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

[firetreeactual]

I recently moved my AntMiners from one location to another, while they were mining on this pool. Upon moving them back to this location, the links to CKPool pool are now dead. I use the following stratum link: stratum+tcp://nonce.kano.is:27181

This is the recommended link for my device, although I have tried the other links to see if they would work as well. I'm uncertain of what to do in order to fix this.

I assume these are Asicminer Tubes, as those are the only devices that will work on that link, and a tube will not work on any of the other links.

I'll have to leave this one for Da Boss. 

[clgrissom3]

I recently moved my AntMiners from one location to another, while they were mining on this pool. Upon moving them back to this location, the links to CKPool pool are now dead. I use the following stratum link: stratum+tcp://nonce.kano.is:27181

This is the recommended link for my device, although I have tried the other links to see if they would work as well. I'm uncertain of what to do in order to fix this.

I was under the impression that the nonce link was for Asicminer Tubes only and you mentioned AntMiners.  This is from the Kano.is home page:

If you have an Asicminer Tube, you will need to mine to:
stratum+tcp://nonce.kano.is:27181
It won't work properly on any other mining port. Don't point normal miners here.
Your Tube miner stats will show up in your account without their worker name.

[clgrissom3]

So ... I have an A7 mining on the pool right now
I'll add a menu a bit later so people can see my workers - if anyone is interested.
I'll post here when it's done.

Miner is actually no where near as loud as I expected - and it's 26C here
(and I have it in the laundry which is about 28C after running the dryer an hour ago)
It's hopping around 2300 to 2500 RPM for me - in the middle to low 60's dBA (i.e. certainly under 70 dBA)
It's temperature says it's 31C

Need to let it run for an hour or so to get a reasonable hash rate estimate.

For anyone who uses the default RPi image (as of today) on canaan.io - it's setup for static IP 192.168.0.100
So you may have to login to that and switch it to DHCP if you have more than one - or if you have a lot, set that in the image.

Very cool Kano!  I can't wait to see what you you get with your new toy!

OK it's up and working.
Everyone logged in now has 2 extra options in the 'Workers' menu:
K.Workers and K.Graph - that shows my data below the menu (still your data above top right)

Edit: oh I'll take it down to the garage at some point later and thus it will have a short outage - but the shift will show that after I do it - it seems they start a little slower then climb up for an hour or so to get the speed right.

Edit2: though it's clear from the Workers page, you can separate out the A6s and A7s on my graph by using at the top "all" ".A6*" and ".A7*" and pressing "Update" - though it will forget your settings if you already had some for your workers.

Edit3: moved - so it was off for a bit over half an hour.

I notice the invalids for your A7 is at 0.714% but it has been dropping since I first looked earlier today.

[usukan]

...
isn't 5THs about half what an A7 should do?

You been smoking something?


Interesting - I was thinking that this A7 miner was meant to be serious competition for S9
Kano - thanks for jogging me to check my facts in detail.

so I checked some details

A7 - 6.0THs
S9 - (B23) 14THs

Power
A7 - 1000W (but Canaan advertises 900W)
S9 - 1500W (with +10% added)

Cost
A7 - $888 (Looks like a lucky number to me? Why not when your competition is out of stock.)
S9 - $1,700

W/GH
A7 - 0.167
A9 -  0.107

So it looks like an s9 is significantly more efficient (maybe 30-40% better - thats a lot).
Sure A7 is better than an S7 (0.25W/GH) but quite a way off an S9.

$/GH
A7 - 0.148
A9 -  0.121

So S9 is marginally cheaper to buy per GH

Based on the efficiency alone - I would be swayed to an S9 over an A7. The efficiency difference is huge IMO.  Let me know if I got something wrong please.

Of course they are out of stock - so its not an option for now.

And - not to miss the claims of quality reliability, flexibility and life expectancy of Canaan machines. So this must be factored positively.
Also - claims of shenanigans by Bitmain with software - should be factored I guess
Life expectancy has always factored low for me since miners become uneconomic quickly any how - but they must last 12 months at least.
Some say that life expectancy may be more important in the future as we won't see such rapid efficiency gains in the future - lets see.  
I expect Canaan to tweak a lot more from new batches if they want to really be competitive.

I've seen a lot here complaining about Antminers.  
I must say that maybe I have been lucky with all my machines from S3's to S7's - no S9's (still waiting for resolution of a clear winner here for my next upgrade - and a price drop hopefully).
I have always run all my Ants overclocked to max (as each machine can handle differently) and never had an issue as long as quality and ample power supply PSU's were used.
Also - they are regularly serviced and cleaned out - like every 2 months or so.
Always managed to sell them in perfect working order for a good price.
Had an S7 fall from the top rack in an earthquake the other day - still running perfectly fine on the floor with PSU dangling above in mid air.

So - I'm still leaning to Ants - but watching all.



Cheers - usukan



 

[daemondazz]

Also - just reporting the error on the top of every Kano.is page

CKPool:     34,724.84THs (This should be PHs)
Shares:     117,281,197,547 (41.62%)
Invalids:     137.5k (0.62%) · 362.3M (0.31%)

Yes its correct in other places - but since every page has this error its just something I thought you might want to know about and might be worthwhile fixing.

You do know 34000TH = 34PH, right?

[moe7865]

...
isn't 5THs about half what an A7 should do?

You been smoking something?

Kano.A7   5.096k   1s   8,397   35,604,892   7.58THs   26s   0.532%   0.004%   5.24THs

also - Pool has is currently displayed as 32THs not 32 PHs

CKPool:     32,745.50THs
Shares:     941,824,361,119 (334.22%)
Invalids:     1.1M (0.62%) · 3.6G (0.38%)

That says 32PH ...

And that page also says 7.58THs ... yeah funny about the inaccuracy of hash rates

Also as I said above ... it takes a while to ramp up ...

Also looking at one number when there's a graph of quite a few that says otherwise ...

Interesting - I was thinking that this A7 miner was meant to be serious competition for S9
Kano - thanks for jogging me to check my facts in detail.

so I checked some details

A7 - 6.0THs
S9 - (B23) 14THs

Power
A7 - 1000W (but Canaan advertises 900W)
S9 - 1500W (with +10% added)

Cost
A7 - $888 (Looks like a lucky number to me? Why not when your competition is out of stock.)
S9 - $1,700

W/GH
A7 - 0.167
A9 -  0.107

So it looks like an s9 is significantly more efficient (maybe 30-40% better - thats a lot).
Sure A7 is better than an S7 (0.25W/GH) but quite a way off an S9.

$/GH
A7 - 0.148
A9 -  0.121

So S9 is marginally cheaper to buy per GH

Based on the efficiency alone - I would be swayed to an S9 over an A7. The efficiency difference is huge IMO.  Let me know if I got something wrong please.

Of course they are out of stock - so its not an option for now.

And - not to miss the claims of quality reliability, flexibility and life expectancy of Canaan machines. So this must be factored positively.
Also - claims of shenanigans by Bitmain with software - should be factored I guess
Life expectancy has always factored low for me since miners become uneconomic quickly any how - but they must last 12 months at least.
Some say that life expectancy may be more important in the future as we won't see such rapid efficiency gains in the future - lets see.  
I expect Canaan to tweak a lot more from new batches if they want to really be competitive.

I've seen a lot here complaining about Antminers.  
I must say that maybe I have been lucky with all my machines from S3's to S7's - no S9's (still waiting for resolution of a clear winner here for my next upgrade - and a price drop hopefully).
I have always run all my Ants overclocked to max (as each machine can handle differently) and never had an issue as long as quality and ample power supply PSU's were used.
Also - they are regularly serviced and cleaned out - like every 2 months or so.
Always managed to sell them in perfect working order for a good price.
Had an S7 fall from the top rack in an earthquake the other day - still running perfectly fine on the floor with PSU dangling above in mid air.

So - I'm still leaning to Ants - but watching all.


Also - just reporting the error on the top of every Kano.is page

CKPool:     34,724.84THs (This should be PHs)
Shares:     117,281,197,547 (41.62%)
Invalids:     137.5k (0.62%) · 362.3M (0.31%)

Yes its correct in other places - but since every page has this error its just something I thought you might want to know about and might be worthwhile fixing.

Cheers - usukan



 

Thats 32 724.84 TH which is correct. Remember 1000Th is 1PH. Kano has just chosen to display the pools combined hash rate as terra hashes which is completely fine.
If it were to be displayed in PH it would be 34.724PH. Note the comma joining the 34 and 724 making it 34 724TH

[binarygold]

Also - just reporting the error on the top of every Kano.is page

CKPool:     34,724.84THs (This should be PHs)
Shares:     117,281,197,547 (41.62%)
Invalids:     137.5k (0.62%) · 362.3M (0.31%)

Yes its correct in other places - but since every page has this error its just something I thought you might want to know about and might be worthwhile fixing.

Cheers - usukan
 

this is written in US (not euro) format, with the comma being a 3 digit separator.

so as others have noted 34,724  Terra (anything)  == 34.724 Peta (anything) a factor of 1K  

mega (x1000)= giga (x1000)= tera (x1000)= peta

edit > meant an arrow, not greater than

[wmabern]

Thats 32 724.84 TH which is correct. Remember 100Th is 1PH. Kano has just chosen to display the pools combined hash rate as terra hashes which is completely fine.
If it were to be displayed in PH it would be 34.724PH. Note the comma joining the 34 and 724 making it 34 724TH

Don't you mean 1,000TH =1PH?

[usukan]

OK - got it now the PH/TH thing

Cheers

[wmabern]

Okay Folks, let's break this two-block-a-day habit! Let's move up to our potential. THREE BLOCKS or BUST! FOUR is better!!  

Come on BLOCKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[moe7865]

Thats 32 724.84 TH which is correct. Remember 100Th is 1PH. Kano has just chosen to display the pools combined hash rate as terra hashes which is completely fine.
If it were to be displayed in PH it would be 34.724PH. Note the comma joining the 34 and 724 making it 34 724TH

Don't you mean 1,000TH =1PH?

Oops typo.
Let me correct that

[wmabern]

Thats 32 724.84 TH which is correct. Remember 100Th is 1PH. Kano has just chosen to display the pools combined hash rate as terra hashes which is completely fine.
If it were to be displayed in PH it would be 34.724PH. Note the comma joining the 34 and 724 making it 34 724TH

Don't you mean 1,000TH =1PH?

Oops typo.
Let me correct that

No problem! Happens to me all the time! The bright side of your statement would be that my ~50TH would be half of a PH!  I wish I had that real hash!! 

[wmabern]

Very happy to see our top-Five Big Irons holding down the fort with about 10PH amongst them!! So very helpful!!
Forever grateful for your support!!  

[kano]

...
Edit2: though it's clear from the Workers page, you can separate out the A6s and A7s on my graph by using at the top "all" ".A6*" and ".A7*" and pressing "Update" - though it will forget your settings if you already had some for your workers.
...

I made a little change to the K.Graph page, it forces the workers to be .A7*,.A6*,all so you don't need to mess with your worker settings if you wish to view my K.Graph page.

[agentcash]

Will this pool be signaling for segwit at any point?

I ran a search to find Kano's opinions on it and it seems he's opposed to it for a few reasons. Attempted dev control of bitcoin and disk space issues stand out the most in my memory. Any further clarifications would be appreciated. I don't visit the forums that much, so I apologize if I missed a post regarding it.

Would also be very interested to hear ck's opinion as well. Thanks.

[wmabern]

Will this pool be signaling for segwit at any point?

I ran a search to find Kano's opinions on it and it seems he's opposed to it for a few reasons. Attempted dev control of bitcoin and disk space issues stand out the most in my memory. Any further clarifications would be appreciated. I don't visit the forums that much, so I apologize if I missed a post regarding it.

Would also be very interested to hear ck's opinion as well. Thanks.

I'm not Kano or -ck, but I know they are both against it and it will not be integrated into the pool software unless over 95% of the miners accept it and it becomes required. I'm completely against it and I'm voting by mining on a pool (Kano/CK) that is against it.

EDIT: I also believe it would mean less transaction fees for individual miner, if I remember correctly.
Come on BLOCKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!

EDIT2: I'm also running Bitcoin Core version v0.13.0 (64-bit). I think v0.13.1 adds the segregated witness features. Therefore, I will not update my core from Bitcoin Core version v0.13.0 (64-bit). I don't know if that makes any difference in terms of acceptance or not. But I'm stubborn that way. 

[wmabern]

blockmines has really come through with his/her hash rate. I'm certainly glad they fixed their naming issues and are mining with Kano!!!

A big Turkey Day (USA) welcome and thanks for being a part of the best pool!!!

Keep on Mining!!! 

[-ck]

Will this pool be signaling for segwit at any point?

I ran a search to find Kano's opinions on it and it seems he's opposed to it for a few reasons. Attempted dev control of bitcoin and disk space issues stand out the most in my memory. Any further clarifications would be appreciated. I don't visit the forums that much, so I apologise if I missed a post regarding it.

Would also be very interested to hear ck's opinion as well. Thanks.

I'm not against it. Kano and I differ in opinion on this one and ultimately this is his pool; I'm part of the administration and tech support but it's not my pool.

[wmabern]

Will this pool be signaling for segwit at any point?

I ran a search to find Kano's opinions on it and it seems he's opposed to it for a few reasons. Attempted dev control of bitcoin and disk space issues stand out the most in my memory. Any further clarifications would be appreciated. I don't visit the forums that much, so I apologise if I missed a post regarding it.

Would also be very interested to hear ck's opinion as well. Thanks.

I'm not against it. Kano and I differ in opinion on this one and ultimately this is his pool; I'm part of the administration and tech support but it's not my pool.

-ck, please forgive me for assuming you were against it. I should know better than assuming anything and putting words in other people's mouths.
I stand corrected.
Mine on!!

[kano]

Will this pool be signaling for segwit at any point?

I ran a search to find Kano's opinions on it and it seems he's opposed to it for a few reasons. Attempted dev control of bitcoin and disk space issues stand out the most in my memory. Any further clarifications would be appreciated. I don't visit the forums that much, so I apologize if I missed a post regarding it.

Would also be very interested to hear ck's opinion as well. Thanks.

My most recent post on the subject
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789369.msg16868494#msg16868494