|
r00tdude
|
 |
February 19, 2014, 05:45:38 PM |
|
Terk, I think you should have a "news" section on the site, and tell people about what is going on, since not everyone digs through all the pages on this thread.
+1 this ^^^  Or maybe a shoutbox? Community building can be a good thing  |
Bitrated user: r00tdude.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
igroock
Member
 Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
February 19, 2014, 05:48:37 PM |
|
Terk can you change the hash refresh time frame? an hour is way too long.
|
|
|
|
|
Prima Primat
Member
Offline
Activity: 117
Merit: 10
|
|
February 19, 2014, 05:48:54 PM |
|
So are you trying to say that the same settings we all use and have used for months/years on profit/coin switching pools don't apply to yours because you all are doing something beyond what the most venerable pools are doing in this space? I'm just trying to understand why the admins of the pool are doing this finger pointing the miners' way. I've never seen reject rates above 10% ever... but here it's like I'm giving away 25% of my hash power and not getting the results I expect from a 90% or better share efficiency. I want to drink the koolaid guys, don't get me wrong. There's a LOT to like here; that said, pointing the finger at the miners and saying they are doing something wrong to experience this problem only with your pool sounds unreasonable. That said, I will adjust my mining configs tonight a bit and see if it has any appreciate effect, but I would like to know, in a detailed technical explanation from the pool admin(s) why this is our issue and not a pool-side issue. Thanks a bunch for the work... r00tdude Are you addressing me? Because I have nothing to do with the pool operator, I'm just helping out lol. Here's one technical explanation by Terk in case you don't know it yet. Terk can you change the hash refresh time frame? an hour is way too long.
Scroll down on the page... |
|
|
|
|
Vinz87
Member
Offline
Activity: 72
Merit: 10
|
|
February 19, 2014, 05:56:28 PM |
|
what about vardiff? i read that it was enabled in the recent past and then the pool switched to a fixed diff=512. will we be able in the future to mine at vardiff with low end miners or to choose the diff by ourself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
r00tdude
|
|
February 19, 2014, 05:56:56 PM |
|
Are you addressing me? Because I have nothing to do with the pool operator, I'm just helping out lol. Here's one technical explanation by Terk in case you don't know it yet.
Thanks for the URL for the explanation... I'll tweak a bit tonight to see if this will really make even more of a difference. Appreciate the assist....
r00tdude
|
Bitrated user: r00tdude.
|
|
|
C892
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 06:08:19 PM |
|
[18:06:05] New block detected on network before pool notification Shouldn't the pool notify about block change? maybe that would reduce the rejected ratio a lot more. Plus, my sgminer is using my failback pool A LOT, really A LOT. Maybe an EU server? (please??) |
|
|
|
|
KC82
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 06:44:51 PM |
|
Terk can you change the hash refresh time frame? an hour is way too long.
On your account's report page, if you scroll down below the hourly average there are charts at the bottom for 10 minute averages of hash rate and reject rate. |
|
|
|
|
KC82
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 06:46:12 PM |
|
what about vardiff? i read that it was enabled in the recent past and then the pool switched to a fixed diff=512. will we be able in the future to mine at vardiff with low end miners or to choose the diff by ourself?
I only have about 450 kh/s on my one card and I would like to see vardiff return as well. |
|
|
|
|
sammy007
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1003
|
|
February 19, 2014, 06:47:25 PM |
|
[18:06:05] New block detected on network before pool notification Shouldn't the pool notify about block change? maybe that would reduce the rejected ratio a lot more. Plus, my sgminer is using my failback pool A LOT, really A LOT. Maybe an EU server? (please??) |
|
|
|
|
Alpharoid
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 06:47:56 PM |
|
[18:06:05] New block detected on network before pool notification Shouldn't the pool notify about block change? maybe that would reduce the rejected ratio a lot more. Plus, my sgminer is using my failback pool A LOT, really A LOT. Maybe an EU server? (please??) +1 |
|
|
|
|
tragyn
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 07:01:37 PM |
|
Did any of you even try looking through the thread (search?). He already said a EU server is in the works.
Thanks for the great service, Terk! I've been mostly pleased by the profits and uptime. Hopefully it keeps up!
|
|
|
|
|
btcboom
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 07:57:16 PM |
|
I'm still getting reject rates of 40% at some times, didn't have these issues before. Is this really due to mining of fast altcoins?
|
|
|
|
|
|
byt411
|
|
February 19, 2014, 08:23:57 PM |
|
I'm still getting reject rates of 40% at some times, didn't have these issues before. Is this really due to mining of fast altcoins?
Did any of you even try looking through the thread (search?). He already said a EU server is in the works.
Thanks for the great service, Terk! I've been mostly pleased by the profits and uptime. Hopefully it keeps up!
This is exactly why, Terk, I suggest you put up a to-do list and work in progress list. People don't dig the thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
ellave
|
|
February 19, 2014, 08:37:22 PM |
|
So thought I would try a new pool & this one seems to be building a good rep, i've had 7mhs on it for 12 hours yet show an average rate of 4.2mhs & my rejects are around 20%.
So without reading 50 odd pages is this normal or is the pool just having a bad 24 hours?
|
|
|
|
|
tragyn
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 08:39:17 PM |
|
So thought I would try a new pool & this one seems to be building a good rep, i've had 7mhs on it for 12 hours yet show an average rate of 4.2mhs & my rejects are around 20%.
So without reading 50 odd pages is this normal or is the pool just having a bad 24 hours?
How about instead of reading 50 pages, you make an effort and just read one or two of the last ones? |
|
|
|
|
|
sebastiebass
|
|
February 19, 2014, 08:40:08 PM |
|
Eu server? yes please! |
|
|
|
FABFAB
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 7
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 09:28:00 PM |
|
[18:06:05] New block detected on network before pool notification Shouldn't the pool notify about block change? maybe that would reduce the rejected ratio a lot more. Plus, my sgminer is using my failback pool A LOT, really A LOT. Maybe an EU server? (please??) +1 |
|
|
|
|
|
SirGeekalot
|
|
February 19, 2014, 09:38:18 PM |
|
so i get the feeling people round here might want an EU server? lol
Terk, other than your precious time and resources, what other obstacle are in the way? you'd see a huge increase from this side of the pond where it to happen soon.
|
|
|
|
|
tragyn
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
February 19, 2014, 09:46:13 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terk (OP)
|
|
February 19, 2014, 10:20:14 PM |
|
so i get the feeling people round here might want an EU server? lol
Terk, other than your precious time and resources, what other obstacle are in the way? you'd see a huge increase from this side of the pond where it to happen soon.
I need to make some changes in the core app to make it work with multiple regions/servers in a synchronized way (with shared profits and unified stats, not like separate pools). This requires more or less a day of my work. I don't have this time because the pool is having performance problems which I'm working on almost 24/7. I already deployed a more powerful server which helped a bit but didn't solve the issue completely because it's a software issue. There's a performance problem in an underlying 3rd party software that I use and I need to either rewrite significant part of this software or change it to something else. I'm working on these software issues at the moment. I'm developing some changes that are quickest to do and have potential to release the load - to try to make everything run smooth with the amount of hashpower that came to the pool. I hope to deploy some of these changes tonight. Then I'm going to decide wether to significantly rewrite this 3rd party software or to use a different one (which in that case would also need to be significantly changed to suit our coin-switching needs). I will most likely choose a different one because the one that I'm using now is just crappy and all different technical problems that the pool has been experiencing since its launch were caused by it. This will probably take me 2-3 days. After I deploy these quick fixes I wrote about two paragraphs above, I will decide what to do first: A) to do what's in the previous paragraph, rewrite the underlying software and solve the performance issues once for good (and then launch new regions); or B) launch the multi-region architecture first hoping that the load will be split between servers and it will buy me some time to do the A). I plan to launch three new servers: Europe, Asia and US East and also move US West server from Oregon to California, so there will be four servers in total. That said, fixing performance is my main objective now and I'm working on it almost 24/7. |
|
|
|
|
