[ANN][BURST] Burst | Efficient HDD Mining | New 1.2.3 Fork block 92000

[yellowduck2]

Burst holding up, hopefully we can see 200 sat

but bitcoin having a slow death

[1714303530]

1714303530

[Merick]

Just a general thought and question.

The time to solve a block appears to fluctuate a lot during the short term, I know that the majority of the blocks are close to the 4min time but it looks like the difficulty algorithm over or under compensates for the large fluctuations within the network.

We can easily see 5PB fluctuations during one day and I would guess an equally impressive number during each hour. More established coins like Bitcoin and Litecoin have a much more predictable and stable block generation time. With Burst I am seeing fluctuations in time such as:

BLOCK - mm:ss
54485 - 5:42
54484 - 0:19
54483 - 3:36
54482 0:02
54481 - 3:02
54480 - 7:05
54478 - 10:00
54477 - 0:33

Within an 8 block period of time a customer would have to wait between 19 seconds to 10 minutes for their first confirmation. When I look at the Litecoin network, their block generation time has fluctuated about 70 seconds max for the last month. (https://bitcoinwisdom.com/litecoin/difficulty) The grey line on the middle chart.

When BURST matures will this variance in block time rewards be an issue?  Possibly causing confidence concerns?  If a customer/merchant are expecting to see one confirmation within ~4min but it doesn't happen for 15min+ this could be an issue.  I've seen 15min+ blocks regularly.

Could the large swings in network capacity and almost cyclical nature of these swings be some very large solo miners taking advantage of this difficulty behavior?  Online Large amounts of plots to increase solo chances,  offline them for few blocks so the difficulty will drop and then online them again? (No idea on this, just trying to figure out why the network capacity fluctuates so much).

Just some thoughts and questions from a noob.

[Guidedog]

what is error code 6 when setting the reward recipient?

[ticote]

Looking the cex.io blog due the suspension of their could mining services, I found this:

https://i.imgur.com/GTdERv1.png

I dont´t know who is cryptov2, but thanks.

[burstcoin]

I was looking through the Burstcoin source code, and one thing that worries me about future scalability is the hard-coded MAX_NUMBER_OF_TRANSACTIONS constant, which limits the number of transactions per block to 255. This is similar to the 1 MB block size limit that is currently affecting bitcoin. Bitcoin is bound by this block size limit, and therefore the bitcoin network can only process a maximum of 7 transactions per second. Burstcoin has a similar limit right now, but its limit is 63 tx/sec. This gives Burstcoin more time to solve the problem - but since solving it requires a hard fork,  I think it would be better to solve the problem now while the coin is still young.

I think the best solution is something along the lines of Gavin Andreson's proposal to increase the maximum block size by 50% per year. I think in Burstcoin's case, the solution should be to increase the maximum number of transactions per block by 3.45% per month (which is about equal to a 50% increase per year).

This is an important change for the future scalability of Burstcoin. And it's an important change to make now, because the more the coin matures, the more difficult it will be to introduce a successful hard fork.

If you're interested, @burstcoin, I'd be willing to take a crack at coding up this change in behavior.

Bumping this since no one commented on it. Does anyone else think it's a good idea to raise the maximum blocksize formulaically over time?

While there certainly is a scalability issue, it won't get fixed just by raising that amount. A 4x increase on that number wouldn't be a bad starting point since nxt has that same per block limit at a 1 minute/block rate instead of 4, but regardless of what it is set to raising the limit only postpones the problem, and the real issue is that full network consensus is required for every transaction. Spamming every transaction to everyone will won't allow for high enough transaction rates for heavy usage over long-term.

are burst devs related to this solar scam?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=917737.msg10077014#msg10077014

shame on you..

you guys just killed your coin

You are jumping to conclusions. Where does it say that DEV is involved?

prove other wise.. sings are in the air

THEY MADE A DEAL TO PUMP BURST?? or they think users will pump

solar thing is koko acting alone.

[yellowduck2]

Bitcoin tank hard. Buying burst is the ONLY way to take full advantage of low btc price. Buying HDD now and mine its a very stupid idea because ROI its gonna be very very long.

[coinits]

Burst holding up, hopefully we can see 200 sat

but bitcoin having a slow death

I see nothing but opportunity for the 'little guy' for bitcoin. It will bottom and then buy buy buy. Never buy on the way down - ie don't try to catch a falling dagger. Watch it close and then start buying on the upswing. Also, big mining farms will not be able to take heavy losses so will shut down. The hobbyist or small farmer will be able to suffer a minor loss and mine the btc at a slightly lower difficulty and hope for future rewards. This is a good time to be in crypto. Weak hands will be tossed to the curb!

[bobafett]

perhaps this is the last and best time to buy burst cheap.

if the btc pricedrop comes to an end and the market look at an alternative coin thats cheap to mine without such power costs, burst will come to the focus.

[burstcoin]

Just a general thought and question.

The time to solve a block appears to fluctuate a lot during the short term, I know that the majority of the blocks are close to the 4min time but it looks like the difficulty algorithm over or under compensates for the large fluctuations within the network.

We can easily see 5PB fluctuations during one day and I would guess an equally impressive number during each hour. More established coins like Bitcoin and Litecoin have a much more predictable and stable block generation time. With Burst I am seeing fluctuations in time such as:

BLOCK - mm:ss
54485 - 5:42
54484 - 0:19
54483 - 3:36
54482 0:02
54481 - 3:02
54480 - 7:05
54478 - 10:00
54477 - 0:33

Within an 8 block period of time a customer would have to wait between 19 seconds to 10 minutes for their first confirmation. When I look at the Litecoin network, their block generation time has fluctuated about 70 seconds max for the last month. (https://bitcoinwisdom.com/litecoin/difficulty) The grey line on the middle chart.

When BURST matures will this variance in block time rewards be an issue?  Possibly causing confidence concerns?  If a customer/merchant are expecting to see one confirmation within ~4min but it doesn't happen for 15min+ this could be an issue.  I've seen 15min+ blocks regularly.

Could the large swings in network capacity and almost cyclical nature of these swings be some very large solo miners taking advantage of this difficulty behavior?  Online Large amounts of plots to increase solo chances,  offline them for few blocks so the difficulty will drop and then online them again? (No idea on this, just trying to figure out why the network capacity fluctuates so much).

Just some thoughts and questions from a noob.

It is most likely due to higher variance since the total amount of nonces being checked is lower.

If we were to assume 15PB network hashrate, each nonce takes up 256KB of storage, that's about 60 billion nonces checked per block, or divided out 250 million nonces per second. For btc even gpus can mine faster than 250 million nonces per second(250MH/s). Since the network hashrate is orders of magnitude higher for btc, it should have less variance.

[Merick]

Just a general thought and question.

The time to solve a block appears to fluctuate a lot during the short term, I know that the majority of the blocks are close to the 4min time but it looks like the difficulty algorithm over or under compensates for the large fluctuations within the network.

We can easily see 5PB fluctuations during one day and I would guess an equally impressive number during each hour. More established coins like Bitcoin and Litecoin have a much more predictable and stable block generation time. With Burst I am seeing fluctuations in time such as:

BLOCK - mm:ss
54485 - 5:42
54484 - 0:19
54483 - 3:36
54482 0:02
54481 - 3:02
54480 - 7:05
54478 - 10:00
54477 - 0:33

Within an 8 block period of time a customer would have to wait between 19 seconds to 10 minutes for their first confirmation. When I look at the Litecoin network, their block generation time has fluctuated about 70 seconds max for the last month. (https://bitcoinwisdom.com/litecoin/difficulty) The grey line on the middle chart.

When BURST matures will this variance in block time rewards be an issue?  Possibly causing confidence concerns?  If a customer/merchant are expecting to see one confirmation within ~4min but it doesn't happen for 15min+ this could be an issue.  I've seen 15min+ blocks regularly.

Could the large swings in network capacity and almost cyclical nature of these swings be some very large solo miners taking advantage of this difficulty behavior?  Online Large amounts of plots to increase solo chances,  offline them for few blocks so the difficulty will drop and then online them again? (No idea on this, just trying to figure out why the network capacity fluctuates so much).

Just some thoughts and questions from a noob.

It is most likely due to higher variance since the total amount of nonces being checked is lower.

If we were to assume 15PB network hashrate, each nonce takes up 256KB of storage, that's about 60 billion nonces checked per block, or divided out 250 million nonces per second. For btc even gpus can mine faster than 250 million nonces per second(250MH/s). Since the network hashrate is orders of magnitude higher for btc, it should have less variance.

Thank you for the response.
I keep forgetting that this coin is still very young, so essentially these block time swings are growing pains and as the network strengthens things should smooth out.

Keep up the good work BurstCoin

[THeZoiD]

are burst devs related to this solar scam?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=917737.msg10077014#msg10077014

shame on you..

you guys just killed your coin

You are jumping to conclusions. Where does it say that DEV is involved?

I agree, pretty harsh words. While I do concur that the project sounds far-fetched to say the least, perhaps the time has come to start thinking and going big.

As always, do your own due diligence and think for yourself.

solar scam...explain please?

solar is the first asset not related to burst mining...

[bobafett]

solar scam...explain please?

solar is the first asset not related to burst mining...

ONE user (koko) started this asset. The Dev already wrote, that he is not involeved in this asset.

So everything is fine!

PS: I also think this solar asset is not a good idea.

[THeZoiD]

solar scam...explain please?

solar is the first asset not related to burst mining...

ONE user (koko) started this asset. The Dev already wrote, that he is not involeved in this asset.

So everything is fine!

PS: I also think this solar asset is not a good idea.

why not?

solar power asic miners + profit from extra power sold

[bobafett]

because there is too less information about this asset and the complete business plan.

at the moment you throw money in a black hole hoping some money comes in future out.

thats the same if i say: i can create a asset for my new ferrari and i tell you i will drive people for money with my car and if i get the money from them, i will refund you. so who wants to give me some burst? pleaser PN!  

[Irontiga]

solar scam...explain please?

solar is the first asset not related to burst mining...

ONE user (koko) started this asset. The Dev already wrote, that he is not involeved in this asset.

So everything is fine!

PS: I also think this solar asset is not a good idea.

why not?

solar power asic miners + profit from extra power sold

I guarantee that u don't roi on it. All that will happen is u will watch the price of solarfarm asset drop to 0.1 burst in a short time. The only way for such an investment to work is for burst's price to remain stable. That's why it works in the real world, the banks help with that.

Here, in burst, a coinof $250k market cap, will either increase to milllions, or die. Nobody buys or mines a stagnant coin, part from btc/ltc due to the big market caps already. And most buyers are actually just waiting to sell for a higher price.

[Equate]

solar scam...explain please?

solar is the first asset not related to burst mining...

ONE user (koko) started this asset. The Dev already wrote, that he is not involeved in this asset.

So everything is fine!

PS: I also think this solar asset is not a good idea.

why not?

solar power asic miners + profit from extra power sold

Or it could be other way around and turn out to be another scam that will hurt burst's image.

[bensam123]

Is there any reason to plot a bunch of small files instead of one really big one? Some people are saying smaller plots (like 200GB) yield more often then a single large one.

[callmejack]

Is there any reason to plot a bunch of small files instead of one really big one? Some people are saying smaller plots (like 200GB) yield more often then a single large one.

some poolminer only submitted shares only after the whole plot has been parsed (not sure if this is still valid cause i mine solo).
from handling perspective during the plot optimization 200gb is good if your server has enough ram (200gb fs cache + 200gb for optimizer) to keep it in filecache after plotting and then read for the optimize process from there.
i have'nt tested it yet cause my plotting has been done before there was a gpu plotter and my storage is filled up since a long time ;-)

what i thought about during the last couple of days while evaluating possible farmoptions in pb scale is if it is possible to merge several smaller plotfiles into one big before you optimize them.
especially for cluster setups this may spread the load to several independant storage nodes if you plot from several  instances serving everything from ram to the optimize process.
i think of something (with small nonce count to explain) like nonce 0 to 511 concatenated with a plot containing nonce 512 to 1023 named xxxxxx_0_1023_512.
then these can get optimized from fs cache into xxxxxx_0_1023_1024 and combined with the next block xxxx_1024_2047_1024 to xxxxx_0_2047_2048 and so on.
i scripted this for some tests with small plots but i still have to verify that the concatenated plots are similar to a directly plotted big file.

 

  

[jamoes]

I was looking through the Burstcoin source code, and one thing that worries me about future scalability is the hard-coded MAX_NUMBER_OF_TRANSACTIONS constant, which limits the number of transactions per block to 255. This is similar to the 1 MB block size limit that is currently affecting bitcoin. Bitcoin is bound by this block size limit, and therefore the bitcoin network can only process a maximum of 7 transactions per second. Burstcoin has a similar limit right now, but its limit is 63 tx/sec. This gives Burstcoin more time to solve the problem - but since solving it requires a hard fork,  I think it would be better to solve the problem now while the coin is still young.

I think the best solution is something along the lines of Gavin Andreson's proposal to increase the maximum block size by 50% per year. I think in Burstcoin's case, the solution should be to increase the maximum number of transactions per block by 3.45% per month (which is about equal to a 50% increase per year).

This is an important change for the future scalability of Burstcoin. And it's an important change to make now, because the more the coin matures, the more difficult it will be to introduce a successful hard fork.

If you're interested, @burstcoin, I'd be willing to take a crack at coding up this change in behavior.

Bumping this since no one commented on it. Does anyone else think it's a good idea to raise the maximum blocksize formulaically over time?

While there certainly is a scalability issue, it won't get fixed just by raising that amount. A 4x increase on that number wouldn't be a bad starting point since nxt has that same per block limit at a 1 minute/block rate instead of 4, but regardless of what it is set to raising the limit only postpones the problem, and the real issue is that full network consensus is required for every transaction. Spamming every transaction to everyone will won't allow for high enough transaction rates for heavy usage over long-term.

I agree that simply changing the MAX_NUMBER_OF_TRANSACTIONS isn't enough to solve scalability issues. However, it is a necessary prerequisite. And, since changing this figure requires a hard fork, I think it is best to do the change sooner rather than later. The longer we wait, the more risky and difficult it becomes to execute the hard fork. It makes sense to get all the needed hard forks out the way now, while the complex politics of a large-market-cap coin haven't emerged yet.

Perhaps a pragmatic solution would be to introduce a second constant that represents a soft maximum. Similar to how Bitcoin has a hard limit of a 1 MB max block size, but also is configured by default to not create blocks larger than 250kb. The second value is user-configurable though, and some miners do indeed create larger blocks. This would allow us to solve all the other scalability issues as they come up without worrying about the complexity of a hard fork. The other scalability issues will also partially solve themselves over time as technology gets better.

In 15 years, and standard desktop machine will likely come with terrabytes of ram, petabytes of hard drive storage, and hundreds of CPU cores, and it will likely have at least a gigbit Internet connection. A machine like this should be able to easily handle 100k transactions per 4-minute block.

I really urge you to look into all the issues and politics surrounding the bitcoin max block size. We can avoid those issues in Burstcoin if we simply plan for the future now rather than putting off the changes until it is too late.

[coinits]

solar scam...explain please?

solar is the first asset not related to burst mining...

ONE user (koko) started this asset. The Dev already wrote, that he is not involeved in this asset.

So everything is fine!

PS: I also think this solar asset is not a good idea.

why not?

solar power asic miners + profit from extra power sold

Term too long and not enough progress in the process. Very high risk venture!