[ANN][LTC][Pool][PPLNS][STRATUM] - ltc.kattare.com - burnside's Mining Pool

[Giddeon]

Hi,

I'm having trouble connecting to the server with cpu miner 2.2.2, I'm getting 403 error when i use my browser.

Can you help?

[burnside]

Hi,

I'm having trouble connecting to the server with cpu miner 2.2.2, I'm getting 403 error when i use my browser.

Can you help?

403 error just means you're not authenticated.  So to see that in the browser is good, it means your network connection to the pool is fine.

Are you sure you're on cpuminer 2.2.2?  The latest 2.2.3 build for windows 64-bit had a bad bug in it.  Go back a few posts for details.

Cheers.

[Giddeon]

Hi,

I'm having trouble connecting to the server with cpu miner 2.2.2, I'm getting 403 error when i use my browser.

Can you help?

403 error just means you're not authenticated.  So to see that in the browser is good, it means your network connection to the pool is fine.

Are you sure you're on cpuminer 2.2.2?  The latest 2.2.3 build for windows 64-bit had a bad bug in it.  Go back a few posts for details.

Cheers.

Oh you're here haha..

Yeap, just ran the --version command, definitely 2.2.2

[Zedster]

No plans to implement NVC?  I seem to get a good output with your pool on LTC if I move to coinotron for NVC I get about 1/10 the output.  I am probably doing something wrong but I was just curious if you planned to offer NVC soon?

[burnside]

No plans to implement NVC?  I seem to get a good output with your pool on LTC if I move to coinotron for NVC I get about 1/10 the output.  I am probably doing something wrong but I was just curious if you planned to offer NVC soon?

LTC is the one true alt-coin.

[Zedster]

No plans to implement NVC?  I seem to get a good output with your pool on LTC if I move to coinotron for NVC I get about 1/10 the output.  I am probably doing something wrong but I was just curious if you planned to offer NVC soon?

LTC is the one true alt-coin.

LOL oh don't get me wrong I agree.  But NVC is much more pump and dump friendly atm.  That is the sad truth.

[Zedster]

burnside maybe you can explain something to a newb?  I am using reaper on your site to mine LTC.  I get back what I consider a good pay off for my measly set up (very new here still using Nvidia, radeons on the way).  But when i take basically the same set up over coinotron and fire it up for NVC I get about 1/5 the output. 

I was under the impression that both coins were running about the same difficulty.  What is this newb missing?  Thanks for any help.  And yes in the long haul I will be using your pool for LTC

[burnside]

burnside maybe you can explain something to a newb?  I am using reaper on your site to mine LTC.  I get back what I consider a good pay off for my measly set up (very new here still using Nvidia, radeons on the way).  But when i take basically the same set up over coinotron and fire it up for NVC I get about 1/5 the output. 

I was under the impression that both coins were running about the same difficulty.  What is this newb missing?  Thanks for any help.  And yes in the long haul I will be using your pool for LTC

By output do you mean hashrate?  Or shares?  Shares can vary widely from pool to pool depending on how difficult their shares are.

If you're talking hashrate, it may be an issue with the DDoS they've been dealing with or something.  Not really sure...

[Zedster]

By output do you mean hashrate?  Or shares?  Shares can vary widely from pool to pool depending on how difficult their shares are.

If you're talking hashrate, it may be an issue with the DDoS they've been dealing with or something.  Not really sure...

Nah i think attack has subsided.  But the hash rates seem the same and for the most part the shares seem about the but actual payout is about 1/3.  I just switched it from PPS to RBPPS could that have been it?  I realize this not your problem or even pertaining to you pool completely but I do appreciate any insight.  Really just trying to understand mining a bit better. 

[kosmokramer]

I just joined the burnside pool. I'm currently mining BTC @ ~12,000 Mh/s on other pools and am considering switching to LTC. I'm testing the waters with one PC and, while cgminer reports 535.3 kh/s, burnside pool reports ~65 kH/s.

Is there any advice you can give me about mining for LTC more efficiently on the burnside pool. Alternatively, if you think this is a horrible idea (as compared to mining for BTC) that'd be good to know, too.

It justs looks like currently (assuming identical hash rates), it's more profitable to mine LTC and trade for BTC. No?

**I should note, I've tried a few other LTC pools and see the same thing, so I'm sure it's something on my end (either unrealistic expectation or incorrect setting).

[tacotime]

The pool gives the average for the past hour or so if I remember right.  Also make sure your LTC settings are correct and you aren't throwing huge amounts of HW errors (see thread in my sig).

[Nicksasa]

I just joined the burnside pool. I'm currently mining BTC @ ~12,000 Mh/s on other pools and am considering switching to LTC. I'm testing the waters with one PC and, while cgminer reports 535.3 kh/s, burnside pool reports ~65 kH/s.

Is there any advice you can give me about mining for LTC more efficiently on the burnside pool. Alternatively, if you think this is a horrible idea (as compared to mining for BTC) that'd be good to know, too.

It justs looks like currently (assuming identical hash rates), it's more profitable to mine LTC and trade for BTC. No?

**I should note, I've tried a few other LTC pools and see the same thing, so I'm sure it's something on my end (either unrealistic expectation or incorrect setting).

Considering your using all the same cards and settings, once you've got your config right use a calculator like the one on notroll.in and enter the BTC & LTC hashrate you get on the card and see if you gain anything by mining ltc.

[Tranz]

It justs looks like currently (assuming identical hash rates), it's more profitable to mine LTC and trade for BTC. No?

This will never happen. BTC uses sha256 LTC uses -scrypt. Totally different algos. The speeds for mining btc vs ltc is very different.

[lampshad3]

Hello burnside, first off as a fellow Oregonian, its good to see a local pool!, been lovin it so far  

and a question, is there a way to turn off the payment notifications? not that big of a deal, was just curious

Thanks!

[burnside]

Hello burnside, first off as a fellow Oregonian, its good to see a local pool!, been lovin it so far  

and a question, is there a way to turn off the payment notifications? not that big of a deal, was just curious

Thanks!

Hey there!  Small world. 

There's not currently a way to turn off the email payment notifications.  Maybe we could implement it down the road?  Wouldn't be hard if there's a set of users that want it.

[planman]

Hello Burnside,

Love your pool to death! Trying to do my best on this end to deliver optimize my rigs.

I have a question about the best way to run cgminer 2.10.5. Specifically I am trying to determine if I should run failover-only or the default failover setting.

My setup is

4 x 5850's running about 1.4 Mhash
1 x 5850   running about 380 Khash
1 x 5870   running about 410 Khash

All of the above equipment is running Windows 7 - 64bit, 4GB ram, and cooled to <72. My hardware is totally stable and runs non-stop.

The problem I am trying to solve: High stales and a lack fault tolerance (your pool is highly available, no slight intended. I just want to be sure my gear keeps running!)

I tried running cgminer with the -load-balance setting but it sent about 50% of the work to the other pool I use. So I stopped doing that.

Then I set cgminer to run with -failover-only. In this mode 99%+ of my hashing went to your pool.

The Litecoin yield was great but I also had very high stales. I hit refresh a few times and saw the stales rate change, so I think the high stales might have been related to one of your background processes starting up and bogging down the server for a few seconds.

In an effort to reduce the stales I changed cgminer to run the default failover mode. In the default failover mode, about 20% of my hashing bleeds over to the failover pool. I have a hard time accepting that so much of my hashing is best sent to the backup pool, but then again the settings in cgminer have proved very reliable in my other applications. If this was best, the yield from the backup pool should be 25% of the daily burnsides pool yield. The yield is only about 15% of the Burnside yield, so I think that tells me something.

What should I do to optimize my setup?

I wondered maybe I should download your Stratum proxy and run that locally for my group of three machines. I thought that might be a small improvement.

Should i just run cgminer as -failover-only and stop worrying about the stales? Or should I run in the default failover mode and let CGminer bleed over some of my work to pool 2 because there really are times the Burnside pool cannot supply enough work.

Thank you in advance for taking a few minutes to read over my questions and thank you for the well implemented pool!

Planman

[matauc12]

Hello Burnside,

Love your pool to death! Trying to do my best on this end to deliver optimize my rigs.

I have a question about the best way to run cgminer 2.10.5. Specifically I am trying to determine if I should run failover-only or the default failover setting.

My setup is

4 x 5850's running about 1.4 Mhash
1 x 5850   running about 380 Khash
1 x 5870   running about 410 Khash

All of the above equipment is running Windows 7 - 64bit, 4GB ram, and cooled to <72. My hardware is totally stable and runs non-stop.

The problem I am trying to solve: High stales and a lack fault tolerance (your pool is highly available, no slight intended. I just want to be sure my gear keeps running!)

I tried running cgminer with the -load-balance setting but it sent about 50% of the work to the other pool I use. So I stopped doing that.

Then I set cgminer to run with -failover-only. In this mode 99%+ of my hashing went to your pool.

The Litecoin yield was great but I also had very high stales. I hit refresh a few times and saw the stales rate change, so I think the high stales might have been related to one of your background processes starting up and bogging down the server for a few seconds.

In an effort to reduce the stales I changed cgminer to run the default failover mode. In the default failover mode, about 20% of my hashing bleeds over to the failover pool. I have a hard time accepting that so much of my hashing is best sent to the backup pool, but then again the settings in cgminer have proved very reliable in my other applications. If this was best, the yield from the backup pool should be 25% of the daily burnsides pool yield. The yield is only about 15% of the Burnside yield, so I think that tells me something.

What should I do to optimize my setup?

I wondered maybe I should download your Stratum proxy and run that locally for my group of three machines. I thought that might be a small improvement.

Should i just run cgminer as -failover-only and stop worrying about the stales? Or should I run in the default failover mode and let CGminer bleed over some of my work to pool 2 because there really are times the Burnside pool cannot supply enough work.

Thank you in advance for taking a few minutes to read over my questions and thank you for the well implemented pool!

Planman

Don't know if that could be even remotely related but isn't 4gb ram low for 2mh/s scrypt?

[burnside]

Hello Burnside,

Love your pool to death! Trying to do my best on this end to deliver optimize my rigs.

I have a question about the best way to run cgminer 2.10.5. Specifically I am trying to determine if I should run failover-only or the default failover setting.

My setup is

4 x 5850's running about 1.4 Mhash
1 x 5850   running about 380 Khash
1 x 5870   running about 410 Khash

All of the above equipment is running Windows 7 - 64bit, 4GB ram, and cooled to <72. My hardware is totally stable and runs non-stop.

The problem I am trying to solve: High stales and a lack fault tolerance (your pool is highly available, no slight intended. I just want to be sure my gear keeps running!)

I tried running cgminer with the -load-balance setting but it sent about 50% of the work to the other pool I use. So I stopped doing that.

Then I set cgminer to run with -failover-only. In this mode 99%+ of my hashing went to your pool.

The Litecoin yield was great but I also had very high stales. I hit refresh a few times and saw the stales rate change, so I think the high stales might have been related to one of your background processes starting up and bogging down the server for a few seconds.

In an effort to reduce the stales I changed cgminer to run the default failover mode. In the default failover mode, about 20% of my hashing bleeds over to the failover pool. I have a hard time accepting that so much of my hashing is best sent to the backup pool, but then again the settings in cgminer have proved very reliable in my other applications. If this was best, the yield from the backup pool should be 25% of the daily burnsides pool yield. The yield is only about 15% of the Burnside yield, so I think that tells me something.

What should I do to optimize my setup?

I wondered maybe I should download your Stratum proxy and run that locally for my group of three machines. I thought that might be a small improvement.

Should i just run cgminer as -failover-only and stop worrying about the stales? Or should I run in the default failover mode and let CGminer bleed over some of my work to pool 2 because there really are times the Burnside pool cannot supply enough work.

Thank you in advance for taking a few minutes to read over my questions and thank you for the well implemented pool!

Planman

I hate to say it, but I have zero experience with cgminer.  I need to play with it soon to get some stratum support going though!

I do wonder... if the stales are mostly from the block boundaries, would failing over to another pool be helpful?  Or would they also be seeing dips around the same block boundaries?

[planman]

Don't know if that could be even remotely related but isn't 4gb ram low for 2mh/s scrypt?
[/quote]


Great question! I doubled the amount of RAM to 8Gb, ran 24 hours, and the hash rate didn't vary more than 1%

So... I went back to 4 and plugged the extra 4GB into my next miner....

[planman]

I hate to say it, but I have zero experience with cgminer.  I need to play with it soon to get some stratum support going though!

I do wonder... if the stales are mostly from the block boundaries, would failing over to another pool be helpful?  Or would they also be seeing dips around the same block boundaries?

I think the stales are most from block boundaries. I run stratum and when I check my stats, I am usually near the low end of stales when compared to the overall pool population.

Failing over to another pool when CGminer determines ltc.kattare.com to be running slow or failing is netting me about 15% of my daily take on ltc.kattare.com. The pool I am failing over too either doesn't get the same dips.... or maybe they are paying for stales?

I will keep you posted if I feel I learn something actionable while I work on this.

Planman