Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB

[bspurloc]

How can I configure the stats page to show separate charts for different miners?
(like this: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH )

Just add an underscore and a miner name for each miner

e.g. the graph above is generated with the login username in the miner software for each miner differentiated thus:

1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_isengard63
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007202
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX002901
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007267
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007341
etc
etc
etc

how would I know the miner name to an S1? looking over the configs,uname etc, I dont see anything unique to each S1

[Majixagi]

How can I configure the stats page to show separate charts for different miners?
(like this: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH )

Just add an underscore and a miner name for each miner

e.g. the graph above is generated with the login username in the miner software for each miner differentiated thus:

1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_isengard63
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007202
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX002901
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007267
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007341
etc
etc
etc

how would I know the miner name to an S1? looking over the configs,uname etc, I dont see anything unique to each S1

If you are on /24 you can use the last octet of it's IP address. Then it is easy to identify and ssh in to one when it needs a reboot. I've actually gone and named them all a1, a2, a3, etc, created DNS entries on my local network, and then everything matches all the way through.

[Biffa]

How can I configure the stats page to show separate charts for different miners?
(like this: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH )

Just add an underscore and a miner name for each miner

e.g. the graph above is generated with the login username in the miner software for each miner differentiated thus:

1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_isengard63
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007202
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX002901
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007267
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007341
etc
etc
etc

how would I know the miner name to an S1? looking over the configs,uname etc, I dont see anything unique to each S1

Stick some labels on them. You put the username in on the miner, so pick a naming convention change he username in cgminer and stick a label with the name on the outside.

[Biomech]

How can I configure the stats page to show separate charts for different miners?
(like this: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH )

Just add an underscore and a miner name for each miner

e.g. the graph above is generated with the login username in the miner software for each miner differentiated thus:

1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_isengard63
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007202
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX002901
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007267
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007341
etc
etc
etc

how would I know the miner name to an S1? looking over the configs,uname etc, I dont see anything unique to each S1

Stick some labels on them. You put the username in on the miner, so pick a naming convention change he username in cgminer and stick a label with the name on the outside.

Gotta love the KISS method

[MrTeal]

How can I configure the stats page to show separate charts for different miners?
(like this: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH )

Just add an underscore and a miner name for each miner

e.g. the graph above is generated with the login username in the miner software for each miner differentiated thus:

1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_isengard63
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007202
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX002901
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007267
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007341
etc
etc
etc

how would I know the miner name to an S1? looking over the configs,uname etc, I dont see anything unique to each S1

Stick some labels on them. You put the username in on the miner, so pick a naming convention change he username in cgminer and stick a label with the name on the outside.

Gotta love the KISS method

I labeled mine with the IP, and on Eligius they are Address_110, Address_111, etc. Not only do you know which physical one it is, but with a glance at Eligius you know where to log into if you want to change a setting.

[Biffa]

How can I configure the stats page to show separate charts for different miners?
(like this: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH )

Just add an underscore and a miner name for each miner

e.g. the graph above is generated with the login username in the miner software for each miner differentiated thus:

1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_isengard63
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007202
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX002901
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007267
1LnUhyCuejMR9dpV559CauwokCGg2n1doH_AX007341
etc
etc
etc

how would I know the miner name to an S1? looking over the configs,uname etc, I dont see anything unique to each S1

Stick some labels on them. You put the username in on the miner, so pick a naming convention change he username in cgminer and stick a label with the name on the outside.

Gotta love the KISS method

I labeled mine with the IP, and on Eligius they are Address_110, Address_111, etc. Not only do you know which physical one it is, but with a glance at Eligius you know where to log into if you want to change a setting.

You win MrTeal, here's a cookie  

Now just make those Habaneros a decent price and we will all love you (except Cevidad maybe)

Oh and while I am here, wtf is up with the luck today? 

[GigaWave]

It's that new diff. Seems the pool wants nothing to do with, And I agree.

[Luke-Jr]

WTF is this?

https://blockchain.info/block-index/419437/00000000000000000f6d2e4f6d4a5055cead93847786c9037baecf4e6e738a7a

Eligius no transactions!

Code:

2014-05-25 04:00:05 CreateNewBlock(): total size 201593
2014-05-25 04:00:21 UpdateTip: new best=00000000000000004690530d2a377ca3623a57171d67a5f71086950b37f92041  height=302495  log2_work=78.786788  tx=39426364  date=2014-05-25 03:59:56 progress=0.999999
2014-05-25 04:00:21 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2014-05-25 04:00:21 CreateNewBlock(): total size 35213
2014-05-25 04:00:30 UpdateTip: new best=000000000000000057339b58e4f45288cd2c99efa6c5fab819a5f0a7d5cd2f93  height=302496  log2_work=78.786913  tx=39426395  date=2014-05-25 04:00:19 progress=0.999999
2014-05-25 04:00:30 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2014-05-25 04:00:30 CreateNewBlock(): total size 25350
2014-05-25 04:00:44 UpdateTip: new best=00000000000000000f6d2e4f6d4a5055cead93847786c9037baecf4e6e738a7a  height=302497  log2_work=78.787037  tx=39426396  date=2014-05-25 03:59:31 progress=0.999997
2014-05-25 04:00:44 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2014-05-25 04:00:44 CreateNewBlock(): total size 26356
2014-05-25 04:01:15 CreateNewBlock(): total size 35866
2014-05-25 04:01:45 CreateNewBlock(): total size 41091
2014-05-25 04:02:07 UpdateTip: new best=00000000000000003257c2434c4f5bdb3befd3795b89a3b46cde6f2b6aa1d73e  height=302498  log2_work=78.787161  tx=39426441  date=2014-05-25 04:01:43 progress=0.999999
2014-05-25 04:02:07 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2014-05-25 04:02:07 CreateNewBlock(): total size 33846

The important line there is:
2014-05-25 04:00:30 CreateNewBlock(): total size 25350

Go away, clueless troll.

[mdude77]

WTF is this?

https://blockchain.info/block-index/419437/00000000000000000f6d2e4f6d4a5055cead93847786c9037baecf4e6e738a7a

Eligius no transactions!

Looks pretty plain to see, it's indeed a block with no transactions that appears to have come from Eligius.  What does it mean?

M

[Luke-Jr]

WTF is this?

https://blockchain.info/block-index/419437/00000000000000000f6d2e4f6d4a5055cead93847786c9037baecf4e6e738a7a

Eligius no transactions!

Looks pretty plain to see, it's indeed a block with no transactions that appears to have come from Eligius.  What does it mean?

kano included the answer in his post, just obscured because he wanted to troll.
The previous block was only 14 seconds prior.

[mdude77]

WTF is this?

https://blockchain.info/block-index/419437/00000000000000000f6d2e4f6d4a5055cead93847786c9037baecf4e6e738a7a

Eligius no transactions!

Looks pretty plain to see, it's indeed a block with no transactions that appears to have come from Eligius.  What does it mean?

kano included the answer in his post, just obscured because he wanted to troll.
The previous block was only 14 seconds prior.

Thanks.  I'd still think 14 seconds is enough to pick up at least one transaction.

M

[Luke-Jr]

WTF is this?

https://blockchain.info/block-index/419437/00000000000000000f6d2e4f6d4a5055cead93847786c9037baecf4e6e738a7a

Eligius no transactions!

Looks pretty plain to see, it's indeed a block with no transactions that appears to have come from Eligius.  What does it mean?

kano included the answer in his post, just obscured because he wanted to troll.
The previous block was only 14 seconds prior.

Thanks.  I'd still think 14 seconds is enough to pick up at least one transaction.

M

Yes, but many miners don't update work that fast.

[gmaxwell]

This is the reasonable, well known, and expected behavior and not something to be concerned about.

Standard behavior for pool software is when a new block is accepted to immediately generate new work before the new transaction list is computed and then long poll again later to update. It can take bitcoind several hundred milliseconds to generate an actual block with content, especially if the mempool is large, and otherwise in that time you'd be twiddling your thumbs doing nothing or uselessly working on an old block. As a result, all miners will produce an empty block here and there, even when there is a backlog (E.g. for a 1 second dwell time it would be 0.16% of blocks).

In the last 1000 block there were 9 empty blocks, that rate suggests an aggregate dwell time of about 5 seconds. According to bc.i they were created by Discus Fish, Slush, Discus Fish, Discus Fish, Discus Fish, Eligius, KnC, Eligius, and Discus Fish.  Perhaps one pool's over-representation there suggests their long-polling behavior could use some tuning, but it isn't Eligius…

The obvious optimizations like precomputing the next block don't work, because someone else will usually have produced this one, and your 'next' will likely conflict with it... though it would be possible to do something like a 'fast tx list now!' that only guarantees validity, and perhaps makes idiotic choices wrt priority/fees.

Fortunately the timing of blocks are independent, e.g. that someone found a block 10 seconds after the last with nothing in it doesn't actually delay the finding of the next block with something in it.

[gmaxwell]

So ... how does deleting my post that says what you have just said make any sense?

I haven't deleted anything here. Nor did I see any post of yours saying anything like I said, instead you appeared to be loudly claming that something was wrong with eligius, you went as far to imply that something was being hidden ("Makes me wonder why he won't explain it. As should anyone who uses this pool...")

and the protocol the pool uses.

You mean the protocol every pool uses? There is basically no GBT hashrate on eligius, as is my understanding— not that there is actually any latency difference.

at least 15s.

I'm afraid you don't understand how block timestamps work. It's possible to find a block 100ms after the prior block and yet have a timestamp a minute later (or a minute before, for that matter), times are not synchronous between miners.

are getting their users to mine empty block ... quite a lot of their mining time.

And yet you can look at the actual observed blocks and Eligius is underrepresented in empty blocks relative to hashrate.

It is also somewhat pointless of you to comment about how mining is done and suggesting that mining empty blocks is ok, since you are a member of the bitcoin dev team who has explicitly stated that they do not care about mining and have ignored requests for changes to bitcoind to improve mining support.
Oh well again.

What the fuck are you talking about here?  That kind of allegations demands some links.

Edit: and your statistics stated also are incorrect.

I linked the actual blocks, so you can see exactly where empty blocks have been produced.

They ignore the fact that a Stratum pool server can avoid the second issue of mining on the empty block for very long by sending out new work immediately after the pool has sent out the empty block work.
Of course, GBT can't do this.

Of course it can. Shit, even getwork can do that.

[ProfMac]

Now since blocks are regularly less than 600s (last diff they averaged under 510s) that means that a pool that does both of these bad practices is pretty much saying that they are getting their users to mine empty block ... quite a lot of their mining time.

I have mined almost exclusively at Eligius with my Avalon.

Under the current mining conditions, it takes more than a week for me to enter the payout queue.  I suspect a missed block could delay that payout by 1 block.  That seems insignificant, and otherwise it is not clear to me how an empty block is a bad thing for me.

I do see that an empty block was produced, and I can encourage a task to improve the transaction template processing, but I don't see any reason for urgency or scheduling this task before some others.

[wizkid057]

So ... how does deleting my post that says what you have just said make any sense?
Yes we know you've had moderator bias to Luke's lies for a very long time.

First, *I* deleted what was essentially a duplicate spammy post. (You quoted your own post in this post then immediately again with nearly the exact same response.  I left the first one, even though it doesn't belong here, but I figured you'd cry about it even more if I deleted both.

Anyway...

What you have said exactly states that Luke is lying.
It has nothing to do with the miner, it is the work that the pool provides and the protocol the pool uses.

Jumping ahead, since you're blaming GBT here somehow (beating a dead horse much?)... while still not valid, I'll point this out:

The Eligius block you refer to was generated using the stratum protocol. This is actually embedded in the coinbase text of the block's generation transaction. see here.  The "ss33" near the end means "Server/Stratum #3, Instance #3."  GBT blocks start with "sg" and getwork just a single "s", both followed by a number.

Now if the pool is written so that it cannot handle quickly generating a new block, but instead generates an empty block that can me mined on for at least 15s ... then that is the pools fault, not the miner's.

Even worse, if the pool protocol does not allow it to tell the miner work with transactions VERY soon after a block change, when someone like you gives an excuse for the pool making the miners mine empty blocks, then that means that not only is the pool ignoring transactions, as you have stated above, but it is also using a protocol that allow this empty block to be mined for a long time ... at least 15s.

Now since blocks are regularly less than 600s (last diff they averaged under 510s) that means that a pool that does both of these bad practices is pretty much saying that they are getting their users to mine empty block ... quite a lot of their mining time.

Eligius actually immediately updates stratum work as soon as bitcoind returns a template.  Since Eligius actually generates some of the the largest blocks on the network, with thousands of txns at times, this actually can take a couple of seconds at times, but usually is pretty immediate. However, the mining hardware/software on the other end is free to continue working on the original work until it expires as per the stratum protocol.

Now from a miner perspective that also means that you lose all the transaction fees that could have been in these blocks.
Oh well.

If you want to argue this, there are many rebuttals.  However the most prominent is that txn fees account for less than half of a percent of miner rewards on avg, but time wasted not doing work while a new transaction list is pushed would result in a lot more losses I'm sure.

Anyway, I think the bulk of your argument is pretty much invalidated by the fact that you obviously don't know what you're talking about since you're blaming the protocol, then suggesting stratum, yet the block in question was generated using stratum...

If you continue on this topic pointlessly, remain clueless, and generally just spam this thread I will simply be deleting your posts.

[wizkid057]

Deleted another misinformation filled kano post.

kano, do not post in this thread again.  I hereby ban you from this self-moderated thread.

Edit: And deleted another (which was posted after this one....)

[crashoveride54902]

Deleted another misinformation filled kano post.

kano, do not post in this thread again.  I hereby ban you from this self-moderated thread.

Edit: And deleted another (which was posted after this one....)

ugh wish he'd just stop...WK has better things to do then babysit this thread

[RealMalatesta]

Maybe a dumb question, but I have two accounts with Eligius. One is a private one with 769.47 Gh/s. Below, you see a picture os some stats:



With this hashrate, I get an estimated change of 0.003 BTC.

Now a second account is hashing with an average of 1,377.44 Gh/s. It is a spondoolies hosted outside of my office.

As you see below, with about the double hashrate, the estimated change is 0.0001 BTC.



How comes? Shouldn't the estimated change be higher? It jumped to +0.001 once, which is still less than for the account with half the hashrate. Is this only a problem with the site or don't I understand the concept of how the estimated change is calculated (very likely...)

[thejewelrytech]

Maybe a dumb question, but I have two accounts with Eligius. One is a private one with 769.47 Gh/s. Below, you see a picture os some stats:



With this hashrate, I get an estimated change of 0.003 BTC.

Now a second account is hashing with an average of 1,377.44 Gh/s. It is a spondoolies hosted outside of my office.

As you see below, with about the double hashrate, the estimated change is 0.0001 BTC.



How comes? Shouldn't the estimated change be higher? It jumped to +0.001 once, which is still less than for the account with half the hashrate. Is this only a problem with the site or don't I understand the concept of how the estimated change is calculated (very likely...)

The 769 gh's is being paid more because of backpay for mining shares  of CPPSRB mining shares owed from slower rounds as you see it is under 100% you have a little over 5% in backpay shares owed to these miners so the pay will usually be higher depending on pool luck and what the pool can pay out as your other rig is running @100% paid shares and 100% is the max you can ever earn  and have no shares owed so they have  been paid the max earning of what paid shares are atm and not owed any backpay for mining shares of CPPSRB from slow rounds.When the pool doesn't find a block in allocated time the 100% will fall under to 99% 98% etc and mining shares that you could of gotten paid rollover and get paid out the next block so you earn the max pay per share  you will then get paid for the work of the past block that took longer but was beyond the pay thresh hold of the past blocks of past shares if owed depending on how slow previous rounds were if there were no slow rounds during mining then you are owed nothing and you remain at 100% with no back  pay as you earned full pay per share. If a round takes 3 hours to find a block and a block should be found in 2 hours? those extra  mining shares that it took to find the block then get logged too cppsrb shelved shares then if the next block is found in 5 minutes instead of getting paid for just 5 minutes of mining shares you did you get paid for the extra hour of shares from the previous block or blocks from shelved shares of the past the 100% drops to 99% 98% etc then get paid during the  next luckier rounds rounds if they fall below the 2 hour mark on luckier rounds and adds a extra .01 + from shelved shares or so depending on pool luck and what it can pay averaging out to max pay per share in the end.You wont ever get paid more than pay per share you did.