[ANN] The First Litecoin PPS Pool (litecoinpool.org)

[pooler]

Ah, didn't know about the DDoS. That, combined with my spotty ISP, is probably what was attributing to my stale/invalid shares. Which resulted in some of my miners being banned. However, I am using Stratum.

How long does a temp ban last? I have to hook-up a monitor and mouse down every time to restart the miner. If the ban only lasts ten minutes or so, I won't bother going through the hassle knowing it will auto fix itself in a short span.

This type of ban only lasts 15 minutes.

[1714204548]

1714204548

[1714204548]

1714204548

[dermo]

hi,

I'm new on the pool and I have an issue with stale share

When a new block is detected I have 1 or 2 stale share not all the time but my ratio is going up since I'm mining on the pool

2013-07-09   643 kH/s   370,784   7,808 (2.06%)   1 (0.00%)   0.310695486528 LTC
2013-07-08   650 kH/s   845,768   10,528 (1.23%)   0 (0.00%)   0.694366868784 LTC
2013-07-07   650 kH/s   846,272   10,272 (1.20%)   0 (0.00%)   0.681653478016 LTC
2013-07-06   514 kH/s   671,504   6,368 (0.94%)   3 (0.00%)   0.540881698912 LTC

Any idea ?

Pinging nl2.litecoinpool.org [80.69.77.111] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 80.69.77.111: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.69.77.111: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.69.77.111: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.69.77.111: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 80.69.77.111:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 22ms, Maximum = 24ms, Average = 23ms

[pooler]

In my experience, stale shares can be caused by the following:

• Network latency. This is the most obvious cause. If a share takes too much time to get to the server it can easily turn stale.
• Block frequency. The more frequently the network is finding blocks, the more frequent the stales. This means that if the network difficulty is going up the stales will be higher.
• Server inefficiency. If the server is slow at handling submissions, some shares will turn stale. A high load can of course cause slowdowns.
• Software latency. Latency can also occur before the share leaves the miner, especially in the case of GPU mining. For example, if the intensity/aggressiveness parameter is set too high.

@dermo, in your case it seems that the first cause is not the problem, as your ping time to the server is low. The difficulty is currently rising but not dramatically, so I wouldn't consider cause #2 either. As regards cause #3, the average stale rate for the nl2 server is just 1%. The occurrence of stales is subject to probability, of course, but your 2% seems pretty high when compared to the average, so I would suggest that you check your miner's configuration.

[dermo]

In my experience, stale shares can be caused by the following:

• Network latency. This is the most obvious cause. If a share takes too much time to get to the server it can easily turn stale.
• Block frequency. The more frequently the network is finding blocks, the more frequent the stales. This means that if the network difficulty is going up the stales will be higher.
• Server inefficiency. If the server is slow at handling submissions, some shares will turn stale. A high load can of course cause slowdowns.
• Software latency. Latency can also occur before the share leaves the miner, especially in the case of GPU mining. For example, if the intensity/aggressiveness parameter is set too high.

@dermo, in your case it seems that the first cause is not the problem, as your ping time to the server is low. The difficulty is currently rising but not dramatically, so I wouldn't consider cause #2 either. As regards cause #3, the average stale rate for the nl2 server is just 1%. The occurrence of stales is subject to probability, of course, but your 2% seems pretty high when compared to the average, so I would suggest that you check your miner's configuration.

it was the question, what do I need to check on the conf 

[pooler]

it was the question, what do I need to check on the conf 

That depends on your software and GPU. It's hard to say what needs to be tweaked. As some like to say, fine-tuning scrypt GPU mining is an art, and experimentation is often the key to a successful setup.
I gave you a hint, though, when I mentioned intensity as a possible cause; generally speaking, anything that pushes the hardware too hard can cause latency.

[dermo]

it was the question, what do I need to check on the conf  

That depends on your software and GPU. It's hard to say what needs to be tweaked. As some like to say, fine-tuning scrypt GPU mining is an art, and experimentation is often the key to a successful setup.
I gave you a hint, though, when I mentioned intensity as a possible cause; generally speaking, anything that pushes the hardware too hard can cause latency.

ty I will try to play with the conf so
but I'm still disappointed because is only happening when a new block is detected

[dermo]

Nice touch for the hardware pooler

I've lowered the Intensivity

2013-07-10   647 kH/s   503,488   2,688 (0.53%)   0 (0.00%)   0.421893741696 LTC
2013-07-09   649 kH/s   841,784   14,162 (1.65%)   1 (0.00%)   0.705366168528 LTC

but I have changed too the pool server from nl2 to stratum+tcp://litecoinpool.org:3333/
I assume .org redirect to random nl nl1 or nl2 server
How can I found the server I'm related ?

Thanks in advance for you help 

[pooler]

Nice touch for the hardware pooler

I've lowered the Intensivity

2013-07-10   647 kH/s   503,488   2,688 (0.53%)   0 (0.00%)   0.421893741696 LTC
2013-07-09   649 kH/s   841,784   14,162 (1.65%)   1 (0.00%)   0.705366168528 LTC

but I have changed too the pool server from nl2 to stratum+tcp://litecoinpool.org:3333/
I assume .org redirect to random nl nl1 or nl2 server
How can I found the server I'm related ?

Thanks in advance for you help 

Nice!
cgminer displays the address of the server you're currently connected to; consider that the main server may redirect you to secondary servers for load-balancing purposes.

[pekv2]

Yup, I found out as well, lowering intensity, I went from 1.20% stales to  0.44%-0.55% stales. I lowered down to 15 from 19.

[dermo]

Hi

Any possibility to give the opportunity to the miner/worker to set the diff or maybe réajust the vardiff server side ?

up and down all the time :/

32/64/128 etc ...

32 calculation is too fast , have 4 rejects when a new block is found sometimes

96 or 128 is nice for 700kh/s

[pooler]

Any possibility to give the opportunity to the miner/worker to set the diff or maybe réajust the vardiff server side ?

up and down all the time :/

32/64/128 etc ...

32 calculation is too fast , have 4 rejects when a new block is found sometimes

96 or 128 is nice for 700kh/s

I don't think letting miners choose would be useful. I may try to make the difficulty adjustment less aggressive though.
In any case, since shares are weighted, there's no significant difference between getting 4 diff-32 shares and 1 diff-128 share, be they accepted or rejected.

[dermo]

Any possibility to give the opportunity to the miner/worker to set the diff or maybe réajust the vardiff server side ?

up and down all the time :/

32/64/128 etc ...

32 calculation is too fast , have 4 rejects when a new block is found sometimes

96 or 128 is nice for 700kh/s

I don't think letting miners choose would be useful. I may try to make the difficulty adjustment less aggressive though.
In any case, since shares are weighted, there's no significant difference between getting 4 diff-32 shares and 1 diff-128 share, be they accepted or rejected.

In any case, since shares are weighted, there's no significant difference between getting 4 diff-32 shares and 1 diff-128 share, be they accepted or rejected.

off course but if the calculation is more difficult maybe the rejected share appear less often when a new block is detected
just an idea I'm not very good with all of this

[pooler]

In any case, since shares are weighted, there's no significant difference between getting 4 diff-32 shares and 1 diff-128 share, be they accepted or rejected.

off course but if the calculation is more difficult maybe the rejected share appear less often when a new block is detected

Sure, as a higher share difficulty leads to fewer shares being found and submitted.
But that does not mean that a high share difficulty can help lowering the percentage of stale shares, which is what matters.

[dermo]

In any case, since shares are weighted, there's no significant difference between getting 4 diff-32 shares and 1 diff-128 share, be they accepted or rejected.

off course but if the calculation is more difficult maybe the rejected share appear less often when a new block is detected

Sure, as a higher share difficulty leads to fewer shares being found and submitted.
But that does not mean that a high share difficulty can help lowering the percentage of stale shares, which is what matters.

thanks for informations 

[galtbit]

Hello Pooler:  Can you explain how the "Teams" function works?  What are the benefits or drawbacks?

[pooler]

Hello Pooler:  Can you explain how the "Teams" function works?  What are the benefits or drawbacks?

Hi... Are you sure you're in the right thread? I don't think LitecoinPool.org has any such function.

[forsetifox]

Hey Pooler.

Someone from France (82.237.99.245/ brn91-2-82-237-99-245.fbx.proxad.net/ France) changed my litecoin wallet address today at 3:25 PM.

Wallet address was changed to LRpwvpGEhFTocxwhxkXC3miZB9XWUh3p8N.

[pooler]

Hey Pooler.

Someone from France (82.237.99.245/ brn91-2-82-237-99-245.fbx.proxad.net/ France) changed my litecoin wallet address today at 3:25 PM.

Wallet address was changed to LRpwvpGEhFTocxwhxkXC3miZB9XWUh3p8N.

I guess you received an automatic notification stating that your payout address was modified from some IP that is not yours.
That would mean your account was hacked by someone who managed to find out your password in some way or another. If you haven't done so already, you should change your password as soon as possible. For additional security, you may also want to enable two-factor authentication.

As far as I can see, the Litecoin address you mentioned doesn't match any pool account at the moment, and that particular French IP only accessed your account.

[forsetifox]

Hey Pooler.

Someone from France (82.237.99.245/ brn91-2-82-237-99-245.fbx.proxad.net/ France) changed my litecoin wallet address today at 3:25 PM.

Wallet address was changed to LRpwvpGEhFTocxwhxkXC3miZB9XWUh3p8N.

I guess you received an automatic notification stating that your payout address was modified from some IP that is not yours.
That would mean your account was hacked by someone who managed to find out your password in some way or another. If you haven't done so already, you should change your password as soon as possible. For additional security, you may also want to enable two-factor authentication.

As far as I can see, the Litecoin address you mentioned doesn't match any pool account at the moment, and that particular French IP only accessed your account.

Yeah. I changed my password and locked my address in there. Pretty strange I've never had a compromised account before.

So far the only connection I have right now is Pool-X. It's in France and I used the same password on there. I really doubt someone guessed my password.

[mmitech]

is it only me or the pool lost the half of its hash rate? we are @ 1,468 MH/s, and the LTC network in general has lost almost 3 Gh/s, I think that Mtgox news is doing more damage than good to LTC,.