kano (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1798
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
 |
January 31, 2015, 11:18:25 AM |
|
... and another block 10 minutes ago ~9.2% and confirmed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"With e-currency based on cryptographic proof, without the need to
trust a third party middleman, money can be secure and transactions
effortless." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 7763
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
January 31, 2015, 01:20:23 PM |
|
... and another block 10 minutes ago ~9.2% and confirmed.
we are heating back up. |
|
|
|
|
ZACHM
|
|
January 31, 2015, 01:37:39 PM |
|
It was nice to wake up on my birthday seeing three emails in my inbox saying we found blocks! Especially after yesterday when I found out that one of my S5's had a hash board die.  |
|
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 7763
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
January 31, 2015, 01:41:33 PM |
|
It was nice to wake up on my birthday seeing three emails in my inbox saying we found blocks!
now I knew 3 blocks on my birthday was going to happen (Jan 27th) I was wrong it was your birthday (Jan 31st) Happy birthday! Pool luck for the contest is approaching average we should have had 14-15 blocks we have 10. very hard to be exact due to pool down time and shift in hashrate and shift in diff. the 14-15 est is eyeball math. more likely 13-14 is correct. we got off to a terrible start 600% then a pair of 200% was more then 1000% for the first 3 blocks the next 7 = 520 % quite a difference all eyeball math above. but 333% a block for 3 or 75% a block for 7 is very close to the real numbers for the 10 blocks in the contest. |
|
|
|
kano (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1798
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
January 31, 2015, 03:23:39 PM |
|
Payout 341209 sent and confirmed
Edit: yep if you only joined/mined since when the blocks were red, then you'd be behind.
If you joined and have continued to mine almost any time before the last 42 blocks you'd probably be ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
pekatete
|
|
January 31, 2015, 07:34:52 PM |
|
What's the recomended /acceptable rate to hit your API? Can I hit it like every 5 mins .... 24/7 ... 365?
Also, got any documentation on the API, or is it just the two links /queries available?
|
|
|
|
|
ZACHM
|
|
January 31, 2015, 08:12:47 PM |
|
And another!
|
|
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 7763
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
January 31, 2015, 08:15:13 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Beachguy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1019
Merit: 1001
Spectreproject Community Manager
|
|
January 31, 2015, 08:38:35 PM |
|
Things change given time......  |
|
|
|
valkir
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1004
|
|
January 31, 2015, 09:56:25 PM |
|
Things change given time...... I want a hoody with that!  |
██ Please support sidehack with his new miner project Send to :
1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
|
|
|
kano (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1798
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
January 31, 2015, 10:13:21 PM
Last edit: January 31, 2015, 10:24:37 PM by kano |
|
What's the recomended /acceptable rate to hit your API? Can I hit it like every 5 mins .... 24/7 ... 365?
Also, got any documentation on the API, or is it just the two links /queries available?
5min is fine. Edit: the docs are simply that it's json  I think I added an html header/footer to some of the text/api links. I'll probably get around to removing that - but will post here if I do. |
|
|
|
|
sloopy
|
|
January 31, 2015, 11:40:07 PM |
|
Quick question from a n00b miner.
I like to learn about settings, and in general get OPO other people's opinions about my current question.
If I am going to be working on a miner, or troubleshooting a miner hardware issue is it better to use a pool wioth a different payout system than PPLNS?
If my miner may be up and down, and the up or down times will be inconsistent, is it betetr to use that miner on a PPS pool until I have it hashing consistently again?
I understand the gist of PPLNS, how we are paid in shifts / shares and the intent of stopping pool hopping.
In effect, my miner would be turned off, on, off, and on again, so it would seem to the pool as though I am hopping when I may be changing a power supply, or testing a particular unit for Overclocking viability, etc.
So, in this case, is it better to use a pool with a different payout scheme, and if so what type (either by pool name or payment method) is the best?
|
Transaction fees go to the pools and the pools decide to pay them to the miners. Anything else, including off-chain solutions are stealing and not the way Bitcoin was intended to function.
Make the block size set by the pool. Pool = miners and they get the choice.
|
|
|
philipma1957
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4102
Merit: 7763
'The right to privacy matters'
|
|
January 31, 2015, 11:51:51 PM |
|
Quick question from a n00b miner.
I like to learn about settings, and in general get OPO other people's opinions about my current question.
If I am going to be working on a miner, or troubleshooting a miner hardware issue is it better to use a pool wioth a different payout system than PPLNS?
If my miner may be up and down, and the up or down times will be inconsistent, is it betetr to use that miner on a PPS pool until I have it hashing consistently again?
I understand the gist of PPLNS, how we are paid in shifts / shares and the intent of stopping pool hopping.
In effect, my miner would be turned off, on, off, and on again, so it would seem to the pool as though I am hopping when I may be changing a power supply, or testing a particular unit for Overclocking viability, etc.
So, in this case, is it better to use a pool with a different payout scheme, and if so what type (either by pool name or payment method) is the best?
I would stay here if I were you. |
|
|
|
kano (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1798
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
February 01, 2015, 12:23:19 AM |
|
Payouts 341276 and 341285 sent (finally)
... and confirmed |
|
|
|
kano (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1798
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
February 01, 2015, 12:35:01 AM |
|
Quick question from a n00b miner.
I like to learn about settings, and in general get OPO other people's opinions about my current question.
If I am going to be working on a miner, or troubleshooting a miner hardware issue is it better to use a pool wioth a different payout system than PPLNS?
If my miner may be up and down, and the up or down times will be inconsistent, is it betetr to use that miner on a PPS pool until I have it hashing consistently again?
I understand the gist of PPLNS, how we are paid in shifts / shares and the intent of stopping pool hopping.
In effect, my miner would be turned off, on, off, and on again, so it would seem to the pool as though I am hopping when I may be changing a power supply, or testing a particular unit for Overclocking viability, etc.
So, in this case, is it better to use a pool with a different payout scheme, and if so what type (either by pool name or payment method) is the best?
The way PPLNS stops the gain from hopping is not to penalising anyone who hops, it's simply that there is no gain from hopping. As I've mentioned before, the 5N we use here simply means that each share is paid once in each of the blocks found in the ~500% after the share. The part that I guess were it may be confusing, is that to get an expected BTC payout when I payout a block, you have to have mined for the full 500% range of the payout. But since each share is paid the same way, the only thing that affects the value of each share is the pool luck. That luck can't be known in advance of course, but also has an expected average to mean that on average each share is expected to get paid 5 times 1/5 of the value of the PPS share (minus 0.9%) Of course that is simply an expected average, so over a short time you may get more OR less, but again you can't know in advance. |
|
|
|
|
bittalc1
|
|
February 01, 2015, 12:51:49 AM |
|
Ok now i really dont get the reward system , i was reading about the diff or N x 500% but i think that i dont understand. So this happened:
from
28.01.2015 06:34:11 PM to 29.01.2015 10:20:12 PM aproh: ~28Hours i was mining on btcguild. Before that i was on your pool and getting ~0.051 BTC after every block found. Of course before that i was building up for 5 days to reach that earnings per block.
from
29.01.2015 10:20:12PM to 01.02.2015 01:00 AM aproh: ~50Hours after mining on btcguild i came back to this pool and for the last two blocks i got 2x ~0.038 BTC.
So when i don't mine 1 hour, and when i come back i should mine 3 hours to get the max reward ? i really dont get it. \
Can you please give me some example, from the block history chart or something similar. Sorry for this, but i'm curious.
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
kano (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1798
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
February 01, 2015, 01:36:40 AM |
|
Payout 341296 sent
...
Each share found is paid ~1/5 it's value in each of the blocks found in the ~500% after the share.
or the reverse version of that meaning the same thing
Each block found pays (equally, based on difficulty) all shares in the ~500% before the block was found.
Payout 341296 confirmed |
|
|
|
|
sjc1490
|
|
February 01, 2015, 03:32:00 AM
Last edit: February 01, 2015, 03:50:01 AM by sjc1490 |
|
bittalc1, I know it can be confusing but you will always be paid for any accepted shares, it doesn't matter if you leave or not. The secret is staying put long enough to see the full 500% which will often take several continuous blocks. I have 20 TH and can say with certainty that the best thing for you to do is point your miners here and forget about them. You will never realize your maximum payout here or anywhere else if you try to chase luck. I mine here to support this pool, I trust both CK and Kano as pool operators as there is complete transparency here, and this pool has had better luck over the long term than others. No matter if you decide to stay here or mine at another pool you need to leave your miners pointed at whichever and basically forget about them. Here are some of Kano's previous responses where he explained the payouts, hope this helps some: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789369.msg9960680#msg9960680https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789369.msg10087464#msg10087464https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789369.msg10098984#msg10098984 |
BTC ADDRESS: 12Qwd8VKLQ4xF44ytHXBpCAKuF9VknG4X2
|
|
|
kano (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1798
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
February 01, 2015, 05:37:55 AM |
|
Anyone who noticed 30 min ago ...
That was a ckpool restart done by me to update some changes and add some debug tracking into it.
Most should have only seen a reconnect in cgminer, not a failover.
|
|
|
|
|
xZork
|
|
February 01, 2015, 06:25:23 AM |
|
Anyone who noticed 30 min ago ...
That was a ckpool restart done by me to update some changes and add some debug tracking into it.
Most should have only seen a reconnect in cgminer, not a failover.
I checked my home miners and as said there was no failover. Rented hash made it look like there was an outage, their charts are a lot more inaccurate than I though. Thanks for the update. |
|
|
|
|
