organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 11:38:58 AM |
|
So how does that change if you have several accounts?
Well since the discussion started about getting shares in short rounds ... and both you and DeepBit have stated that the number of accounts doesn't matter ... My comments were pointing out that the hash rate is not the ONLY factor in determining if you will get shares in the short rounds. A miner can't do much about LPs. Just making sure BlackPrapor realises this. However, now that you mention it, if you have more accounts, then you will have to receive more LP messages. This will slow down the first item I listed above - such that the average time to get the LP for each account will increase since every account after the first one to receive the LP will of course receive it later. Why is this? Workers on different accounts wont receive LPs sequentially afaik.
|
|
|
|
DutchBrat
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 11:42:18 AM |
|
Isn't the race to be the first to get the LP also a lottery like who get's to deliver the solution to the hash ?
i.e. If you have 100 rigs setup with 1 GPU you have 100 lottery tickets to be the first to get a LP as opposed to 20 rigs with 5 GPU's where you have only 20 tickets....
For the really short rounds (in the hundreds/few thousands of shares) your hashing power isn't so much what counts as it is the time in which you get the LP (and then of course deliver a solution before the round ends)
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:08:31 PM |
|
So how does that change if you have several accounts?
Well since the discussion started about getting shares in short rounds ... and both you and DeepBit have stated that the number of accounts doesn't matter ... My comments were pointing out that the hash rate is not the ONLY factor in determining if you will get shares in the short rounds. A miner can't do much about LPs. Just making sure BlackPrapor realises this. However, now that you mention it, if you have more accounts, then you will have to receive more LP messages. This will slow down the first item I listed above - such that the average time to get the LP for each account will increase since every account after the first one to receive the LP will of course receive it later. Why is this? Workers on different accounts wont receive LPs sequentially afaik. Unless I've completely missed something about non-broadcast TCP/IP packets travelling around the internet ... ... how can all the network packets arrive at the same time? Even if the pool has multiple threads sending out the packets, they still have a sequential ordering through at least some the devices as they travel across the net - and of course the pool itself will not have as many threads as there are miners, that will be sending out the LP notices.
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:11:03 PM |
|
Isn't the race to be the first to get the LP also a lottery like who get's to deliver the solution to the hash ?
i.e. If you have 100 rigs setup with 1 GPU you have 100 lottery tickets to be the first to get a LP as opposed to 20 rigs with 5 GPU's where you have only 20 tickets....
For the really short rounds (in the hundreds/few thousands of shares) your hashing power isn't so much what counts as it is the time in which you get the LP (and then of course deliver a solution before the round ends)
Hmm what was the comment I made in IRC 9 hours ago to a pool OP ... ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) 13:05 < kanoi> so ... ***** ... how does the pool decide the order it sends out LPs ... (yes that is a rather controversial question, but only if the answer isn't truly random ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:23:11 PM Last edit: April 18, 2012, 12:39:15 PM by organofcorti |
|
Isn't the race to be the first to get the LP also a lottery like who get's to deliver the solution to the hash ?
i.e. If you have 100 rigs setup with 1 GPU you have 100 lottery tickets to be the first to get a LP as opposed to 20 rigs with 5 GPU's where you have only 20 tickets....
For the really short rounds (in the hundreds/few thousands of shares) your hashing power isn't so much what counts as it is the time in which you get the LP (and then of course deliver a solution before the round ends)
That's pretty much the way I see it along with delays caused by geographical distance. I did some analysis here and found that I could model the LP response fairly well (although I wasn't sure it was due to LP at the time, I am now) . The response time was distributed as a log normal distribution, mean 0.7 seconds, sd 1.65 seconds. So I think I see Kano's point now - LP variations will have an effect on your variance for very short rounds. If the model above holds, the mean lag time is about 7.5 seconds, median 2.01 seconds and a standard deviation of about 30. It's quite skewed, half of the miners getting LPs before 2 seconds, and the rest receiving the LPs from 2 seconds up to around 100 seconds after the start of the round. Edit: This isn't taking into account the time for the share to get from the miner to the pool. Also, the mode is 0.13 seconds, so most miners will have received their LPs by then.
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:25:23 PM |
|
Why is this? Workers on different accounts wont receive LPs sequentially afaik.
Unless I've completely missed something about non-broadcast TCP/IP packets travelling around the internet ... ... how can all the network packets arrive at the same time? Even if the pool has multiple threads sending out the packets, they still have a sequential ordering through at least some the devices as they travel across the net - and of course the pool itself will not have as many threads as there are miners, that will be sending out the LP notices. Having more accounts doesn't mean you're going to increase the average time to get LPs, which is what I thought you were saying in the post. It just means a reduction in overall LP variance.
|
|
|
|
rjk
Sr. Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:28:20 PM |
|
Isn't the race to be the first to get the LP also a lottery like who get's to deliver the solution to the hash ?
i.e. If you have 100 rigs setup with 1 GPU you have 100 lottery tickets to be the first to get a LP as opposed to 20 rigs with 5 GPU's where you have only 20 tickets....
For the really short rounds (in the hundreds/few thousands of shares) your hashing power isn't so much what counts as it is the time in which you get the LP (and then of course deliver a solution before the round ends)
Hmm what was the comment I made in IRC 9 hours ago to a pool OP ... ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) 13:05 < kanoi> so ... ***** ... how does the pool decide the order it sends out LPs ... (yes that is a rather controversial question, but only if the answer isn't truly random ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) I know that Slush prioritizes the LPs he sends out based on hashrate - I don't know whether Deepbit does this or not, but I think Slush is one of the only ones that does that.
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:32:33 PM |
|
I know that Slush prioritizes the LPs he sends out based on hashrate - I don't know whether Deepbit does this or not, but I think Slush is one of the only ones that does that.
Interesting. Prioritising by hashrate is probably a good way to reduce overall stales.
|
|
|
|
P4man
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:37:19 PM |
|
Bitminter does it too. Then again, with 100-150 GH there arent that many 1 minute rounds.
|
|
|
|
DutchBrat
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 12:55:19 PM |
|
Isn't the race to be the first to get the LP also a lottery like who get's to deliver the solution to the hash ?
i.e. If you have 100 rigs setup with 1 GPU you have 100 lottery tickets to be the first to get a LP as opposed to 20 rigs with 5 GPU's where you have only 20 tickets....
For the really short rounds (in the hundreds/few thousands of shares) your hashing power isn't so much what counts as it is the time in which you get the LP (and then of course deliver a solution before the round ends)
Hmm what was the comment I made in IRC 9 hours ago to a pool OP ... ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) 13:05 < kanoi> so ... ***** ... how does the pool decide the order it sends out LPs ... (yes that is a rather controversial question, but only if the answer isn't truly random ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) I know that Slush prioritizes the LPs he sends out based on hashrate - I don't know whether Deepbit does this or not, but I think Slush is one of the only ones that does that. So that effectively means that the higher your hash rate the more chance you have of submitting a share in a very short round.... so smaller miners will have less of a chance to participate in a 'more profitable' round than big miners. That means quick rounds don't even out based on variance... so the model becomes statistically biased as big miners will have a bigger chance to begin with (of course you have to factor in geographics / network speed / etc etc) Edit: Mind you, it is all mostly a hypothetical discussion as there aren't that many rounds where not all miners participate (on Deepbit) and even though it would be nice to get a 'huge' payoff in a round from time to time, I have the feeling that not participating in such a round won't affect your overall 'expected' payout that much....
|
|
|
|
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 01:02:06 PM |
|
We don't know that Deepbit prioritises based on hashrate. Unless Deepbit mentions it, you could only work it out if large representative sample of miners agrees to post a couple of weeks earnings per round somewhere. If Deepbit is prioritising based on hashrate then I wouldn't be surprised if most pools are, and then it's a level playing field - doesn't matter which pool you mine at.
|
|
|
|
macbook-air
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 04:13:31 PM |
|
Hello, I am getting "Account_locked" while trying to create a new worker or change name of an existing worker. Why? I can still make manually payout. Probably it was accidentally locked because of poolhopping. PM me your login name. Hello, I have PM my login name yesterday, and after 24 hours, still getting "Account_locked".
|
|
|
|
DeepBit (OP)
Donator
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 532
Merit: 501
We have cookies
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 05:58:01 PM |
|
Hello, I have PM my login name yesterday, and after 24 hours, still getting "Account_locked". Unlocked, see PM.
|
Welcome to my bitcoin mining pool: https://deepbit.net ~ 3600 GH/s, Both payment schemes, instant payout, no invalid blocks ! Coming soon: ICBIT Trading platform
|
|
|
Mousepotato
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 06:55:44 PM |
|
What happened to the "Avg shares in the last 24hrs" at the top of the Stats page?
|
Mousepotato
|
|
|
DeepBit (OP)
Donator
Hero Member
Offline
Activity: 532
Merit: 501
We have cookies
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 18, 2012, 07:07:35 PM |
|
What happened to the "Avg shares in the last 24hrs" at the top of the Stats page? Nothing was changed in the last months.
|
Welcome to my bitcoin mining pool: https://deepbit.net ~ 3600 GH/s, Both payment schemes, instant payout, no invalid blocks ! Coming soon: ICBIT Trading platform
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 24, 2012, 07:45:05 AM |
|
... What I'm trying to get to here is to be able to buy _low cost_ products on the go, where BTC has the greatest advantage (no fees) against VISA, Mastercard, etc. Most stores don't accept card payment under a certain amount, BTC would spread like wildfire if they could add a QR code for immediate BTC payment. ...
Bitcoin has fees - and when the payments get low enough, the fee % effectively gets quite high ... (and many people seem to want to enforce them more strictly or make them higher) Yes in general those fees are lower than Credit Cards, but saying there are "(no fees)" is simply incorrect. Aside: then of course when you try to convert BTC to $ - wow most of the fees charged by the BTC people would make the banks envious ... (I'm amazed at the number of times I read 'no fees' when looking at exchanges from BTC to $ only to wonder why losing 30% in the process is considered no fees ...)
|
|
|
|
dmoldovan
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 26, 2012, 01:56:33 PM |
|
Hello,
I switched my workers to PPS, and the reward is rather strange: I have about 1300 MHashes/sec, and, some rewards are like this:
Time My hashes total hashes reward 26.04 13:14:10 0h 47m 1335 2335729 0.00774512 26.04 07:42:51 2h 32m 3332 7452024 0.00206964
That is, on the "bigger", there are 2.5 times more hashes than in the first block, BUT, the reward is less than the reward for the first block.
There must be some mistake in calculation here.
PS: all rewards are mixed up since I switched to PPS
Please somebody check this out.
Regards, Dan
|
|
|
|
os2sam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3582
Merit: 1094
Think for yourself
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 26, 2012, 03:16:59 PM |
|
Hello,
I switched my workers to PPS, and the reward is rather strange: I have about 1300 MHashes/sec, and, some rewards are like this:
Time My hashes total hashes reward 26.04 13:14:10 0h 47m 1335 2335729 0.00774512 26.04 07:42:51 2h 32m 3332 7452024 0.00206964
That is, on the "bigger", there are 2.5 times more hashes than in the first block, BUT, the reward is less than the reward for the first block.
There must be some mistake in calculation here.
PS: all rewards are mixed up since I switched to PPS
Please somebody check this out.
Regards, Dan
The reward column only shows Proportional rewards. If you are only doing PPS then this column will show PPS in it. If you are doing both PPS and Proportional only the proportional value shows. The PPS and Prop shares are added together in the Shares Total column so it looks like your getting paid less than you really are. Sam
|
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
|
|
|
dmoldovan
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 26, 2012, 04:39:39 PM |
|
OK, got it;
Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
|
smracer
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1055
Merit: 1020
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
May 10, 2012, 03:02:34 PM |
|
It looks like the block times are messing up again. shows 3 and 4 hour+ blocks for small ones on the stats page.
|
|
|
|
|