KanoPool since 2014 🐈 - PPLNS and Solo 0.5% fee - Worldwide - 2437 blocks

[tholmes4005]

I know this is off topic.  Sorry, not sorry.  Everyone seems to brag about Canaan vs Bitmain so I want to try the new 721 out.  I ordered it and then was told I couldn't pay with Bitcoin.  How can Canaan not accept bitcoin for purchase of there miners?!  Just had to pay a $100 wire fee.  WTF!  Sorry just had to vent and this board seems to have a larger amount of sensible people than others.

[firetreeactual]

Just got a followup message from Jon at Canaan via a ticket...he asked if I would share this. Sounded reasonable...so here's the clip.

"Hey if you are on bitcointalk, could you let people know we are hearing their concerns. Best way for people to let us know what we should support is to be a customer of our new product. And second, we will do our best to support our customers 🙂 We are rolling out new features and support in private, not in public 🙂"

I mentioned that, next time around, if I had to pay with a wire transfer it would not happen. Aside from the cost, I have to drive 30 mi on narrow two-lane island road just to get to a bank that can do a wire transfer. Ain't gonna happen. I paid for my A6s with PayPal, but something changed internally there. I don't know what (probably don't want to know). I think, however, they seem to be aware the natives are restless.  

I'm not an apologist for Canaan. They've treated me very well so far, and have, when queried directly, given honest answers. I don't ask for much more in this biz.

EDIT: I also asked about the new diagram posted about connecting the A721 (basically the same as an A6), re why it showed only four PCIe cables per box, leaving four inputs unused. He said only four were necessary, and that further advisement on features would be forthcoming. The whole thing is quite intriguing.

[philipma1957]

I am still working with them for paypal or btc.  Maybe it will change.

[bitgameSolo]

I'm looking at my stats on ckpool for an underclocked s7 at 2.86 Th/s. It has been running about 12 hours and I wanted to know if my invalids are reasonable. It says stale: 28,290/10 ; duplicate: 2,829/1. For a total invalid rate of 0.206%. I think this is reasonable but if anyone can confirm I would appreciate it. The overall pool rate for invalids is higher.

[firetreeactual]

I'm looking at my stats on ckpool for an underclocked s7 at 2.86 Th/s. It has been running about 12 hours and I wanted to know if my invalids are reasonable. It says stale: 28,290/10 ; duplicate: 2,829/1. For a total invalid rate of 0.206%. I think this is reasonable but if anyone can confirm I would appreciate it. The overall pool rate for invalids is higher.

Well...my S7s at Labrador (three of them) run all the way from 0.08 to 0.22 on invalids; the older S7 (a two-fan) does better for what reason I don't know. They're all set the same. I've seen many comments on how S7s can vary wildly in performance from box to box. Some of this depends on your Internet connection as well, though. Dunno why you're underclocking; I just run mine at stock, and they're fine...but they're in a controlled environment. When I had them at home they were very sensitive to heat. Never did underclock, though. Just ran enough fans to resurrect the Hindenburg... 

Mine on...

[clgrissom3]

I'm looking at my stats on ckpool for an underclocked s7 at 2.86 Th/s. It has been running about 12 hours and I wanted to know if my invalids are reasonable. It says stale: 28,290/10 ; duplicate: 2,829/1. For a total invalid rate of 0.206%. I think this is reasonable but if anyone can confirm I would appreciate it. The overall pool rate for invalids is higher.

You are less than the pool average so there's nothing to worry about.

[clgrissom3]

Block by rishat with 4.22TH/s! Wow, good job! Welcome to the Acclaim Board with your 1st Kano block!  This is our 2nd of the day!

[clgrissom3]

Block by kupax with 29.26TH/s!  This is his 3rd Kano block and our 1st of the new day!  

I am loving all of these 13+ blocks!  

And we are nearly all green again; only the Last 500 Blocks line to go! 

[wmabern]

Block by kupax with 29.26TH/s!  This is his 3rd Kano block and our 1st of the new day!  

I am loving all of these 13+ blocks!  

And we are nearly all green again; only the Last 500 Blocks line to go! 

KOOL!! 

Come on TEAM, let's make this a FOUR-BLOCK WEDNESDAY!!!! (Or MORE!) 

WE can do it!!!

Come on BLOCKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!

[clgrissom3]

Block by cobramining!  This is his 7th Kano block and our 2nd of the day! 

[wmabern]

BLOCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[philipma1957]

you know I had a hunch and did a small rental for a bit more hash.  nice

[clgrissom3]

Kano, what does this mean?  I'm still scratching my head over this one...same block number but different time stamp...

Code:

[2016-11-22 20:40:46] Pool 0 message: Block 440140 solved by cobramining.C1-2 @
ckpool!
[2016-11-22 20:40:47] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2016-11-22 20:40:50] Pool 0 message: Block 440140 solved by cobramining.C1-2 @
ckpool!

[wmabern]

Loving the GREEN!  

Let's get this next block too! It's doable!!!

[kano]

Kano, what does this mean?  I'm still scratching my head over this one...same block number but different time stamp...

Code:

[2016-11-22 20:40:46] Pool 0 message: Block 440140 solved by cobramining.C1-2 @
ckpool!
[2016-11-22 20:40:47] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2016-11-22 20:40:50] Pool 0 message: Block 440140 solved by cobramining.C1-2 @
ckpool!

His miner submitted the block twice.
A 'duplicate' is accepted as a block since it's not impossible for the main pool node to see the block after it's main bitcoind sees it
(unlikely but not impossible)
CKDB spits out lotsa extra messages when this happens also - but I've coded it so that it just means one block properly in both situations

Edit: here's the main CKDB message related to it:

Code:

[2016-11-23 01:40:49.932+00] blocks_add(): Duplicate (1-Confirm) blocks ignored, Status: New, Block: 440140/...00001c50e5b79b5e/2016-11-23 01:40:49.930201+00

[clgrissom3]

Kano, what does this mean?  I'm still scratching my head over this one...same block number but different time stamp...

Code:

[2016-11-22 20:40:46] Pool 0 message: Block 440140 solved by cobramining.C1-2 @
ckpool!
[2016-11-22 20:40:47] Stratum from pool 0 detected new block
[2016-11-22 20:40:50] Pool 0 message: Block 440140 solved by cobramining.C1-2 @
ckpool!

His miner submitted the block twice.
A 'duplicate' is accepted as a block since it's not impossible for the main pool node to see the block after it's main bitcoind sees it
(unlikely but not impossible)
CKDB spits out lotsa extra messages when this happens also - but I've coded it so that it just means one block properly in both situations

Edit: here's the main CKDB message related to it:

Code:

[2016-11-23 01:40:49.932+00] blocks_add(): Duplicate (1-Confirm) blocks ignored, Status: New, Block: 440140/...00001c50e5b79b5e/2016-11-23 01:40:49.930201+00

Wow!  Thanks Kano!  Where else can you get the skinny on anything like you can here on Kano.is!

[firetreeactual]

Minor...I think...problem maybe someone can clue me in. I sent my partner his daily payout on Monday (our time). Small transaction...we do this every day, no problem. The transaction from Monday is still showing unconfirmed...zero confirms. Something doesn't look right on the BT screen, but I just don't see it. The tx amt appears to be double what it should be. If anyone has thoughts, you should probably PM me so we don't clutter the board. I'm not so akamai (knowledgeable) on this end of things. Thx.

[jonnybravo0311]

it could very well be a case of transaction fee being too low.  There are currently almost 50k unconfirmed transactions out there and you're looking at a fee of at least 80 satoshi per byte to get you confirmed in a reasonable time.

[firetreeactual]

it could very well be a case of transaction fee being too low.  There are currently almost 50k unconfirmed transactions out there and you're looking at a fee of at least 80 satoshi per byte to get you confirmed in a reasonable time.

Thanks...that makes sense, but seemed unusual as I always just take the Core's default on fees and have never had a tx take more than 30 min or so to confirm. Guess I've just been lucky. I'll take your advice, though, and bump the fee.

[jonnybravo0311]

Core typically does a good job estimating fees, but I almost always check against https://bitcoinfees.21.co to see how the network looks.  For example, right now Core is giving me an estimate of 0.0007BTC per kb; however, the website is suggesting 100000 satoshi per kb.  If I were to send a transaction now, I'd probably use the higher estimate to fast track it, especially since my last reply there are now more than 64k unconfirmed transactions.