[CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers

[Igotcha]

Luck or not luck, I see some really difference for at least the last week in total 

[dadach]

there we go 4 consecutive blocks, that might erase the deficit a little

[elchorizo]

there we go 4 consecutive blocks, that might erase the deficit a little

Yup, I'm seeing payouts on PPLNS are better now then they have been past couple days.

[eleuthria]

I've fixed a bug that was affecting users that have NMC displayed.  Due to changes in how PPLNS shifts are recorded/cleaned up, and an oversight on the Dashboard, users with NMC displayed were seeing their 'Current Shares' stat reset constantly.  This didn't actually affect their shares being included on PPLNS, it was just an error in displaying the shares in the current shift until it was completed.

This bug has been around a while, but probably wasn't noticed/reported due to the fact that until recently it was not possible to merged mine with PPLNS as the payment method.


As an aside:  Yay for blocks getting solved!

[elchorizo]

I've fixed a bug that was affecting users that have NMC displayed.  Due to changes in how PPLNS shifts are recorded/cleaned up, and an oversight on the Dashboard, users with NMC displayed were seeing their 'Current Shares' stat reset constantly.  This didn't actually affect their shares being included on PPLNS, it was just an error in displaying the shares in the current shift until it was completed.

This bug has been around a while, but probably wasn't noticed/reported due to the fact that until recently it was not possible to merged mine with PPLNS as the payment method.


As an aside:  Yay for blocks getting solved!

Wow, I didn't even know you supported NMC mining. This is the first I've heard of it and sure enough I check my settings page and I see the NMC stuff there. Didn't notice it was even there last time I was in the interface.

Perhaps updating the FAQ or something might be in order? I see no mention of it anywhere else on the site

[eleuthria]

I've fixed a bug that was affecting users that have NMC displayed.  Due to changes in how PPLNS shifts are recorded/cleaned up, and an oversight on the Dashboard, users with NMC displayed were seeing their 'Current Shares' stat reset constantly.  This didn't actually affect their shares being included on PPLNS, it was just an error in displaying the shares in the current shift until it was completed.

This bug has been around a while, but probably wasn't noticed/reported due to the fact that until recently it was not possible to merged mine with PPLNS as the payment method.


As an aside:  Yay for blocks getting solved!

Wow, I didn't even know you supported NMC mining. This is the first I've heard of it and sure enough I check my settings page and I see the NMC stuff there. Didn't notice it was even there last time I was in the interface.

Perhaps updating the FAQ or something might be in order? I see no mention of it anywhere else on the site

NMC merged mining is still only available on one getwork server (mergedmining.btcguild.com:8332).  I've purposely hid it in the past because I want to get rid of getwork.  Recently I have given *some* thought to adding merged mining of the various altcoins that support it, but too early to tell.  I've been getting bit by the coding bug recently, and last time that happened I created a new mining protocol+pool server...then replaced that mining protocol with Stratum to avoid a protocol war.

[elchorizo]

NMC merged mining is still only available on one getwork server (mergedmining.btcguild.com:8332).  I've purposely hid it in the past because I want to get rid of getwork.  Recently I have given *some* thought to adding merged mining of the various altcoins that support it, but too early to tell.  I've been getting bit by the coding bug recently, and last time that happened I created a new mining protocol+pool server...then replaced that mining protocol with Stratum to avoid a protocol war.

If the normal stratum server supported it I think that would be awesome!

[jdany]

I've fixed a bug that was affecting users that have NMC displayed.  Due to changes in how PPLNS shifts are recorded/cleaned up, and an oversight on the Dashboard, users with NMC displayed were seeing their 'Current Shares' stat reset constantly.  This didn't actually affect their shares being included on PPLNS, it was just an error in displaying the shares in the current shift until it was completed.

This bug has been around a while, but probably wasn't noticed/reported due to the fact that until recently it was not possible to merged mine with PPLNS as the payment method.


As an aside:  Yay for blocks getting solved!

I got a sense that you were stressing over the lack of production last night. 
Thanks for the effort you put in.
It's appreciated.

[eleuthria]

I'm doing some background work right now.  Back in June of 2012, I "pruned" the database of users that hadn't logged in since the change to PPS.  Since then, user accounts and pool workers have mostly been accumulating rapidly for almost a year.  Many accounts have not logged in since early 2012.

I'm currently in the process of pruning the database of any users who have not logged in for 1 year.  This is a complete removal from all active database tables.  A full backup was done prior to starting this obviously.  The criteria for being pruned is as follows:

1) The account has not been logged into for 12 months.
2) The account has not had any mining done for 6 months.
Both of these must be true for an account to be pruned.

My hope is this will speed up certain scripts, specifically the graph generation script and the automatic payouts.  Users who try to log in after their account has been pruned will receive a notice of what happened, and told to email me to begin an account restoration.  All data being removed is fully recoverable if the user ever decides to return.

[dogie]

I'm doing some background work right now.  Back in June of 2012, I "pruned" the database of users that hadn't logged in since the change to PPS.  Since then, user accounts and pool workers have mostly been accumulating rapidly for almost a year.  Many accounts have not logged in since early 2012.

I'm currently in the process of pruning the database of any users who have not logged in for 1 year.  This is a complete removal from all active database tables.  A full backup was done prior to starting this obviously.  The criteria for being pruned is as follows:

1) The account has not been logged into for 12 months.
2) The account has not had any mining done for 6 months.
Both of these must be true for an account to be pruned.

My hope is this will speed up certain scripts, specifically the graph generation script and the automatic payouts.  Users who try to log in after their account has been pruned will receive a notice of what happened, and told to email me to begin an account restoration.  All data being removed is fully recoverable if the user ever decides to return.

Obviously I don't believe you're doing anything remotely negative, but how are you handling inactive accounts with balances?

[eleuthria]

Obviously I don't believe you're doing anything remotely negative, but how are you handling inactive accounts with balances?

All the data is still in place if the user ever returns.  Users have come back after over a year of inactivity and found hundreds (or thousands) of dollars worth of coins waiting for them.  Forcing payouts to the last address on file has been suggested in the past, my only concern about that is that for inactive accounts, a SIGNIFICANT number of users back then were using e-wallet services or one-time exchange addresses.  As a result, these addresses simply can't be accessed by the actual owner of the account anymore (theft/stolen/no longer valid).

My policy so far has been that if BTC Guild ever needs to close its doors, I will leave the site open at least 6 months in a withdrawal-only mode for users to reclaim whatever was left in the accounts.  A withdrawal-only website would not be costly to keep online for quite some time.

[organofcorti]

Obviously I don't believe you're doing anything remotely negative, but how are you handling inactive accounts with balances?

All the data is still in place if the user ever returns.

Pretty sure I had an account for ohhhh, must have been a few hundred btc at least

[eleuthria]

Obviously I don't believe you're doing anything remotely negative, but how are you handling inactive accounts with balances?

All the data is still in place if the user ever returns.

Pretty sure I had an account for ohhhh, must have been a few hundred btc at least

There was one user that came back to an account of 80~90 BTC during the >$100 rally.  I bet that made them pretty happy .

[dogie]

Obviously I don't believe you're doing anything remotely negative, but how are you handling inactive accounts with balances?

All the data is still in place if the user ever returns.  Users have come back after over a year of inactivity and found hundreds (or thousands) of dollars worth of coins waiting for them.  Forcing payouts to the last address on file has been suggested in the past, my only concern about that is that for inactive accounts, a SIGNIFICANT number of users back then were using e-wallet services or one-time exchange addresses.  As a result, these addresses simply can't be accessed by the actual owner of the account anymore (theft/stolen/no longer valid).

My policy so far has been that if BTC Guild ever needs to close its doors, I will leave the site open at least 6 months in a withdrawal-only mode for users to reclaim whatever was left in the accounts.  A withdrawal-only website would not be costly to keep online for quite some time.

What you could do after the 6 months is use all the accounts with balance to slowly fund the site. So if there is 1k in the pot, start drawing from that equally from the accounts.

[dogie]

24 Hour Earnings 2.13960759 on 2.43 theoretical, moving up quite fast. Looks like its recovering.

[eleuthria]

24 Hour Earnings 2.13960759 on 2.43 theoretical, moving up quite fast. Looks like its recovering.

Yep.  Like I've said in the past, 24-hour earnings with PPLNS is time-delayed ~6 hours due to the mature time on PPLNS.  Actually, it's closer to a 10-hour delay now that ASICMINER is moving more into solo mining.  Still very short (shorter than any other PPLNS pool I think).  Luck did bounce back fairly well, though we're still going to need more of this type of luck to make up for the negative trend the pool has been on.


Very likely going to get into merged mining testing next weekend.  If I can figure out a good way to implement it in the pool software, I will probably go with multiple altcoins similar to what bitparking does.  Hopefully that will keep people excited even when luck is sour.

[elchorizo]

24 Hour Earnings 2.13960759 on 2.43 theoretical, moving up quite fast. Looks like its recovering.

Yep.  Like I've said in the past, 24-hour earnings with PPLNS is time-delayed ~6 hours due to the mature time on PPLNS.  Actually, it's closer to a 10-hour delay now that ASICMINER is moving more into solo mining.  Still very short (shorter than any other PPLNS pool I think).  Luck did bounce back fairly well, though we're still going to need more of this type of luck to make up for the negative trend the pool has been on.


Very likely going to get into merged mining testing next weekend.  If I can figure out a good way to implement it in the pool software, I will probably go with multiple altcoins similar to what bitparking does.  Hopefully that will keep people excited even when luck is sour.

Free namecoin never hurts! Thats why I'm so stoked about it.

[Igotcha]

I am just curious, why is the overall pool speed dropping from 37,000 GH/s to 30,000 GH/s within a few days?

Is that due to people leave pools and mine solo with asics for example?

[Subo1977]

I am just curious, why is the overall pool speed dropping from 37,000 GH/s to 30,000 GH/s within a few days?

Is that due to people leave pools and mine solo with asics for example?

I think its ASicminer which left the Pool

[americandesi]

24 Hour Earnings 2.13960759 on 2.43 theoretical, moving up quite fast. Looks like its recovering.

Under normal circumstances.. what is the avg variance when using PPLNS to the theoretical value.?
An estimated ball park figure will do.!