[POOL][Scrypt][Scrypt-N][X11] Profit switching pool - wafflepool.com

[phzi]

Do we have Saturncoin (SAT) in the rotation?  If not, it might be worth adding too - has some buy depth waiting to be eaten on cryptsy, variable block rewards, and diff around 10.

[1714283397]

1714283397

[1714283397]

1714283397

[1714283397]

1714283397

[1714283397]

1714283397

[1714283397]

1714283397

[orenjuice5]

If somone could explain me why my earnings log is not consistent with stats of found blocks?

After a block is found, it goes through three possible stages:
Unconfirmed -> Confirmed -> Converted

Recently found blocks appear in your coin balances and "Bitcoins unconverted (approximate)" total (newly Unconfirmed).
Mined blocks mature and are considered confirmed by the network (transition from Unconfirmed -> Confirmed).
Confirmed coins are ready to be sent to the exchange and traded to BTC (or are in the process of being sent/traded).
When coins are traded, the earnings log record the coins converted and total BTC made (transition from Confirmed -> Converted).

thank you for explanation. so if i get it right real time stats for blocks are on stats page. and earnings log is made after we got btc?

Is our balance of unconverted increase only once the block has matured or does it go up before? Meaning when I look at the stat page and notice we found 2 blocks of doge but they are at immature status did the unconfirmed balance increased by those 2 found blocks or the balance will be increased once the block has been confirmed

Thanks in advance for your reply

[miless2111s]

Here is another basic widget with more features in the works.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.whatnick.wafflewatcher


1) BTC target address scanning via ZXing
2) Regular data fetch and caching to allow plotting of historical earnings
3) Miner failure warnings
4) Tracking multiple BTC targets

Source is here - https://bitbucket.org/whatnick/wafflewatcher

Feel free to contribute feature requests and code. BTC donations are welcome and will make me very happy.

Observations: I have dragged it onto my desktop and it is happily sitting there but the data doesn't appear to be correct - I assume that it will update in 15 mins as set to my data?
Other than re-dragging it there seems to be no way to access the settings menu which is a pain as I then need to re-enter my payment address.

Requests:
1) When it is first dragged onto the desktop can it immediately grab my data so I know it is working
2) There needs to be a way (I guess an app or a menu button) to access the settings dialogue.
3) Worker stats with warnings (configurable thresholds)
4) Text saying what the numbers are!

Thanks for sharing

Miles

[vladman]

Hi, in the last couple of days (roughly), I'm seeing much higher reject rates than before.  It used to be around 0.6-0.9%, and now it's about 2-4%.  I haven't changed any settings on my end and I've restarted my rig a couple of times.  BTW, I'm not referring to the change that happened a couple of weeks ago.  I did reduce the intensity on my cards following that, which lead to the 0.6-0.9% rejects as mentioned earlier.

I do read this thread regularly, and saw a couple of people mention higher rejects recently, but haven't yet seen anyone comment or offer a possible explanation.  Just wondering if Waffle changed anything or if there's another reason, and if there's anything we (miners) are supposed to do?

Thanks.

[slimbee32]

Is there anyone on here from the UK who could confirm if you make a profit with wafflepool? (and you pay for your electricity). Im only small time mining at about 5mhs using 5 r9 290x's for the past 4 weeks and the most I have made in a week of 24/7 mining is £17 profit with my electricity costs at £0.13 pkw/h. Id like to continue but this is not worth heating my shed and degrading my cards for that kind of return. Thank you

[vladman]

Is there anyone on here from the UK who could confirm if you make a profit with wafflepool? (and you pay for your electricity). Im only small time mining at about 5mhs using 5 r9 290x's for the past 4 weeks and the most I have made in a week of 24/7 mining is £17 profit with my electricity costs at £0.13 pkw/h. Id like to continue but this is not worth heating my shed and degrading my cards for that kind of return. Thank you

I'm in London, UK.  My electricity costs me £0.1155 per kWh plus a £0.35 daily charge.  I mine at about 2.5 mh/s and estimate my electricity costs about £3 every day.  I probably make about £4 a day (even less the last few days since BTC dropped in value).  So there's your answer.  £1 per day in profit.  Hardly worth it, but I'm doing this hoping that BTC (and other alt-coins) will go up in the future, not for immediate gains.  A massive risk of course, but hey, we'll see.

EDIT: forgot to mention heating.  My rig's actually been heating my flat since early January when I began this whole thing.  I actually switched my heating off soon after, so there's a small saving there too.

[slimbee32]

Is there anyone on here from the UK who could confirm if you make a profit with wafflepool? (and you pay for your electricity). Im only small time mining at about 5mhs using 5 r9 290x's for the past 4 weeks and the most I have made in a week of 24/7 mining is £17 profit with my electricity costs at £0.13 pkw/h. Id like to continue but this is not worth heating my shed and degrading my cards for that kind of return. Thank you

I'm in London, UK.  My electricity costs me £0.1155 per kWh plus a £0.35 daily charge.  I mine at about 2.5 mh/s and estimate my electricity costs about £3 every day.  I probably make about £4 a day (even less the last few days since BTC dropped in value).  So there's your answer.  £1 per day in profit.  Hardly worth it, but I'm doing this hoping that BTC (and other alt-coins) will go up in the future, not for immediate gains.  A massive risk of course, but hey, we'll see.

EDIT: forgot to mention heating.  My rig's actually been heating my flat since early January when I began this whole thing.  I actually switched my heating off soon after, so there's a small saving there too.

Thanks, I may switch it off and monitor bc value etc and see it picks up. Thats a nice bonus regarding savings on your heating but we know that the heat comes with noise and my missus would not allow that lol

[azebro]

Is there anyone on here from the UK who could confirm if you make a profit with wafflepool? (and you pay for your electricity). Im only small time mining at about 5mhs using 5 r9 290x's for the past 4 weeks and the most I have made in a week of 24/7 mining is £17 profit with my electricity costs at £0.13 pkw/h. Id like to continue but this is not worth heating my shed and degrading my cards for that kind of return. Thank you

I'm in London, UK.  My electricity costs me £0.1155 per kWh plus a £0.35 daily charge.  I mine at about 2.5 mh/s and estimate my electricity costs about £3 every day.  I probably make about £4 a day (even less the last few days since BTC dropped in value).  So there's your answer.  £1 per day in profit.  Hardly worth it, but I'm doing this hoping that BTC (and other alt-coins) will go up in the future, not for immediate gains.  A massive risk of course, but hey, we'll see.

EDIT: forgot to mention heating.  My rig's actually been heating my flat since early January when I began this whole thing.  I actually switched my heating off soon after, so there's a small saving there too.

Thanks, I may switch it off and monitor bc value etc and see it picks up. Thats a nice bonus regarding savings on your heating but we know that the heat comes with noise and my missus would not allow that lol

I'm in Northern Ireland, electricity costs me ~ £0.12 and still making some profit.
During winter  I'd estimate ~£500 of heating oil saved as have rigs distributed around the house and use them as heating. (I'm mainly on 270s so pretty quiet).

HTH,
A

[oktay50000]

why waffle always keep 0.02btc and not pay all

[phzi]

why waffle always keep 0.02btc and not pay all

In earned or unconverted balance?

[ingrown]

Anyone else noticing a crazy high stalerate?  My 15 minute stalerate is between 20 and 27% across all 4 of my miners.

Edit: May have been a fluke, I just let it sit and everything looks normal again.

[phzi]

Anyone else noticing a crazy high stalerate?  My 15 minute stalerate is between 20 and 27% across all 4 of my miners.

Edit: May have been a fluke, I just let it sit and everything looks normal again.

It probably happens with some of the fast coins now.  I find the same thing occasionally - this is why I expressed a strong dislike for the rejected share scheme that came along with PW's new stratum implementation.

For a switching pool, what I used to like about wafflepool the most was that shares were shares, unless they were truly truly stale.  In my mind, it just decreases the appearance of variance, and eliminates the risk of coin penalty if the switcher is splitting hash between say litecoin and fluttercoin.

[jedimstr]

Anyone else noticing a crazy high stalerate?  My 15 minute stalerate is between 20 and 27% across all 4 of my miners.

Edit: May have been a fluke, I just let it sit and everything looks normal again.

It probably happens with some of the fast coins now.  I find the same thing occasionally - this is why I expressed a strong dislike for the rejected share scheme that came along with PW's new stratum implementation.

For a switching pool, what I used to like about wafflepool the most was that shares were shares, unless they were truly truly stale.  In my mind, it just decreases the appearance of variance, and eliminates the risk of coin penalty if the switcher is splitting hash between say litecoin and fluttercoin.

I take the opposite view... Pw now correctly counts accepted shares and stales/rejects as they should be, instead of accepting some shares on changeover that should have been stale.  This pool is now inline with the proper behavior of every other multi switching pool out there.  The "low rejects vs other pools" that people touted is actually a bug. A bug in our favor, but still a bug.

Yes, miners got a bit of a boost with credit on shares that should have been rejected, but that wasn't very fair to the pool or pw.

[phzi]

Yes, miners got a bit of a boost with credit on shares that should have been rejected, but that wasn't very fair to the pool or pw.

I disagree - I think the old system was quite fair.

Consider: the switcher decides to put half of the pool on tagcoin and half on litecoin.  The miners on tagcoin will see much higher reject rates then those mining litecoin.  Both are doing the same "real work" towards finding a block - but those rigs on tagcoin would be making a chunk less due to reject rate.  Essentially, half of the pool would see lower profits.  

Considering that we do not mine the smaller low-diff coins for very long, consider the more realistic situation where a chunk of the pool gets moved to tagcoin for a few shifts.  That chunk is basically being "penalized" by higher rejects for a few rounds - possibly several percent difference in an hour of mining.

[jedimstr]

Yes, miners got a bit of a boost with credit on shares that should have been rejected, but that wasn't very fair to the pool or pw.

I disagree - I think the old system was quite fair.

Consider: the switcher decides to put half of the pool on tagcoin and half on litecoin.  The miners on tagcoin will see much higher reject rates then those mining litecoin.  Both are doing the same "real work" towards finding a block - but those rigs on tagcoin would be making a chunk less due to reject rate.  Essentially, half of the pool would see lower profits.  

Considering that we do not mine the smaller low-diff coins for very long, consider the more realistic situation where a chunk of the pool gets moved to tagcoin for a few shifts.  That chunk is basically being "penalized" by higher rejects for a few rounds - possibly several percent difference in an hour of mining.

Please re-read PW's explanation of the difference between the way the previous stratum implementation and new stratum implementation works: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=433634.msg5762701#msg5762701

The pool was being overly forgiving in giving credit to shares that were actually stale after a coin switch.  This means miners were being paid for shares that did NOT have corresponding profit for the pool to pay us with.
 
How was this fair again?

Your argument on low-diff coins and relative rejects between the two has absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying.

The way it works now is actually the way it should work.

[comeonalready]

Yes, miners got a bit of a boost with credit on shares that should have been rejected, but that wasn't very fair to the pool or pw.

I disagree - I think the old system was quite fair.

phzi, we all know the real reason you think the old system was more preferable.  It was because you purposefully overtuned your miners to submit as many shares as possible, regardless of whether they were valid, in order to claim more shares for yourself.  You have already brazenly admitted to gaming the old more lenient system and essentially cheating fellow miners out of some of their rightful profits.

From <1% rejected consistently to >10% rejected so far.

I am testing different configs on 2 rigs now to see if I can get the rejects down - hard to sample over a short period of time.  I do know that I hated this block reject scheme on clevermining, however.  I liked the reject scheme on waffle before. But, I will admit I am very interested to see what kind of reject rate sfire would have under this new scheme - it might made a big different on profits depending on how badly people were abusing this.

Can we get some reject % data, and maybe ourselves vs pool (along with shift info maybe)?

So that would mean you were one of the miners who were taking up to 10% more of your fair share of profits from the pool, however unknowingly.  For the others who had their equipment tuned correctly for mining almost anywhere else than wafflepool, they were receiving up to 10% less of profits directly due to their efforts, depending upon the ratio of efficient to inefficient miners in the pool.  The actual percentages depend upon whether wafflepool was actually a pool of fools, and only poolwaffle knows that as he is the only one with access to the relevant statistics.

So that would mean you were one of the miners who were taking up to 10% more of your fair share of profits from the pool, however unknowingly.

Oh, I knew what I was doing by cranking my miners the way I did - but as I said, I have discovered many blocks for WafflePool, and a rare few were orphans.

For the others who had their equipment tuned correctly for mining almost anywhere else than wafflepool, they were receiving up to 10% less of profits directly due to their efforts, depending upon the ratio of efficient to inefficient miners in the pool.  The actual percentages depend upon whether wafflepool was actually a pool of fools, and only poolwaffle knows that as he is the only one with access to the relevant statistics.

Ya... I still think that was one of the best parts about wafflepool - haha.

Clearly the new system is much fairer to the more ethical members of the pool, as payouts are distributed according to how may valid shares are submitted to the pool.
 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=433634.msg5777112#msg5777112
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=433634.msg5775015#msg5775015
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=433634.msg5777737#msg5777737

[miless2111s]

Missing payments? 

Can someone help me out here before I panic

I have a couple of payments which are showing up in the "details" but haven't shown up in my wallet which is reporting that it is synchronised with the net:

2014-04-01 08:50:24   0.01733143   02dfa6cbcc43eedb627322b38c93e7d1801cc3cfa7a363257795ff6cb24fd4fb
2014-03-31 18:30:45   0.01372869   ecb3ef699145d32c3b09b91e286e27fab340295b19c1c0a571dfaecf3cc02e4d

Given that I have a payment from today I assume that the payment engine isn't stuck so where are these two payments?

Many thanks

Miles

[maxpowerzz92]

Yes, miners got a bit of a boost with credit on shares that should have been rejected, but that wasn't very fair to the pool or pw.

I disagree - I think the old system was quite fair.

phzi, we all know the real reason you think the old system was more preferable.  It was because you purposefully overtuned your miners to submit as many shares as possible, regardless of whether they were valid, in order to claim more shares for yourself.  You have already brazenly admitted to gaming the old more lenient system and essentially cheating fellow miners out of some of their rightful profits.

Not trying to take sides, but I do remember someone saying to set xintensity to 1100 on wafflepool but leave it around 300-400 on other mining pools because of the old system.

[phzi]

Please re-read PW's explanation of the difference between the way the previous stratum implementation and new stratum implementation works: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=433634.msg5762701#msg5762701

I have no need to re-read something that I already understand.

The pool was being overly forgiving in giving credit to shares that were actually stale after a coin switch.  This means miners were being paid for shares that did NOT have corresponding profit for the pool to pay us with.

What? no... that's not what it meant.  Miners were getting paid for shares the same across the board - every share was considered equal unless it was 2 blocks behind.
 

How was this fair again?

Your argument on low-diff coins and relative rejects between the two has absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying.

It has everything to do with what you were saying.  The new system creates disparity in the prospective value of a given share depending on the coin that is being mined.  Miners will see say 20% reject rates with TAG, but 2% with litecoin/dogecoin.  That means tag shares would be worth on average 20% less then litecoin shares.

phzi, we all know the real reason you think the old system was more preferable.  It was because you purposefully overtuned your miners to submit as many shares as possible, regardless of whether they were valid, in order to claim more shares for yourself.  You have already brazenly admitted to gaming the old more lenient system and essentially cheating fellow miners out of some of their rightful profits.

The "real reason" is exactly what I posted above.  Do you realize that tuning miners to 1100 xI only provided ~ 2-3% hashrate benefit?  PoolWaffle has acknowledged that his original estimates of 7 and 10% gain from 'over tuning' was an over estimate.  I never 'gamed' the old system - I mined exactly how anyone with half a brain did.  That same "tuning" settings are ideal for Litecoin mining, btw. In fact, they are basically ideal for anything other then a fast switching pool with inconsistent reject rates.

As for phzi, certainly didn't mean to call anyone out on the miner tweaking, just noticed it was happening, and wanted to fully explain what was going to happen with the new software (and why).  I honestly expected a bit higher than 2-3% overall (expected 5-7% and thus more complaining on the forum), but 2-3% seems to be taken really well.  From his perspective, everything he did made sense.[...]

So that would mean you were one of the miners who were taking up to 10% more of your fair share of profits from the pool, however unknowingly.  For the others who had their equipment tuned correctly for mining almost anywhere else than wafflepool, they were receiving up to 10% less of profits directly due to their efforts, depending upon the ratio of efficient to inefficient miners in the pool.  The actual percentages depend upon whether wafflepool was actually a pool of fools, and only poolwaffle knows that as he is the only one with access to the relevant statistics.

No - you're misreading obviously.  Again, it was a 2-3% benefit in hashrate by tuning and ignoring workunit turnaround time.  Those that had their equipment 'tuned correctly' were the people like me, btw - and PoolWaffle did post a few stats, and I have seen a few others outside of this forum thread...

Clearly the new system is much fairer to the more ethical members of the pool, as payouts are distributed according to how may valid shares are submitted to the pool.

Still no idea how you come to that conclusion.  Payouts were previously distributed proportional to hashrate, now they are distributed proportional to hashrate and coin switcher luck - the previous system has less variances, was more consistent, and therefore more fair.

[miless2111s]

does it really matter if previously some sort of tune gave more or less shares by single digit %?  It's PW's pool, his decision and if we don't like it we're free to wander off!