bydand
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
|
|
April 22, 2014, 06:44:45 AM |
|
i have a 3 card rig. It is configured to run at 700 per card, and cgminer says it is doing that. my hashrate on the waffle page has me at 1800 total, rather than the appx 2100 total cgminer says i'm doing.
is there something i need to adjust to fix the discrepancy?
tia
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Gods or Kings. Only Bitcoin
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
zneww
|
|
April 22, 2014, 12:00:53 PM |
|
why profit droping on waffle???
God said so.
|
|
|
|
Hueristic
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3808
Merit: 4899
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
|
|
April 22, 2014, 01:12:08 PM |
|
Some won't like this but since it's so rarely iterated:
I like the idea of huge buying pressure on BTC to drive the price up which is basically what multi-scrypt profit pools do. ...
I disagree, Prove this statement.
|
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
|
|
|
TorturdChaos
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
|
|
April 22, 2014, 01:53:48 PM |
|
@WP - thanks for all your hard work and running such a great mining pool.
I was wondering tho, if VarDiff had been considered or discussed in the past. The 512 difficulty seems a bit steep. Looking at the earning log, the coin has been switched approximately 50 times in the last 5hrs, only giving an average of 6 minutes per coin. My poor slow mining rigs cannot finish their work before the coin switch, especially on really fast coins that only take 30 secs or so. Even my faster mining rig (800kh/s) shows a lot of stales. When mining on a VarDiff pool my fast rig normally gets set about 256, while my 2 slow(100khs/ and 200khs/s) rigs are more around 64 or 96. Or is VarDiff just to much load on the servers? Would it be better to offer a lower difficultly option or two? (128,256,512 ?)
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
suchmoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8922
https://bpip.org
|
|
April 22, 2014, 02:10:37 PM |
|
@WP - thanks for all your hard work and running such a great mining pool.
I was wondering tho, if VarDiff had been considered or discussed in the past. The 512 difficulty seems a bit steep. Looking at the earning log, the coin has been switched approximately 50 times in the last 5hrs, only giving an average of 6 minutes per coin. My poor slow mining rigs cannot finish their work before the coin switch, especially on really fast coins that only take 30 secs or so. Even my faster mining rig (800kh/s) shows a lot of stales. When mining on a VarDiff pool my fast rig normally gets set about 256, while my 2 slow(100khs/ and 200khs/s) rigs are more around 64 or 96. Or is VarDiff just to much load on the servers? Would it be better to offer a lower difficultly option or two? (128,256,512 ?)
Thanks!
The theory says that high difficulty doesn't matter. The practice will catch up with theory over a long enough period of time. It might not look pretty on short term charts, that's all.
|
|
|
|
edonkey
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1150
Merit: 1004
|
|
April 22, 2014, 03:17:32 PM |
|
Yep, this is the major downside of no user accounts. For this to work it will require signed messages. We'll try to make it as easy as possible, but would be signing something like "doge=xxxxxxx, ltc=yyyyyyy" from your BTC account, so we can verify it was you. I expect a huge number of "HOW DOES I SINE?" emails, and a lot of "My address is at my exchange, so I can't sign" problems, so we'll see how that goes...
Maybe the answer is to add optional user accounts? If you want to use the pool as it is today with default payout options, you would not need an account. But if you want non-default payouts, you'd need to get an account and set up your profile and payout options. I know that adding accounts has its own set of complications, like database schema changes, email verification, SSL certificates (and avoiding Heartbleed), two factor options, etc. But it's probably simpler to support because users are familiar with accounts and managing profiles and options. Also, you can build new features on an account system later, like hash rate drop alerts, etc.
|
Was I helpful? BTC: 3G1Ubof5u8K9iJkM8We2f3amYZgGVdvpHr
|
|
|
ibfr33k
Member
Offline
Activity: 75
Merit: 10
|
|
April 22, 2014, 03:42:03 PM |
|
Has anyone ever used nicehash's service and mined here? I tried it for a small amount and it would never connect. Works fine on CM.
|
I'm a noob just starting, all donations are welcome. 13DXKRXQncUnWAFtemSwNH7boRZfEfsg5a
|
|
|
suchmoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8922
https://bpip.org
|
|
April 22, 2014, 03:56:58 PM |
|
Yep, this is the major downside of no user accounts. For this to work it will require signed messages. We'll try to make it as easy as possible, but would be signing something like "doge=xxxxxxx, ltc=yyyyyyy" from your BTC account, so we can verify it was you. I expect a huge number of "HOW DOES I SINE?" emails, and a lot of "My address is at my exchange, so I can't sign" problems, so we'll see how that goes...
Maybe the answer is to add optional user accounts? If you want to use the pool as it is today with default payout options, you would not need an account. But if you want non-default payouts, you'd need to get an account and set up your profile and payout options. I know that adding accounts has its own set of complications, like database schema changes, email verification, SSL certificates (and avoiding Heartbleed), two factor options, etc. But it's probably simpler to support because users are familiar with accounts and managing profiles and options. Also, you can build new features on an account system later, like hash rate drop alerts, etc. I think it's more complicated than that. Current users wishing to convert to a user account would still have to go through message signing, otherwise they wouldn't be able to claim their existing BTC address. It also opens some attack vectors that don't exist with an anonymous service. 2FA would help somewhat but is it all really worth the trouble and risk.
|
|
|
|
5ick3uffalo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 994
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 22, 2014, 05:09:36 PM |
|
Has anyone ever used nicehash's service and mined here? I tried it for a small amount and it would never connect. Works fine on CM.
Nope, only know HashCows. I think Waffle and HashCows nearly same profitable regarding to http://poolpicker.eu/
|
BTC: 1Dw9feZAGSeHvaiQ55T7C92VAAXB2nVKKk
|
|
|
edonkey
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1150
Merit: 1004
|
|
April 22, 2014, 05:09:47 PM |
|
Yep, this is the major downside of no user accounts. For this to work it will require signed messages. We'll try to make it as easy as possible, but would be signing something like "doge=xxxxxxx, ltc=yyyyyyy" from your BTC account, so we can verify it was you. I expect a huge number of "HOW DOES I SINE?" emails, and a lot of "My address is at my exchange, so I can't sign" problems, so we'll see how that goes...
Maybe the answer is to add optional user accounts? If you want to use the pool as it is today with default payout options, you would not need an account. But if you want non-default payouts, you'd need to get an account and set up your profile and payout options. I know that adding accounts has its own set of complications, like database schema changes, email verification, SSL certificates (and avoiding Heartbleed), two factor options, etc. But it's probably simpler to support because users are familiar with accounts and managing profiles and options. Also, you can build new features on an account system later, like hash rate drop alerts, etc. I think it's more complicated than that. Current users wishing to convert to a user account would still have to go through message signing, otherwise they wouldn't be able to claim their existing BTC address. It also opens some attack vectors that don't exist with an anonymous service. 2FA would help somewhat but is it all really worth the trouble and risk. That's a good point. You need proof of ownership of a BTC address in order to claim it. But that could be a onetime event. After that managing your addresses and payout options under an account profile GUI would be much easier and supportable than sending a signed message for every option change.
|
Was I helpful? BTC: 3G1Ubof5u8K9iJkM8We2f3amYZgGVdvpHr
|
|
|
JHammer
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
April 22, 2014, 10:16:38 PM |
|
So thinking ahead 6 to 8 months, what coin can Profit switching pools use as their base coin to compare to? Like "vs LTC" today? Feathercoin maybe?
|
|
|
|
poolwaffle (OP)
|
|
April 22, 2014, 10:49:07 PM |
|
So thinking ahead 6 to 8 months, what coin can Profit switching pools use as their base coin to compare to? Like "vs LTC" today? Feathercoin maybe?
Or maybe LTC?
|
|
|
|
JHammer
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
April 23, 2014, 12:15:29 AM |
|
So thinking ahead 6 to 8 months, what coin can Profit switching pools use as their base coin to compare to? Like "vs LTC" today? Feathercoin maybe?
Or maybe LTC? Maybe. I know mining and difficulty does not necessarily translate to higher prices..
|
|
|
|
JHammer
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
April 23, 2014, 12:20:23 AM |
|
Nice to see Pot Coin is in the mix now.. Happy 420
|
|
|
|
suchmoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8922
https://bpip.org
|
|
April 23, 2014, 02:19:01 AM |
|
I noticed something amusing today. Can you spot a difference between these two fragments of cgminer logs: [2014-04-23 04:08:23] Network diff set to 766 [2014-04-23 04:08:23] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:00] Network diff set to 901 [2014-04-23 04:09:00] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:14] Network diff set to 1.01K [2014-04-23 04:09:14] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:15] Network diff set to 314 [2014-04-23 04:09:15] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:40] Network diff set to 288 [2014-04-23 04:09:40] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:49] Network diff set to 299 [2014-04-23 04:09:49] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:10:40] Network diff set to 317 [2014-04-23 04:10:40] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:11:26] Network diff set to 319 [2014-04-23 04:11:26] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:11:29] Network diff set to 325 [2014-04-23 04:11:29] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2014-04-23 04:08:23] Network diff set to 766 [2014-04-23 04:08:23] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:00] Network diff set to 901 [2014-04-23 04:09:00] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:14] Network diff set to 1.01K [2014-04-23 04:09:14] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:18] Network diff set to 314 [2014-04-23 04:09:18] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:39] Network diff set to 288 [2014-04-23 04:09:39] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:09:48] Network diff set to 299 [2014-04-23 04:09:48] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:10:40] Network diff set to 317 [2014-04-23 04:10:40] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:11:25] Network diff set to 319 [2014-04-23 04:11:25] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block [2014-04-23 04:11:29] Network diff set to 325 [2014-04-23 04:11:29] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
The first one is from CleverMining, the second one from WafflePool (or maybe it's the other way around). Great minds think alike?
|
|
|
|
phzi
|
|
April 23, 2014, 04:07:33 AM |
|
So thinking ahead 6 to 8 months, what coin can Profit switching pools use as their base coin to compare to? Like "vs LTC" today? Feathercoin maybe?
Or maybe LTC? Maybe. I know mining and difficulty does not necessarily translate to higher prices.. Litecoin is obviously going to be the dominant scrypt network, just as bitcoin is the dominant sha network. Litecoin simply maintains too much of the hash power and marketcap already, that there's little chance of it being unseated. And when massive hashing power from ASICs come around, small coins with pitiful network hashrates will get attacked left/right/center similar to SHA altcoin destruction. I think we will be comparing profit vs litecoin for a long time to come. I noticed something amusing today. Can you spot a difference between these two fragments of cgminer logs:
<snip>
The first one is from CleverMining, the second one from WafflePool (or maybe it's the other way around). Great minds think alike?
Looks like profitability algorithms coming to the same conclusion. Curious that one of the block change notifications was several seconds faster on one pool - they must have been the ones to find the previous block, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
gaalx
|
|
April 23, 2014, 04:35:42 AM Last edit: April 23, 2014, 06:05:43 AM by gaalx |
|
pw, hidden3=whitecoin?
PS to 10000 btc are planned gifts?
|
|
|
|
spiderdk
Member
Offline
Activity: 74
Merit: 10
|
|
April 23, 2014, 04:35:58 AM |
|
Hash Rate: 3.27 MH/s (15min approximated) Worker 15m Hashrate 15m Stalerate xxxx 3.27 MH/s 10.08% reject too high on both us servers why
|
|
|
|
phzi
|
|
April 23, 2014, 04:43:15 AM |
|
pw, hidden3=whitecoin?
Whitecoin isn't hidden anymore.
|
|
|
|
gaalx
|
|
April 23, 2014, 05:07:49 AM |
|
pw, hidden3=whitecoin?
Whitecoin isn't hidden anymore. Is not hide
|
|
|
|
|