[~1000 GH/sec] BTC Guild - 0% Fee Pool, LP, SSL, Full Precision, and More

[hugolp]

Wow. We're on a super long 6 hour block!
And today was looking so good til now.

Hopefully is another of the recurrent hang ups of the scripts that report the data.

[1714025989]

1714025989

[fcmatt]

Wow. We're on a super long 6 hour block!
And today was looking so good til now.

Hopefully is another of the recurrent hang ups of the scripts that report the data.

One can only hope or today is basically shot.

The odds of us having an 8 hour block with the current pool speed is really really tiny...

By using this website: http://digbtc.com/ it seems like that is an awful lot of unclaimed blocks
for btcguild not to have grabbed one or more.

[eleuthria]

I'm adding a new check to the new block code to prevent this from happening in the future.  We had a 600 share round that lasted barely over 2 seconds, so US West hadn't sync'd the round before the round ended.

The new check will ignore these server sync issues if the total shares of a round are under 15,000 [which is about 1 minute on one server].

The blocks from last night have now been properly calculated.

[fcmatt]

I'm adding a new check to the new block code to prevent this from happening in the future.  We had a 600 share round that lasted barely over 2 seconds, so US West hadn't sync'd the round before the round ended.

The new check will ignore these server sync issues if the total shares of a round are under 15,000 [which is about 1 minute on one server].

The blocks from last night have now been properly calculated.

all is forgiven. especially when i squeaked in 5 shares out of 663 which resulted in a .377 payout. :-)

[hugolp]

I'm adding a new check to the new block code to prevent this from happening in the future.  We had a 600 share round that lasted barely over 2 seconds, so US West hadn't sync'd the round before the round ended.

The new check will ignore these server sync issues if the total shares of a round are under 15,000 [which is about 1 minute on one server].

The blocks from last night have now been properly calculated.

Did we actually had a 6:45 one, 10+ million shares? is that some kind of record?

[fcmatt]

I'm adding a new check to the new block code to prevent this from happening in the future.  We had a 600 share round that lasted barely over 2 seconds, so US West hadn't sync'd the round before the round ended.

The new check will ignore these server sync issues if the total shares of a round are under 15,000 [which is about 1 minute on one server].

The blocks from last night have now been properly calculated.

Did we actually had a 6:45 one, 10+ million shares? is that some kind of record?

Nope. It is actually happened before and to multiple pools. It is almost becoming common to see
one every month or what not.

[hugolp]

Nope. It is actually happened before and to multiple pools. It is almost becoming common to see
one every month or what not.

Well, that puts us on the negative on this round again. Im kind of getting use to it.

[gnar1ta$]

I'm adding a new check to the new block code to prevent this from happening in the future.  We had a 600 share round that lasted barely over 2 seconds, so US West hadn't sync'd the round before the round ended.

The new check will ignore these server sync issues if the total shares of a round are under 15,000 [which is about 1 minute on one server].

The blocks from last night have now been properly calculated.

Did we actually had a 6:45 one, 10+ million shares? is that some kind of record?

Nope. It is actually happened before and to multiple pools. It is almost becoming common to see
one every month or what not.

Mineco completed a 11.9 million share round recently....that sucked.

[eleuthria]

Stats are updating again, was informed of the apache exploit regarding the request range header.  Restarted apache during a stat update, which sets a switch to stop the server from running it multiple times simultaneously.  Fixed the switch and now everything is back to normal.

[eleuthria]

I'm pleased to announce the return of EU (DE) servers.  These servers are actually running on new load balancing setup that should completely eliminate long poll delays due to overloaded network interfaces.  You can use the new servers by just entering 'btcguild.com' as the server [not uswest./uscentral., just btcguild.com).  If you want to make sure you always point at these servers unless they are removed, you can also use de.btcguild.com

[BookLover]

Are you planning on implementing difficulty 2 or >2 shares soon?  I was really looking forward to that feature when you first announced it.

P.S. Thanks for the great pool.(soon to be absolutely amazing once the pool's luck improves )

[fcmatt]

Are you planning on implementing difficulty 2 or >2 shares soon?  I was really looking forward to that feature when you first announced it.

P.S. Thanks for the great pool.(soon to be absolutely amazing once the pool's luck improves )

I doubt he will because load is not such a big deal anymore. The code, pushpoold i think it is called, has now
been optimized to handle much more load then before.

[PcChip]

"...has now been optimized to handle much more load then before."

Like a bukakke robot, if you will.

[Syke]

Is there something wrong with the stats website? I haven't seen updates in a few hours.

[BookLover]

Are you planning on implementing difficulty 2 or >2 shares soon?  I was really looking forward to that feature when you first announced it.

P.S. Thanks for the great pool.(soon to be absolutely amazing once the pool's luck improves )

I doubt he will because load is not such a big deal anymore. The code, pushpoold i think it is called, has now
been optimized to handle much more load then before.

You are misunderstanding my motive for difficulty 2 or >2 shares.  I desire to have this feature so it will lower MY bandwidth usage.(I'm running on limited bandwidth per 24 section )  If eleuthria will implement difficulty 2 or >2 shares, then I can run more computers on his pool without having to worry about my internet being ground to a near halt.

[fcmatt]

Are you planning on implementing difficulty 2 or >2 shares soon?  I was really looking forward to that feature when you first announced it.

P.S. Thanks for the great pool.(soon to be absolutely amazing once the pool's luck improves )

I doubt he will because load is not such a big deal anymore. The code, pushpoold i think it is called, has now
been optimized to handle much more load then before.

You are misunderstanding my motive for difficulty 2 or >2 shares.  I desire to have this feature so it will lower MY bandwidth usage.(I'm running on limited bandwidth per 24 section )  If eleuthria will implement difficulty 2 or >2 shares, then I can run more computers on his pool without having to worry about my internet being ground to a near halt.

I think you are the first person to ever complain about bandwidth usage when it comes to mining. One could get away with 10 computers
on a 128K ISDN line and i doubt it would stress it much. Low latency is more of a key then a fat pipe.

But i can be wrong. I will admit I am not graphing my switch ports my miners are connected to. I consider the bandwidth they use
to be trivial.

So to implement diff 2 shares because you are on dialup?

[BookLover]

I think you are misunderstanding my situation.  I am limited to ~200MB per 24h or my connection will be grounded to a near halt.(This limit is not just on my miners and includes normal data consumption)

[fcmatt]

I think you are misunderstanding my situation.  I am limited to ~200MB per 24h or my connection will be grounded to a near halt.(This limit is not just on my miners and includes normal data consumption)

Then I guess it would be nice to know how much the miners are using versus your other internet use?
How many MB do the miners use in a day for how many video cards/PCs?

And you must realize that you are in a very unique situation and cutting down bandwidth was not the goal of diff 2 shares.

[eleuthria]

I think you are misunderstanding my situation.  I am limited to ~200MB per 24h or my connection will be grounded to a near halt.(This limit is not just on my miners and includes normal data consumption)

I'm sorry, but at this time I do not plan on returning to the plan of implementing diff=2 shares.  The downstream bandwith would be basically the same on your end, only the upstream would be reduced.  I can't imagine what kind of terrible ISP you have that has bandwith caps at 6 GB/month, unless you're mining on a cell phone plan?


In other news, the EU (DE) cluster just doubled in size.  I'm moving US West miners to that server at this time, in an attempt to save on costs while improving overall pool performance.

[BookLover]

I think you are misunderstanding my situation.  I am limited to ~200MB per 24h or my connection will be grounded to a near halt.(This limit is not just on my miners and includes normal data consumption)

Then I guess it would be nice to know how much the miners are using versus your other internet use?
How many MB do the miners use in a day for how many video cards/PCs?

And you must realize that you are in a very unique situation and cutting down bandwidth was not the goal of diff 2 shares.

Each miner uses about ~36MB per day.

I know my I'm in a very unique situation.  I'm not whining, complaining, or otherwise pitifully begging, I'm just asking if eleuthria ever plans on implementing difficulty 2 or >2 shares.

I think you are misunderstanding my situation.  I am limited to ~200MB per 24h or my connection will be grounded to a near halt.(This limit is not just on my miners and includes normal data consumption)

I'm sorry, but at this time I do not plan on returning to the plan of implementing diff=2 shares.  The downstream bandwith would be basically the same on your end, only the upstream would be reduced.  I can't imagine what kind of terrible ISP you have that has bandwith caps at 6 GB/month, unless you're mining on a cell phone plan?


In other news, the EU (DE) cluster just doubled in size.  I'm moving US West miners to that server at this time, in an attempt to save on costs while improving overall pool performance.

Thanks for letting me know, I guess I'll have to figure something else out.

P.S. It's not a cell phone plan I'm just in a place where it's really hard to get a decent internet connection.

P.P.S. Do you know if it is possible to set up my miners to run through a central computer to your pool or if that would even decrease MB consumption?