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

[ak111in]

Wafflepoolmonitor APP Suggestion:

"Pull to refresh" same in this app (someone made for my PB Mining Cloudmining Account):

thanks for the suggestion, but there is already a refresh option at the top right(pointed in image below).

[gaalx]

Now there are many algorithms (scrypt, x11, kessak etc.).
Most of them work on the same cgminer (newer version, say cgminer-3.7.2-kalroth-20140324). Settings do not differ significantly, except for lines like - "kernel": "scrypt", may still need to adapt the frequency.
So how can you make in the configuration file when you switch to a specific pool, automatic conversion settings for the corresponding algorithm.

Is it possible to specify individual settings for cgminer.conf as follows:

"pools" : [
{
          "url" : "stratum+tcp://eu.wafflepool.com:3333",
          "user" : "---",
          "pass" : "x",
"kernel" : "scrypt",
"gpu-engine" : "---",
"gpu-memclock" : "---"
     },
{
          "url" : "stratum+tcp://uswest.wafflepool.com:3333",
          "user" : "---",
          "pass" : "x",
"kernel" : "X11",
"gpu-engine" : "---",
"gpu-memclock" : "---"
     }

Thank you.

sgminer supports different algorithms and parameters like in your example, but there is no way to set engine, memclocks, etc, specific to a pool.  You could script this via the API, however.

it is possible in more detail? or can met a similar subject in which it is possible to read about the raised question.

[5ick3uffalo]

Wafflepoolmonitor APP Suggestion:

"Pull to refresh" same in this app (someone made for my PB Mining Cloudmining Account):

thanks for the suggestion, but there is already a refresh option at the top right(pointed in image below).

Hi, yes I know the refresh button but pull/swipe down to refresh more comfortable.

Not a "must have" but it would be better sure, rest is close.
to perfect. Lovely App and worth paying for some satoshis for the paid version.

[gaalx]

pw, I remember that you in one of the messages marked what to switch between technologies rather simply. if it concerns a line similar - "scrypt": true, yes, but is features with thin setup of frequencies, thread-concurrency, etc. didn't reflect?

[poolwaffle]

pw, I remember that you in one of the messages marked what to switch between technologies rather simply. if it concerns a line similar - "scrypt": true, yes, but is features with thin setup of frequencies, thread-concurrency, etc. didn't reflect?

Not between technologies (algorithms I assume you mean).  Only between Scrypt-N nfactor values.  There might be support for switching algorithms built into a miner later, but I'm not sure they exist yet (I haven't dug that deeply though).  And if parameters can't be specified per-algorithm, you're going to be mining pretty sub-optimally a lot of the time.

[phzi]

pw, I remember that you in one of the messages marked what to switch between technologies rather simply. if it concerns a line similar - "scrypt": true, yes, but is features with thin setup of frequencies, thread-concurrency, etc. didn't reflect?

Not between technologies (algorithms I assume you mean).  Only between Scrypt-N nfactor values.  There might be support for switching algorithms built into a miner later, but I'm not sure they exist yet (I haven't dug that deeply though).  And if parameters can't be specified per-algorithm, you're going to be mining pretty sub-optimally a lot of the time.

Indeed. There's no publicly available miner yet that support multiple algorithms and hotswapping.  Implementing X11 and a few other algorithms on top of the latest sgminer is reasonably trivial (the X11 patch from sph-sgminer is fairly clean, and isn't difficult to modify to use the sgminer algorithm pattern vs only the classic kernel pattern).  However, I have seen no work done on making parameters algorithm specific.

If nobody else tackles it by the end of the month, I plan on cleaning up and releasing my own sgminer derivative (maybe clgminer? or the ever vain phziner hah) with multi-algorithm hotswapping support.  Algorithm-specific parameters and stratum extensions are my hold-back at the moment.  @PoolWaffle: maybe if you're interested, we could plan to launch a multi-algorithm GPU-only version of WafflePool simultaneously with clgminer.  The miner would be open source, but not the server-side stratum layer, so it would give WafflePool a solid first-to-market opportunity.

I have been fighting with myself a bit on how to handle the fact that different GPUs perform differently on various algorithms - e.g. one GPU might do 500KH/s scrypt, 250KH/s scrypt(n=11), and 1.5MH/s X11; whereas another might do 400KH/s scrypt, 300KH/s scrypt(n=11), and 2MH/s X11.  So you have a 4:2:6 ratio vs 4:3:10 ratio.  This is fairly significant, as at a given moment, the first rig might be best hashing scrypt(n=11), and the second would be most profitable to hash X11.  So, some sort of local benchmarking with relative performance report back to the pool is necessary to optimize profits - of course, this would complicate switcher logic significantly...  Power consumption is also different between algorithm (which some users will care about, and some won't), so a user-specified algorithm weight preference might be the easiest solution.

[suchmoon]

user-specified algorithm weight preference might be the easiest solution.

Since time-to-market is quite important here I'd say this would be good enough for a start. I would definitely use this kind of miner even if it requires manual benchmarking, since I would be tuning the GPUs for each algo anyway.

[poolwaffle]

pw, I remember that you in one of the messages marked what to switch between technologies rather simply. if it concerns a line similar - "scrypt": true, yes, but is features with thin setup of frequencies, thread-concurrency, etc. didn't reflect?

Not between technologies (algorithms I assume you mean).  Only between Scrypt-N nfactor values.  There might be support for switching algorithms built into a miner later, but I'm not sure they exist yet (I haven't dug that deeply though).  And if parameters can't be specified per-algorithm, you're going to be mining pretty sub-optimally a lot of the time.

Indeed. There's no publicly available miner yet that support multiple algorithms and hotswapping.  Implementing X11 and a few other algorithms on top of the latest sgminer is reasonably trivial (the X11 patch from sph-sgminer is fairly clean, and isn't difficult to modify to use the sgminer algorithm pattern vs only the classic kernel pattern).  However, I have seen no work done on making parameters algorithm specific.

If nobody else tackles it by the end of the month, I plan on cleaning up and releasing my own sgminer derivative (maybe clgminer? or the ever vain phziner hah) with multi-algorithm hotswapping support.  Algorithm-specific parameters and stratum extensions are my hold-back at the moment.  @PoolWaffle: maybe if you're interested, we could plan to launch a multi-algorithm GPU-only version of WafflePool simultaneously with clgminer.  The miner would be open source, but not the server-side stratum layer, so it would give WafflePool a solid first-to-market opportunity.

I have been fighting with myself a bit on how to handle the fact that different GPUs perform differently on various algorithms - e.g. one GPU might do 500KH/s scrypt, 250KH/s scrypt(n=11), and 1.5MH/s X11; whereas another might do 400KH/s scrypt, 300KH/s scrypt(n=11), and 2MH/s X11.  So you have a 4:2:6 ratio vs 4:3:10 ratio.  This is fairly significant, as at a given moment, the first rig might be best hashing scrypt(n=11), and the second would be most profitable to hash X11.  So, some sort of local benchmarking with relative performance report back to the pool is necessary to optimize profits - of course, this would complicate switcher logic significantly...  Power consumption is also different between algorithm (which some users will care about, and some won't), so a user-specified algorithm weight preference might be the easiest solution.

I don't think the stratum changes for kernel swapping would be difficult, could extremely easily add another command (mining.swapkernel, with a "nscrypt" or "x11" passed). First to market is nice, especially on the server-side, stratum being "hidden" or non-open-source isn't terribly useful, anyone can just connect to the pool and see the messages in plaintext.  Like you said, the much harder part is figuring out the switching.  Both based on ratios (nothing in the server supports/expects that yet), and based on time it takes to switch.  Depending on how long the switch of a kernel takes on the client-side, it becomes a much more difficult equation.  Do we think you're going to lose 10% of the time when switching, 20%?

[phzi]

poolwaffle: With pre-compiled kernels, you're looking at 100ms average hotswap turnaround.  Pretty negligible in my testing so far.

suchmoon: agreed.

The biggest pro I know in switching for the profit-based multipool world undoubtedly runs WafflePool, so that's why I am bringing this discussion here. A server-side that takes user-weighted algorithm preferences, calculates best coins per algo, and switches miners as appropriate, stands on the other side of this miner development.

[gaalx]

To switch to other algorithm is the first problem, and here to carry out thin setup of a cgminer - the second and probably is more difficult than the first.

[Biffa]

Wafflepool seems down to me, cloudflare is reporting the back end server is down.

If you're the owner of this website:
Contact your hosting provider letting them know your web server is not completing requests. An Error 522 means that the request was able to connect to your web server, but that the request didn't finish. The most likely cause is that something on your server is hogging resources. Additional troubleshooting information here.

[volder]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

[gaalx]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

[volder]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

[poolwaffle]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

[volder]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

I have some high speed ASICs (Innosillicon A2) that I wanted to use on Waffle Pool, but the 512 diff makes them spam shares to your server and slows them WAY down.

I would like to see both 8192 and 16384 share Diffs become available. Maybe even 32768 (or higher) too. Coinshift vardiff places these ASICs at 53312 diff.

I'm not sure which would work best on wafflepool, so having both to test with would be great.

[suchmoon]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

Can you do two ports, one for 8k and another for 64k or so? There is wide range of new ASICs now between 10-90 MH/s and even faster ones are coming.

[JHammer]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

Can you do two ports, one for 8k and another for 64k or so? There is wide range of new ASICs now between 10-90 MH/s and even faster ones are coming.

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

[volder]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

Can you do two ports, one for 8k and another for 64k or so? There is wide range of new ASICs now between 10-90 MH/s and even faster ones are coming.

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Yes, there is a difference.

[JHammer]

Is there a way to manually set pool diff with Wafflepool? I have several large ASIC miners and 512 diff is WAY too low. They just spam your servers with shares.

it was possible earlier, as the password to deliver x=1024. It seems works and now.

What about higher? Like 8000 or 16000 diff? Do those work?

What difficulty would be useful?  Would be reasonably trivial to setup an extra port with very high difficulty.

Can you do two ports, one for 8k and another for 64k or so? There is wide range of new ASICs now between 10-90 MH/s and even faster ones are coming.

Why did a pool tell me to use d=512 for my 30 MH's Gridspeeds?   Are there differences between types of ASIC's? I thought 30 MH's is 30 MH's?

Yes, there is a difference.

And it is?    WTF is up with people on this forum.....