[ANN][AUTO-SWITCH] Profit-switch auto-exchange pool: CleverMining.com

[citronick]

is DCR mined in CM2?

[ppanther]

is DCR mined in CM2?

It is not mined by CM2. The algo is blake and not scrypt.

Best,
PPanther

[dexu]

A lot of rejects on TITAN d=32768 1 hour 8% rejected.

US.celevermining same on EU.clevermining.

You can do something about it?

[ppanther]

A lot of rejects on TITAN d=32768 1 hour 8% rejected.

US.celevermining same on EU.clevermining.

You can do something about it?

Thank you for you message, dexu. Most likely it is related to aggressive coin switching, which leads to decent profitability of about 150% at the moment. This is outcompeting the 8% rejects. However, please provide me with your username by PM. I'll investigate, if there is annother issue or a single coin leading to significant higher rejects than others.

[dexu]

Thank You, PM sent.

Its too agresive switch for my miner still got ~8% reject.

If you got the ability to change this option to more light version, to not interrupt the miners work like this agresive CUT and work to another block.

[toptek]

is LTCRabbit.com gonna keep running to ? . I all ways liked CleverMining.com , glad to see some one that cares took it over , I'm gonna use it more then ever now and LTCRabbit.com was my very first script pool, i ever used like slushes pool was my very first bitcoin pool , i still use both . good stuff.


cya

[ppanther]

is LTCRabbit.com gonna keep running to ? . I all ways liked CleverMining.com , glad to see some one that cares took it over , I'm gonna use it more then ever now and LTCRabbit.com was my very first script pool, i ever used like slushes pool was my very first bitcoin pool , i still use both . good stuff.


cya

Thank you, toptek. Yes, both CM2 and LTCRabbit will be ran as separate brands. CM2 is targeting mining professionals which prefer no registration + BTC payouts and LTCRabbit is targeting mining beginners. Both take advantage of the new, improved, highly profitable CM2 mining backend.

[ppanther]

Some KNC Titan users reported problems with the amount of rejects. The titan miner has a individual problem with high amount of work restarts due to aggressive coin switching. We fired up a solution to treat the specific demands of the KNC Titan. Only Titan miners are able to connect to this port.

stratum+tcp://us.clevermining.com:3444/#xnsub#skipcbcheck
stratum+tcp://eu.clevermining.com:3444/#xnsub#skipcbcheck

Please switch your Titan to the exact address (US or EU) displayed above (do not remove the / before the #xnsub).

Please let me know the results. Thank you for your support, guys!

Best,
PPanther

[DCTrader]

Hello,

I am a long time participant in the CleverMining pool. Overall, I really like it.

However, I am currently have a problem. The website is reporting zero MH/S for my miner despite the fact that it is running fine.

I have rebooted it twice recently, but the website stills shows no activity.

The CM2 website lists ltcrabbit.zendesk.com as the support e-mail address. Is that supposed to be ltcrabbit@zendesk.com?

I assume that you meant to type ltcrabbit@zendesk.com so I send an email there along with two screen shots. I hope that was the correct thing to do.


Regards,


DCTrader

[ppanther]

Hello,

I am a long time participant in the CleverMining pool. Overall, I really like it.

However, I am currently have a problem. The website is reporting zero MH/S for my miner despite the fact that it is running fine.

I have rebooted it twice recently, but the website stills shows no activity.

The CM2 website lists ltcrabbit.zendesk.com as the support e-mail address. Is that supposed to be ltcrabbit@zendesk.com?

I assume that you meant to type ltcrabbit@zendesk.com so I send an email there along with two screen shots. I hope that was the correct thing to do.


Regards,


DCTrader

The email has changed. The correct email is: support@miningcentral.freshdesk.com Please resend your message including your username and screenshots. I'll check your issue.

[toptek]

A little tip for some if you see a dead pool message  in the command line UI with BFG, this tip is not just for titan's and the tip setting is not just for titan's, only, kind like nicehash says and i read some other place and it  only works with nice hash i read some place also but it works with any miner i have tried on any site that does coin checking. i have a Zeus miner i still use a lot it kind of makes something. it works for me .!!!


/#xnsub#skipcbcheck mainly use #skipcbcheck, coin checking was casing some slow down issue with that messages even on my out dated 22 MH cyclone, i disabled coin checking.

don't ask why im still using it, i got ripped off on a Alcheminer 256 MH, i was trying to buy, sigh, I had a place set up at home, waiting.

[GenTarkin]

@cleverming your Titan ports left something to be desired. I see bout 1.5-2% rejects. On prohashing.com(which switches coins much faster than your pool) I get about .7-1.5%

Also, it would be nice if the vardiff was statically set, because even if Im using 8192 ... bfgminer still dynamically changes diff while mining, sometimes vardiff goes so high the miner doesnt submit shares for blocks during fast rounds ... so I would lose out on that profitability.

[ppanther]

@cleverming your Titan ports left something to be desired. I see bout 1.5-2% rejects. On prohashing.com(which switches coins much faster than your pool) I get about .7-1.5%

Also, it would be nice if the vardiff was statically set, because even if Im using 8192 ... bfgminer still dynamically changes diff while mining, sometimes vardiff goes so high the miner doesnt submit shares for blocks during fast rounds ... so I would lose out on that profitability.

Nice to meet the creator of the famous GenTarkin Mod    If you want to improve the Titan reject rate, you are putting Titans to coins with high difficulty and do less coin switching. That's to some point harming the profitability of other miners, which use well designed scrypt asics. 1.5-2% rejects is not too bad, if you think of overall scrypt profitability moving 20% up and down day by day. However, there is always room for improvement. I would need to have web access to a titan miner, in order to do intense testing for some hours on several days. Of course, i would compensate for the downtime. If you want to help and provide access to a titan, please PM me.

Best,
PPanther

[GenTarkin]

@cleverming your Titan ports left something to be desired. I see bout 1.5-2% rejects. On prohashing.com(which switches coins much faster than your pool) I get about .7-1.5%

Also, it would be nice if the vardiff was statically set, because even if Im using 8192 ... bfgminer still dynamically changes diff while mining, sometimes vardiff goes so high the miner doesnt submit shares for blocks during fast rounds ... so I would lose out on that profitability.

Nice to meet the creator of the famous GenTarkin Mod    If you want to improve the Titan reject rate, you are putting Titans to coins with high difficulty and do less coin switching. That's to some point harming the profitability of other miners, which use well designed scrypt asics. 1.5-2% rejects is not too bad, if you think of overall scrypt profitability moving 20% up and down day by day. However, there is always room for improvement. I would need to have web access to a titan miner, in order to do intense testing for some hours on several days. Of course, i would compensate for the downtime. If you want to help and provide access to a titan, please PM me.

Best,
PPanther

Well, like I said .. on prohashing the rejects are about half what I see on this pool and they switch coins MUCH faster than my Titan does on clevermining. Also, the other point is vardiff changes as I mine even when I set it statically to 8192. The problem is, vardiff will get set extremely high on fast switching coins and my Titan will only submit a couple shares ... and I lose out on profitability of those fast switching rounds. A place to start I think is to allow static vardiff of 8192 or higher and the pool shouldnt change it dynamically during mining.

[Terk]

Hi everyone,

it's great to see that you're happy with CM2 and that profitability returned back to high levels. Great work PPanther!

I just wanted to let you know that I made the final settlement and that the final payout from CM1 was sent yesterday in this transaction: http://btc.blockr.io/tx/info/8e246297cdf63be825f0b47ca1207e23aaf977bc066768bd0e30a7391c0d18b2

All users with balances at least 0.001 BTC at CM1 were paid in the above payout.

For amounts lower than 0.001 BTC, it's not feasible to send such low payouts because transaction fees would be too high compared to payout amounts. I didn't want to leave you with unpaid balances even if they were 0.00025 BTC or $0.10, so sub-0.001 balances of all "somehow active" users were transferred to CM2. I sent them to PPanther in this transaction: http://btc.blockr.io/tx/info/949554f2f34beb64a06c8ffea58a4230fc461d0572a995d0258ed944788955c5 and also sent him list of usernames and their balances. He added these amounts to your CM2 balances.

There were ~600 active users at the beginning of the March when the switch to CM2 was made. I transferred balances of all users who were active up to three months before, so for anyone who submitted even a single valid share since Dec 1st, 2015 (this is how I define "somehow active" usernames). There were 1993 usernames satisfying this criteria, including 1622 usernames with sub-0.001 balances, so balances of 1622 usernames were transferred to CM2 with a total of 0.43319776 BTC (so on average 0.000267076 BTC per user). This way everyone should keep their balance, while we won't clutter CM2 database with thousands usernames unused since 2014.

Once again thank you for being part of CleverMining during my ownership and I wish you amazing profits and experiences in the future at CM2!

[not.you]

I had balance of something like .02 or .03 and it was not paid or transferred.

EDIT: oh but now when I go look I see it was zeroed so I guess that makes it official that I won't get it.  Not that I thought I would.  It was stuck for months.

[hacky]

Terk, I think there is a problem with the last payout on the old platform.

On my account, I see a payout of 0.00023938 with this txid : 949554f2f34beb64a06c8ffea58a4230fc461d0572a995d0258ed944788955c5.

But I didn't received it on 123ta35pH43kosWrdf8rSeFUMWsVdNzETC

Could you please verify ? Thanks !

EDIT : ok, misread your post with the < 0.001, sorry !

[Terk]

I had balance of something like .02 or .03 and it was not paid or transferred.

EDIT: oh but now when I go look I see it was zeroed so I guess that makes it official that I won't get it.  Not that I thought I would.  It was stuck for months.

Yes, old unexchanged balances were explained here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=448649.msg13714576#msg13714576

In short: they were post-fork blocks for some small coins from 2015 and even 2014 which were mostly orphan blocks but CM1 software failed to mark them automatically as orphans (because some of them might not be orphans). I reviewed them manually and recovered all valid blocks in January and they were paid out at that time. Invalid blocks were recently corrected to zero after confirming that they were actually orphans.

100.00% of actually valid blocks from CM1 were exchanged and paid out (actually, even more, because when doing manual review I found out that some invalid blocks were also paid out in 2015 before they were marked as invalid; so the pool actually mistakenly paid ~0.45 BTC more than it mined).

[Terk]

Terk, I think there is a problem with the last payout on the old platform.

On my account, I see a payout of 0.00023938 with this txid : 949554f2f34beb64a06c8ffea58a4230fc461d0572a995d0258ed944788955c5.

But I didn't received it on 123ta35pH43kosWrdf8rSeFUMWsVdNzETC

Could you please verify ? Thanks !

EDIT : ok, misread your post with the < 0.001, sorry !

Yes, you're right. You figured it out but I'll repeat here for others who might be confused.

This is a bulk transaction in which sub-0.001 balances were transferred from CM1 to CM2. On your payouts list you see an actual value which was transferred for your username, but when you click to look in the block explorer there's a bulk value of all user balances combined. If you see this, it means that this "payout" was credited to your CM2 account.

[linusdunkers]

@cleverming your Titan ports left something to be desired. I see bout 1.5-2% rejects. On prohashing.com(which switches coins much faster than your pool) I get about .7-1.5%

Also, it would be nice if the vardiff was statically set, because even if Im using 8192 ... bfgminer still dynamically changes diff while mining, sometimes vardiff goes so high the miner doesnt submit shares for blocks during fast rounds ... so I would lose out on that profitability.

Nice to meet the creator of the famous GenTarkin Mod    If you want to improve the Titan reject rate, you are putting Titans to coins with high difficulty and do less coin switching. That's to some point harming the profitability of other miners, which use well designed scrypt asics. 1.5-2% rejects is not too bad, if you think of overall scrypt profitability moving 20% up and down day by day. However, there is always room for improvement. I would need to have web access to a titan miner, in order to do intense testing for some hours on several days. Of course, i would compensate for the downtime. If you want to help and provide access to a titan, please PM me.

Best,
PPanther

Well, like I said .. on prohashing the rejects are about half what I see on this pool and they switch coins MUCH faster than my Titan does on clevermining. Also, the other point is vardiff changes as I mine even when I set it statically to 8192. The problem is, vardiff will get set extremely high on fast switching coins and my Titan will only submit a couple shares ... and I lose out on profitability of those fast switching rounds. A place to start I think is to allow static vardiff of 8192 or higher and the pool shouldnt change it dynamically during mining.

I just sent an email to your support (#27 Where goes the hashrate?) see copy below:

Hello!
You have great profitability according to your website. Currently 0.0001098 BTC/day per MH/s.
I am running 20 x KnC Miner Titan units with a total hashrate about 6300 MH/s (according to BFGMiner stats).
 
BFGMiner configuration:
stratum+tcp://eu.clevermining.com:3333
<btc address>
d=16384
 
Now, looking at the dashboard for this account:
https://www.clevermining.com/users/<btc address>
 
3621.64 MH/S
8 min. accepted hashrate (252.78 MH/s rejected)
 
WTF? Only 57% accepted hashrate compared to BFGMiner stats? It says 252.78 MH/s rejected, that is 4% out of the total current hashrate of 6300 MH/s. So where the fuck is the remaining 39%?
The correct profitabililty is 0.000067 BTC/day per MH/s since you are not reporting hashrate correctly.
 
I will take this information on the forum and you have to explain what you are doing and why.
 
/Linus Dunkers (BTC Sweden)

I am running the latest licensed version of GenTarkin’s Custom KNC Titan Firmware. I read some of the posts on this forum and I have now changed so that my miner configuration looks like this:
stratum+tcp://eu.clevermining.com:3444/#xnsub#skipcbcheck
<btc address>
d=8192

The stats now are the following:
6067.76 MH/S
8 min. accepted hashrate (158.82 MH/s rejected)

So could someone explain where the 39% of hashing power went before making these changes? I have been using CleverMining for more than a year. For how long time has about 40% of my hashing power gone to waste?

/Linus Dunkers (BTC Sweden)