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

[LazyOtto]

This will really help with the difficulty spike eating away profits.  Thank you for doing this.

It usually cause severe Bitcoin mining instability.  I'm not at all happy about this.

BitParking and BitMinter are both dealing with it without significant instability issues.

For the recent while.

They both have had some teething pains.

IIRC, Ozcoin never solved the problem adequately.

[lemonys]

This will really help with the difficulty spike eating away profits.  Thank you for doing this.

28% increase in a few minutes...  4 blocks to go.  Ugghhh.   

[eleuthria]

what does it mean when your cards hash but the shares are not accepted?

The most common report of this is from GUI Miner users that are having Hardware Errors/Verification Failed errors.  These are local problems, meaning the miner is having issues and isn't even sending the shares to the pool at all.  You can confirm if this is the problem by going to View -> Show Console, and watching that for a few minutes.  The most common reason for this is due to bad driver versions.  I am not able to give much guidance on what the best versions to use are, I haven't mined on GPUs in a very long time.

[os2sam]

This will really help with the difficulty spike eating away profits.  Thank you for doing this.

It usually cause severe Bitcoin mining instability.  I'm not at all happy about this.

Merged mining doesn't cause instability unless the implementation is poor.  It can cause minor (<0.1%) drops in BTC due to added latency when preparing new work after a longpoll.  However, I'm specifically implementing this in a way where namecoin efficiency is sacrificed to let the pool run without skipping a beat even if namecoind is frozen/slow/crashed.  The only efficiency change will be work messages from the pool require ~50 bytes of extra data inside the coinbase.


UPDATE:  Phase 1 went well.  I've got the pool creating the bitcoin side of merged mining (coinbase message that includes the mm signal + namecoin block hash) while still successfully creating blocks.  Tomorrow I'll be working on building the NMC block with the MM headers included.  It's very likely this can be done by the weekend unless I run into unexpected problems.  Everything is in place so the entire namecoin side is running in a separate thread that will not block the primary pool/bitcoin threads.

Putting aside my general dislike for merged mining for a minute, maybe .

What is unleashing 30 to 40T(Terra)Hash/s on Alt Coin chains going to do to them?  Is it going to make the alt coin miners happy campers?

Just wondering.
Thanks,
Sam

[dogie]

This will really help with the difficulty spike eating away profits.  Thank you for doing this.

It usually cause severe Bitcoin mining instability.  I'm not at all happy about this.

Merged mining doesn't cause instability unless the implementation is poor.  It can cause minor (<0.1%) drops in BTC due to added latency when preparing new work after a longpoll.  However, I'm specifically implementing this in a way where namecoin efficiency is sacrificed to let the pool run without skipping a beat even if namecoind is frozen/slow/crashed.  The only efficiency change will be work messages from the pool require ~50 bytes of extra data inside the coinbase.


UPDATE:  Phase 1 went well.  I've got the pool creating the bitcoin side of merged mining (coinbase message that includes the mm signal + namecoin block hash) while still successfully creating blocks.  Tomorrow I'll be working on building the NMC block with the MM headers included.  It's very likely this can be done by the weekend unless I run into unexpected problems.  Everything is in place so the entire namecoin side is running in a separate thread that will not block the primary pool/bitcoin threads.

Putting aside my general dislike for merged mining for a minute, maybe .

What is unleashing 30 to 40T(Terra)Hash/s on Alt Coin chains going to do to them?  Is it going to make the alt coin miners happy campers?

Just wondering.
Thanks,
Sam

Ofc not, we're increasing network hash rate dramatically.

Request: Can we set "display units" as a default across all pages? I have 7 active workers and have to keep expanding it to show more each time. I can also see on slow page loads that it does load them all, just hides them again.

[eleuthria]

Request: Can we set "display units" as a default across all pages? I have 7 active workers and have to keep expanding it to show more each time. I can also see on slow page loads that it does load them all, just hides them again.

The # of items in data tables should be saving as a cookie so that it remembers your settings when alternating pages.  I'll take another look at the dashboard to see if something is forcing those back to default size.  The way it works it the whole table loads with the page, then the javascript condenses it and splits it into pages, which is why on a slow load you might see the whole table before it shrinks.

[dogie]

Request: Can we set "display units" as a default across all pages? I have 7 active workers and have to keep expanding it to show more each time. I can also see on slow page loads that it does load them all, just hides them again.

The # of items in data tables should be saving as a cookie so that it remembers your settings when alternating pages.  I'll take another look at the dashboard to see if something is forcing those back to default size.  The way it works it the whole table loads with the page, then the javascript condenses it and splits it into pages, which is why on a slow load you might see the whole table before it shrinks.

Sometimes it is remembering, but possibly every 4-48 hours it forgets.

[eleuthria]

Request: Can we set "display units" as a default across all pages? I have 7 active workers and have to keep expanding it to show more each time. I can also see on slow page loads that it does load them all, just hides them again.

The # of items in data tables should be saving as a cookie so that it remembers your settings when alternating pages.  I'll take another look at the dashboard to see if something is forcing those back to default size.  The way it works it the whole table loads with the page, then the javascript condenses it and splits it into pages, which is why on a slow load you might see the whole table before it shrinks.

Sometimes it is remembering, but possibly every 4-48 hours it forgets.

Hmm, I bet the cookies don't refresh themselves.  I'll take a look and make it set the cookies to something like 1-year in the future if that's the issue.

[os2sam]

Ofc not

What does that mean?

[dogie]

Ofc not

What does that mean?

Of course not.

[os2sam]

Ofc not

What does that mean?

Of course not.

Ah, I see.
TTFN

[doublec]

What is unleashing 30 to 40T(Terra)Hash/s on Alt Coin chains going to do to them?  Is it going to make the alt coin miners happy campers?

Namecoin is currently 21THash/s so you'd be doubling it which probably won't have a great effect. A bigger change would be if ixcoin and devcoin were added. They're currently 6 Thash/s. Devcoin's price is very low so it'd be interesting to see what happens when it drops sub-satoshi level.

[runlinux]

Boy am I glad I locked my email and payout address. I received a random password reset email this morning. Needless to say, I logged in, requested it myself from the site, then REALLY changed my password.

Never click links in an email, especially when you didn't request it!

[rammy2k2]

can u please make merged stratum ? it would be really nice! 

[os2sam]

can u please make merged stratum ? it would be really nice! 

Haven't been paying attention much lately huh?

Look at the previous couple pages of this thread.

[wtfvanity]

can u please make merged stratum ? it would be really nice! 

Haven't been paying attention much lately huh?

Look at the previous couple pages of this thread.

Not even a couple, just go back one.

[rammy2k2]

can u please make merged stratum ? it would be really nice! 

Haven't been paying attention much lately huh?

Look at the previous couple pages of this thread.

Not even a couple, just go back one.

LOL, u got that right ! GREAT news !

[johnyj]

I just came over this thread

Sabotaging Mining Pools
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94392.0

Is it possible that one single entity (for example a large mining equipment manufacturer) using part of its large mining hash power to attack the pools and make them unprofitable while at the same time improve their own pool's mining profit?

[eleuthria]

Merged mining still in progress.  Lots of distractions during the week that pushed back a working implementation.  Still hopeful to have it working on testnet this weekend and likely deployed on the live Stratum servers early next week.

[rammy2k2]

Merged mining still in progress.  Lots of distractions during the week that pushed back a working implementation.  Still hopeful to have it working on testnet this weekend and likely deployed on the live Stratum servers early next week.

+1