Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 06:17:15 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 [364] 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 ... 426 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers  (Read 828547 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
MoreBloodWine
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


I rule with an iron fist !


View Profile WWW
July 01, 2014, 05:38:08 AM
 #7261

Dev and IXC only add about 0.1% more to your profits and it's another coin you have to send to an exchange and then dump for Bitcoin (assuming you only want BTC).  I think the uptime and security affording by this pool and others like Bitminter and Elegius exceed the paltry add on of those coins.

Not counting uptime/security (unlikely to be affected), the real issue is extra load on the servers.  As you pointed out, DVC+IXC are virtually worthless.  I'm not even sure if they're 0.1% actually.  Adding extra coins to each pool server means each server will be wasting time accessing the SSDs/RAM for those coins, a few CPU cycles, and some bandwidth every time they get a block.  That will at least minimally impact bitcoind performance.  How much?  I can't say, and nobody else really can either.  But it is a non-0 impact, and for how worthless they are, I'm not willing to risk ANY performance for junk coins on BTC Guild.
What about this though, thoughts / concerns ?

Quote
If BTC Guild could offer a low cost PPS variant (as suggested in a thread by Meni Rosenfeld) in conjunction with some other pools, I think GHash.IO would be in trouble.

Want a chance at winning some BTC, LTC or another crypto currency ?
Then be sure to check out our Weekly Crypto Lotteries: Crypto Lottos

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480832235
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480832235

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480832235
Reply with quote  #2

1480832235
Report to moderator
MoreBloodWine
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


I rule with an iron fist !


View Profile WWW
July 01, 2014, 09:51:20 AM
 #7262

Damn, comin up on almost a 12hr block.

Want a chance at winning some BTC, LTC or another crypto currency ?
Then be sure to check out our Weekly Crypto Lotteries: Crypto Lottos

DrG
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile
July 01, 2014, 09:54:35 AM
 #7263

All the pools must be having bad luck.  200 blocks into this difficulty and the re-target is the same as the current difficulty.  Bitminter just had a 1 day+ block and they have more hash than us right now.

And this is why PPS in the old form would kill any pool.

hurricandave
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 865



View Profile
July 01, 2014, 09:56:12 AM
 #7264

This is the kind of Luck that discourages me from buying more equipment if the Pool is going to struggle this bad for a share of the rewards.
MoreBloodWine
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


I rule with an iron fist !


View Profile WWW
July 01, 2014, 10:03:36 AM
 #7265

All the pools must be having bad luck.  200 blocks into this difficulty and the re-target is the same as the current difficulty.  Bitminter just had a 1 day+ block and they have more hash than us right now.

And this is why PPS in the old form would kill any pool.
Lol, no thy don't... they go 1.2Ph where we have a hair over 11Ph.

This is the kind of Luck that discourages me from buying more equipment if the Pool is going to struggle this bad for a share of the rewards.
I got 3Th I'll have coming online any time between this Thursday or the Monday that follows (3rd - 7th).

Want a chance at winning some BTC, LTC or another crypto currency ?
Then be sure to check out our Weekly Crypto Lotteries: Crypto Lottos

guytechie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
July 01, 2014, 10:15:37 AM
 #7266

So we are finally going to have closed shifts with no blocks found...

Put something in my tip jar if I made your day. Smiley
BTC:
1MkmBHDjonAFXui6JEx9ZmEemfMtUo9Cmu
Tigggger
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 952



View Profile
July 01, 2014, 11:38:53 AM
 #7267

So we are finally going to have closed shifts with no blocks found...

Cry Sad


guytechie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
July 01, 2014, 11:44:43 AM
 #7268

Has NMC moved one bit, too?

Edit:  we found one finally!  No 0 block yet closed yet, but it was damn close!

Put something in my tip jar if I made your day. Smiley
BTC:
1MkmBHDjonAFXui6JEx9ZmEemfMtUo9Cmu
Sir Alan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 221


View Profile
July 01, 2014, 12:05:51 PM
 #7269

(Sigh) Over 12½ hours.  I was just about to start sticking pins in a wax effigy of Ghash.io.

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
Tigggger
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 952



View Profile
July 01, 2014, 12:09:50 PM
 #7270

Has NMC moved one bit, too?

Edit:  we found one finally!  No 0 block yet closed yet, but it was damn close!

It's on the stats page, and on the blockchain but not on the PPLNS stats, so we have a closed 0 shift after that block was found ??



EDIT: It just updated to show 1 block.

guytechie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
July 01, 2014, 12:24:54 PM
 #7271

Has NMC moved one bit, too?

Edit:  we found one finally!  No 0 block yet closed yet, but it was damn close!

It's on the stats page, and on the blockchain but not on the PPLNS stats, so we have a closed 0 shift after that block was found ??



EDIT: It just updated to show 1 block.

That's because the block was found when that shift was open.  It's not when the block is confirmed.

Put something in my tip jar if I made your day. Smiley
BTC:
1MkmBHDjonAFXui6JEx9ZmEemfMtUo9Cmu
kendog77
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742


View Profile
July 01, 2014, 01:16:26 PM
 #7272

Can we please go back to average luck? 80-90% luck seems like the new normal.  Angry

I really don't want to switch over to the dark side (GHash.IO).
DaveF
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 410


If you can read this you are too close.


View Profile WWW
July 01, 2014, 03:50:33 PM
 #7273

Dev and IXC only add about 0.1% more to your profits and it's another coin you have to send to an exchange and then dump for Bitcoin (assuming you only want BTC).  I think the uptime and security affording by this pool and others like Bitminter and Elegius exceed the paltry add on of those coins.

Not counting uptime/security (unlikely to be affected), the real issue is extra load on the servers.  As you pointed out, DVC+IXC are virtually worthless.  I'm not even sure if they're 0.1% actually.  Adding extra coins to each pool server means each server will be wasting time accessing the SSDs/RAM for those coins, a few CPU cycles, and some bandwidth every time they get a block.  That will at least minimally impact bitcoind performance.  How much?  I can't say, and nobody else really can either.  But it is a non-0 impact, and for how worthless they are, I'm not willing to risk ANY performance for junk coins on BTC Guild.

I'm asking this because I don't know / understand not to be a pain:

Could they were on a physically separate server? With some of the databases I deal with 90%+ of the work is done on the main box 10% is done on other ones. The 10% does not "matter" it's what we term "live irrelevant data". It's for the programmers to use live data / connections to test work, if it all goes boom or lags behind no big deal the main database servers don't even know about it. The front end application servers here (I'm assuming the stratum servers for you) know about it and talk to it at the lowest priority, but if the test back end fails no big deal.

I don't know enough about the stratum protocol to know if that's even possible.

And no, I don't think it's worth the time to mine the other coins, but I do want to understand more.

-Dave

1800bitcoin.com domain for sale. PM me.
guytechie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
July 01, 2014, 05:39:04 PM
 #7274

Can we please go back to average luck? 80-90% luck seems like the new normal.  Angry

I really don't want to switch over to the dark side (GHash.IO).

If this keeps up, it's no wonder why our pool hash is dropping.  Probably for ghash...

It's going to take a buttload of good luck to dig us out of this 80-90% new norm.

Put something in my tip jar if I made your day. Smiley
BTC:
1MkmBHDjonAFXui6JEx9ZmEemfMtUo9Cmu
sconklin321
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 109


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 12:49:43 AM
 #7275

Dev and IXC only add about 0.1% more to your profits and it's another coin you have to send to an exchange and then dump for Bitcoin (assuming you only want BTC).  I think the uptime and security affording by this pool and others like Bitminter and Elegius exceed the paltry add on of those coins.

Not counting uptime/security (unlikely to be affected), the real issue is extra load on the servers.  As you pointed out, DVC+IXC are virtually worthless.  I'm not even sure if they're 0.1% actually.  Adding extra coins to each pool server means each server will be wasting time accessing the SSDs/RAM for those coins, a few CPU cycles, and some bandwidth every time they get a block.  That will at least minimally impact bitcoind performance.  How much?  I can't say, and nobody else really can either.  But it is a non-0 impact, and for how worthless they are, I'm not willing to risk ANY performance for junk coins on BTC Guild.

I'm asking this because I don't know / understand not to be a pain:

Could they were on a physically separate server? With some of the databases I deal with 90%+ of the work is done on the main box 10% is done on other ones. The 10% does not "matter" it's what we term "live irrelevant data". It's for the programmers to use live data / connections to test work, if it all goes boom or lags behind no big deal the main database servers don't even know about it. The front end application servers here (I'm assuming the stratum servers for you) know about it and talk to it at the lowest priority, but if the test back end fails no big deal.

I don't know enough about the stratum protocol to know if that's even possible.

And no, I don't think it's worth the time to mine the other coins, but I do want to understand more.

-Dave

I'm not 100% sure here, but I think a lot of this comes down to just mitigating the sheer latency.  To start with, it is my understanding that the second a new block is found, all the work that is currently being worked on for the old expires.  So you lose clock cycles/bandwidth there, trying to send out new work to all the workers currently connected so that they are all working on the current block.  Definitely don't want to be wasting clock cycles checking/updating work to worthless coins then.  Also, when you find a block, you need to get this from the accepted share that found it, to the blockchain and broadcast it as fast as the server/network will allow this.  Sometimes, a matter of a few fractions of a second could be the difference between a block being accepted or orphaned.  Better to keep the resources available for the coins that are worth it than waste it on coins that are more or less worthless.
incin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 01:09:46 AM
 #7276

Like today when BTCGuild lost block 308770 to slush.  Angry

Majixagi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 01:11:46 AM
 #7277

Dev and IXC only add about 0.1% more to your profits and it's another coin you have to send to an exchange and then dump for Bitcoin (assuming you only want BTC).  I think the uptime and security affording by this pool and others like Bitminter and Elegius exceed the paltry add on of those coins.

Not counting uptime/security (unlikely to be affected), the real issue is extra load on the servers.  As you pointed out, DVC+IXC are virtually worthless.  I'm not even sure if they're 0.1% actually.  Adding extra coins to each pool server means each server will be wasting time accessing the SSDs/RAM for those coins, a few CPU cycles, and some bandwidth every time they get a block.  That will at least minimally impact bitcoind performance.  How much?  I can't say, and nobody else really can either.  But it is a non-0 impact, and for how worthless they are, I'm not willing to risk ANY performance for junk coins on BTC Guild.

I'm asking this because I don't know / understand not to be a pain:

Could they were on a physically separate server? With some of the databases I deal with 90%+ of the work is done on the main box 10% is done on other ones. The 10% does not "matter" it's what we term "live irrelevant data". It's for the programmers to use live data / connections to test work, if it all goes boom or lags behind no big deal the main database servers don't even know about it. The front end application servers here (I'm assuming the stratum servers for you) know about it and talk to it at the lowest priority, but if the test back end fails no big deal.

I don't know enough about the stratum protocol to know if that's even possible.

And no, I don't think it's worth the time to mine the other coins, but I do want to understand more.

-Dave

I'm not 100% sure here, but I think a lot of this comes down to just mitigating the sheer latency.  To start with, it is my understanding that the second a new block is found, all the work that is currently being worked on for the old expires.  So you lose clock cycles/bandwidth there, trying to send out new work to all the workers currently connected so that they are all working on the current block.  Definitely don't want to be wasting clock cycles checking/updating work to worthless coins then.  Also, when you find a block, you need to get this from the accepted share that found it, to the blockchain and broadcast it as fast as the server/network will allow this.  Sometimes, a matter of a few fractions of a second could be the difference between a block being accepted or orphaned.  Better to keep the resources available for the coins that are worth it than waste it on coins that are more or less worthless.

Look, all I'm saying is that ghash.io figured it out and does fairly well with over 4 times the hash rate of BTCGuild. mmpool.org figured it out with even more coins. BTCGuild should be able to figure it out. I'd just like to see more feature parity with the biggest pool because I don't think the current system is going to get better on its own. If I were making some amount of my income based on how much market share my pool had, I would be looking for any way possible to keep that income reasonably high without exceeding a certain threshold that would endanger the network.

Pick ajax stats, split payouts, merged mining, something anything to close the gap. Just my 2 bits.

Yes, I am currently mining here because it is the most stable pool there is. I'm also mining here because I want this pool to survive. As the mining corporations gather more network share, more private miners will tend to consolidate to fewer higher hash rate pools to reduce their variance. p2pool and Eligius can survive because they don't rely on a fee to run. I'm just worried about BTCGuild eventually becoming an abandoned pool like a few others have. Maybe I'm thinking too far ahead or being alarmist, but I thought I would try to share my concerns while there is still a chance to do something about it. It really has much less to do with the income those coins would provide than it does with the perception of value the pool provides.

has not sold out
psahx
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154



View Profile
July 02, 2014, 03:11:21 AM
 #7278

Approximate Pool Luck
     24H    /     3D     /     1W     /     2W     /     1M     /     3M     / All Time
55.512% / 74.217% / 80.471% / 92.197% / 91.989% / 90.556% / 97.749%

      Cry            Cry            Cry             Cry            Cry            Cry            Cry



All we need now is just some GOOD LUCK...
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
July 02, 2014, 03:40:49 AM
 #7279

Approximate Pool Luck
     24H    /     3D     /     1W     /     2W     /     1M     /     3M     / All Time
55.512% / 74.217% / 80.471% / 92.197% / 91.989% / 90.556% / 97.749%

      Cry            Cry            Cry             Cry            Cry            Cry            Cry



All we need now is just some GOOD LUCK...

With only about 12 blocks/day expected, it doesn't take much to swing those numbers anymore.  Yesterday's 13 hour block pretty much guaranteed the weekly average is going to stay low until that round rolls out of the average, yet it wasn't a record in terms of shares vs diff.  It wasn't even 7x.  Yet that single day had a multiple-percent impact on the 1-month average because of how small the sample size is becoming.  During our last run of luck (Jun 18 - Jun 21) the 24H - 2W numbers were all over 100% again.

You're going to see more extremes now, that's what happens when you're a smaller share of the overall network.  The bad days will be extremely low, the good days will be much higher.  Each block is ~13% of expectation, so getting 4 blocks more than expected is now huge (160%), whereas in the past it was only a minor bump (115-125%).  In the same vein, 4 blocks less than expectation is now a 40% instead of 80%.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
sconklin321
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 109


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 05:14:38 AM
 #7280

Dev and IXC only add about 0.1% more to your profits and it's another coin you have to send to an exchange and then dump for Bitcoin (assuming you only want BTC).  I think the uptime and security affording by this pool and others like Bitminter and Elegius exceed the paltry add on of those coins.

Not counting uptime/security (unlikely to be affected), the real issue is extra load on the servers.  As you pointed out, DVC+IXC are virtually worthless.  I'm not even sure if they're 0.1% actually.  Adding extra coins to each pool server means each server will be wasting time accessing the SSDs/RAM for those coins, a few CPU cycles, and some bandwidth every time they get a block.  That will at least minimally impact bitcoind performance.  How much?  I can't say, and nobody else really can either.  But it is a non-0 impact, and for how worthless they are, I'm not willing to risk ANY performance for junk coins on BTC Guild.

I'm asking this because I don't know / understand not to be a pain:

Could they were on a physically separate server? With some of the databases I deal with 90%+ of the work is done on the main box 10% is done on other ones. The 10% does not "matter" it's what we term "live irrelevant data". It's for the programmers to use live data / connections to test work, if it all goes boom or lags behind no big deal the main database servers don't even know about it. The front end application servers here (I'm assuming the stratum servers for you) know about it and talk to it at the lowest priority, but if the test back end fails no big deal.

I don't know enough about the stratum protocol to know if that's even possible.

And no, I don't think it's worth the time to mine the other coins, but I do want to understand more.

-Dave

I'm not 100% sure here, but I think a lot of this comes down to just mitigating the sheer latency.  To start with, it is my understanding that the second a new block is found, all the work that is currently being worked on for the old expires.  So you lose clock cycles/bandwidth there, trying to send out new work to all the workers currently connected so that they are all working on the current block.  Definitely don't want to be wasting clock cycles checking/updating work to worthless coins then.  Also, when you find a block, you need to get this from the accepted share that found it, to the blockchain and broadcast it as fast as the server/network will allow this.  Sometimes, a matter of a few fractions of a second could be the difference between a block being accepted or orphaned.  Better to keep the resources available for the coins that are worth it than waste it on coins that are more or less worthless.

Look, all I'm saying is that ghash.io figured it out and does fairly well with over 4 times the hash rate of BTCGuild. mmpool.org figured it out with even more coins. BTCGuild should be able to figure it out. I'd just like to see more feature parity with the biggest pool because I don't think the current system is going to get better on its own. If I were making some amount of my income based on how much market share my pool had, I would be looking for any way possible to keep that income reasonably high without exceeding a certain threshold that would endanger the network.

Pick ajax stats, split payouts, merged mining, something anything to close the gap. Just my 2 bits.

Yes, I am currently mining here because it is the most stable pool there is. I'm also mining here because I want this pool to survive. As the mining corporations gather more network share, more private miners will tend to consolidate to fewer higher hash rate pools to reduce their variance. p2pool and Eligius can survive because they don't rely on a fee to run. I'm just worried about BTCGuild eventually becoming an abandoned pool like a few others have. Maybe I'm thinking too far ahead or being alarmist, but I thought I would try to share my concerns while there is still a chance to do something about it. It really has much less to do with the income those coins would provide than it does with the perception of value the pool provides.

I hear what you're saying, unfortunately we don't find the hashrate they do either.  When you have over 1/3 of the hashrate you can minimize your latency risk because you have a 1 in 3 chance of finding the next block and preventing it from being orphaned.  While we're at just shy of 10% of the network hashrate.  So, we have a 1 in 10 chance of finding the next block, so we need every advantage we can get.  Risking latency for some worthless coins isn't worth the risk of a block being orphaned because we're not likely to find the next block. I do get what you're saying though.
Pages: « 1 ... 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 [364] 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 ... 426 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!