you good business advice.  Best regards Phil

I don't have a pool you fool.
It an inherent part of how pools work ...

[kano]

Thanks for your reply. I recognized that calulations are correct. But 'supervising' a bunch of small miners by the provided live stats (my account -> workers seems) not really praticable.

Is there any kind of workaround? Haven't had a closer look at cgminer api but perhaps the bitminter api works better?

The pool API is based on the shares you submit, since that is all the pool knows, so it's accuracy over a short period of time is quite unreliable - finding shares is statistically random.

My cgminer API, on the other hand, reports the counted hashes done by the devices
(or with ICA and MMQ, it counts successful hashes and reasonably accurately estimates valid aborted hashes if configured correctly)

Thanks for your input, kano. Even my very, very slow 30Mhps-test-miner is running 24x7. Therefore calculations could be made on a reliable basis, I think. But even after some days figures on the live-stats page don't seem to become more realistic.

(I hope I don't start any shitstorm with this:) Mining with this tiny "rig" on other pools showed always nearly accurate figures there.

So I don't think submitting shares (and therefore providing enough data for exact speed calcs) is the point. At least to me (n00b) it seem's like it's more a question about the background processes running on DrHaribos servers.

With deforse mining at around 300Mbps and having the same issues it's seems not an good idea to change to this pool as I have about 8 miners with 120-180Mbps and need to see if all of them are doing their job, right?

No, I was comparing a pool API to a miner API (in this case I was referring to the cgminer API)
If you are talking about the DrHaribo miner API, then it should be accurate also.

The problem (again) with any pool API is it only knows about shares.
You get one (1diff) of them on average every ~4 billion hashes.
The miner can usually count single hashes so of course it will be way more accurate and over a much shorter period of time.

[Paulizei]

No, I was comparing a pool API to a miner API (in this case I was referring to the cgminer API)

The miner can usually count single hashes so of course it will be way more accurate and over a much shorter period of time.

Agree, but my point is, is there a way to see many small miners working properly on the website?

My problem could be related to the very small hashrat, my testminer provides. If this would be the case for 120-180Mhps miners too, I wouldn't recognize if one of it fails ...or at least to late.

P.S.: All others figures (e.g. 'Your Ghps' on the live stats page) are totally ok! I'd like to change to this pool but simply need to find a simple way to see if my miners are working - which is the case on at least some other pools.