and restarted
Eu nodes are next, us is the big one carrying !1.1Thash atm
Topic: [0Th]Ozcoin Pooled Mining |DGM 1%|Stratum+VarDiff port 80|NEW CN mining| - page 106. (Read 398185 times)
June 21, 2012, 12:40:16 PM
and restarted
Eu nodes are next, us is the big one carrying !1.1Thash atm
June 21, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
Apparently the SSL certificate has expired for https://lc.ozco.in, my browser keeps prompting me with a warning message every time I visit the site. (I'm using Chrome)
yes it has, we better fix it 
us.ozco.in will be restarted for updates, this will cause a small downtime.
June 21, 2012, 12:07:13 PM
Apparently the SSL certificate has expired for https://lc.ozco.in, my browser keeps prompting me with a warning message every time I visit the site. (I'm using Chrome)
June 21, 2012, 11:58:45 AM
us2.ozco.in is in Chicago, so yes further north
us.ozco.in is in Dallas
I am seeing significantly lower stales in ecoinpool console on us2 ~25% of what the other servers are showing. feedback on IRC has been good too
We will start rolling through the other servers
Ahh, very nice. I'm in Michigan so Chicago is a lot closer to me. us.ozco.in is in Dallas
I am seeing significantly lower stales in ecoinpool console on us2 ~25% of what the other servers are showing. feedback on IRC has been good too
We will start rolling through the other servers
June 21, 2012, 11:45:39 AM
us2.ozco.in has been updated to bitcoind 0.6.3Rc1
others will be done one at a time,
anyone able to jump on us2 and let us know if stales are better would be appreciated
I know my ping to us2 is about 15-20ms faster than the original US server (I assume this one is located a bit further north than us.ozco.in?). Not sure about stales as I currently just have it set as a backup.others will be done one at a time,
anyone able to jump on us2 and let us know if stales are better would be appreciated
us.ozco.in is in Dallas
I am seeing significantly lower stales in ecoinpool console on us2 ~25% of what the other servers are showing. feedback on IRC has been good too
We will start rolling through the other servers
June 21, 2012, 11:32:52 AM
us2.ozco.in has been updated to bitcoind 0.6.3Rc1
others will be done one at a time,
anyone able to jump on us2 and let us know if stales are better would be appreciated
I know my ping to us2 is about 15-20ms faster than the original US server (I assume this one is located a bit further north than us.ozco.in?). Not sure about stales as I currently just have it set as a backup. others will be done one at a time,
anyone able to jump on us2 and let us know if stales are better would be appreciated
June 21, 2012, 10:53:28 AM
us2.ozco.in has been updated to bitcoind 0.6.3Rc1
others will be done one at a time,
anyone able to jump on us2 and let us know if stales are better would be appreciated
others will be done one at a time,
anyone able to jump on us2 and let us know if stales are better would be appreciated
June 21, 2012, 07:43:53 AM
Updating our Bitcoinds over the next few hours to 0.6.3rc1
There will be a brief downtime on each mining node.
This should help block propagation and stale shares.
There will be a brief downtime on each mining node.
This should help block propagation and stale shares.
June 21, 2012, 01:54:01 AM
there is a ToDo, cool - that'd be another nice page users could be interested and could stop asking same questions / making requests
(of course without security-issues if disclosures is healthier)
I appreciate your pool working now for some days (since I signed up) without any problem, hadn't that in a while with several other pools
and your service also is quite nice, beside you care about the network not only your benefits.
(of course without security-issues if disclosures is healthier)
I appreciate your pool working now for some days (since I signed up) without any problem, hadn't that in a while with several other pools
and your service also is quite nice, beside you care about the network not only your benefits.
* Graet feels ashamed
believe it or not publishing a public todo list is um on the um todo list Thanks for the kind words, glad you are having a good experience on Ozcoin
June 21, 2012, 01:51:10 AM
there is a ToDo, cool - that'd be another nice page users could be interested and could stop asking same questions / making requests
(of course without security-issues if disclosures is healthier)
I appreciate your pool working now for some days (since I signed up) without any problem, hadn't that in a while with several other pools
and your service also is quite nice, beside you care about the network not only your benefits.
(of course without security-issues if disclosures is healthier)
I appreciate your pool working now for some days (since I signed up) without any problem, hadn't that in a while with several other pools
and your service also is quite nice, beside you care about the network not only your benefits.
June 21, 2012, 01:32:47 AM
vv01f
yep, there are a few broken links and still no FAQ.
Every time we get close to the frontend tidying up something happens to bring us back to the backend/mining software.
latest is another security vulnerability in Bitcoind :/
thanks for the feedback, it is on the todo list
Gladamas
cheers and welcome
yep, there are a few broken links and still no FAQ.
Every time we get close to the frontend tidying up something happens to bring us back to the backend/mining software.
latest is another security vulnerability in Bitcoind :/
thanks for the feedback, it is on the todo list
Gladamas
cheers and welcome
June 20, 2012, 03:51:41 PM
found the link to not working page (msg: page not found):
http://www.ozcoin.net/content/how-does-payout-work
via this one:
http://www.ozcoin.net/content/balance-namecoin
http://www.ozcoin.net/content/how-does-payout-work
via this one:
http://www.ozcoin.net/content/balance-namecoin
June 19, 2012, 05:01:07 AM
Though I'd put this here for anyone that doesnt browse around
went and dug through the DB
We have had 12 orphans since we went DGM 30/12/2011
2 were our fault when we didnt get the BIP16 updates right
so 10 orphans for over 6.5 months
The last 2 were 15th and 8th of this month, whilst either or both of these may be attributed to current issues, we are not showing an unusually high orphan rate.
We spent quite some time over the last 24hours looking to see what we could do poolside to help the longpolls, stales and big block issues.
We came to the conclusion that apart from optimising some logging and databases some more to reduce load there isnt really much we can do, this is a network issue and the pools will need help from the devs to resolve.
Ozcoin will continue to accept all standard transactions into our blocks, we do not see any advantage to restricting the number of transactions in our blocks.
On a side note, value of txns included with blocks has gone from 0.0x to 0.x with a lot around 0.3 and we had one block with more than 1BTC in txn fees.
Graeme
It looks like Ozcoin is processing all transactions, Bitparking is passing along no transactions, and Deepbit has a transaction fee threshold that prunes lower fee and/or free transactions from their blocks.
The question then, is, does this make a difference to them? Are deepbit (and to a lesser extent bitparking) keeping a low orphan rate or is this barking up the wrong tree? I still get the feeling we're missing the underlying cause for this since it predates the abrupt rise in the number of transactions.went and dug through the DB
We have had 12 orphans since we went DGM 30/12/2011
2 were our fault when we didnt get the BIP16 updates right
so 10 orphans for over 6.5 months
The last 2 were 15th and 8th of this month, whilst either or both of these may be attributed to current issues, we are not showing an unusually high orphan rate.
We spent quite some time over the last 24hours looking to see what we could do poolside to help the longpolls, stales and big block issues.
We came to the conclusion that apart from optimising some logging and databases some more to reduce load there isnt really much we can do, this is a network issue and the pools will need help from the devs to resolve.
Ozcoin will continue to accept all standard transactions into our blocks, we do not see any advantage to restricting the number of transactions in our blocks.
On a side note, value of txns included with blocks has gone from 0.0x to 0.x with a lot around 0.3 and we had one block with more than 1BTC in txn fees.
Graeme
June 19, 2012, 03:52:02 AM
For those intertested
us.ozco.in runs close to a Terahash or over most of the time
us2.ozco.in is usually under 50Ghash
eu.ozco.in runs at 200-300Ghash
eu2.ozco.in runs at under 50Ghash
If the node you are on is giving slow longpolls consider using a less loaded node
us.ozco.in runs close to a Terahash or over most of the time
us2.ozco.in is usually under 50Ghash
eu.ozco.in runs at 200-300Ghash
eu2.ozco.in runs at under 50Ghash
If the node you are on is giving slow longpolls consider using a less loaded node
Any chance to have that information on the website or included into the API? Would be a neat information for my miners startscript.
BTW, is there any miner out there supporting the "X-Switch-To" extension ( https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork#switchto )?
the todo list for the frontend is growing. Stats and stuff.
mainly because we spend most of our time working on the backend/mining stuff, thought things were going nice until this recent txn spam made us look at it again :/
June 19, 2012, 02:00:21 AM
For those intertested
us.ozco.in runs close to a Terahash or over most of the time
us2.ozco.in is usually under 50Ghash
eu.ozco.in runs at 200-300Ghash
eu2.ozco.in runs at under 50Ghash
If the node you are on is giving slow longpolls consider using a less loaded node
us.ozco.in runs close to a Terahash or over most of the time
us2.ozco.in is usually under 50Ghash
eu.ozco.in runs at 200-300Ghash
eu2.ozco.in runs at under 50Ghash
If the node you are on is giving slow longpolls consider using a less loaded node
Any chance to have that information on the website or included into the API? Would be a neat information for my miners startscript.
BTW, is there any miner out there supporting the "X-Switch-To" extension ( https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork#switchto )?
June 18, 2012, 07:23:51 PM
Since there are now 4 pool servers and the performance of each server will differ for every person, there are some stats in cgminer v2.4.3 that can help you decide which ozcoin pool to use as your main pool
java API stats
reports the pool getwork performance.
e.g. like:
[STATS2] =>
(
[STATS] => 2
[ID] => POOL0
[Elapsed] => 456605
[Calls] => 129391
[Wait] => 114.686699
[Max] => 41.213763
[Min] => 0.000003
[Pool Calls] => 23844
[Pool Attempts] => 23852
[Pool Wait] => 12037.374767
[Pool Max] => 19.118501
[Pool Min] => 0.456760
)
This shows that I network called the pool 'getwork' 23844 times successfully and waited a total of 12037.374767 seconds
Thus an average of 0.50... seconds for the pool to reply to the getwork requests
My Pool Max is high coz I do a network reset each night at midnight (but the Pool Min also shows it's never faster than 0.456760s for me)
My numbers are good since you can also see above what the devices are doing waiting on the device level getworks:
129391 work requests taking a total of 114.686699s so on average 0.000089s
Edit: so if you load-balance all 4 servers for a few hours you can use these stats to help decide
nicejava API stats
reports the pool getwork performance.
e.g. like:
[STATS2] =>
(
[STATS] => 2
[ID] => POOL0
[Elapsed] => 456605
[Calls] => 129391
[Wait] => 114.686699
[Max] => 41.213763
[Min] => 0.000003
[Pool Calls] => 23844
[Pool Attempts] => 23852
[Pool Wait] => 12037.374767
[Pool Max] => 19.118501
[Pool Min] => 0.456760
)
This shows that I network called the pool 'getwork' 23844 times successfully and waited a total of 12037.374767 seconds
Thus an average of 0.50... seconds for the pool to reply to the getwork requests
My Pool Max is high coz I do a network reset each night at midnight (but the Pool Min also shows it's never faster than 0.456760s for me)
My numbers are good since you can also see above what the devices are doing waiting on the device level getworks:
129391 work requests taking a total of 114.686699s so on average 0.000089s
Edit: so if you load-balance all 4 servers for a few hours you can use these stats to help decide
Thanks for sharing that kano
June 18, 2012, 06:54:19 PM
Since there are now 4 pool servers and the performance of each server will differ for every person, there are some stats in cgminer v2.4.3 that can help you decide which ozcoin pool to use as your main pool
java API stats
reports the pool getwork performance.
e.g. like:
[STATS2] =>
(
[STATS] => 2
[ID] => POOL0
[Elapsed] => 456605
[Calls] => 129391
[Wait] => 114.686699
[Max] => 41.213763
[Min] => 0.000003
[Pool Calls] => 23844
[Pool Attempts] => 23852
[Pool Wait] => 12037.374767
[Pool Max] => 19.118501
[Pool Min] => 0.456760
)
This shows that I network called the pool 'getwork' 23844 times successfully and waited a total of 12037.374767 seconds
Thus an average of 0.50... seconds for the pool to reply to the getwork requests
My Pool Max is high coz I do a network reset each night at midnight (but the Pool Min also shows it's never faster than 0.456760s for me)
My numbers are good since you can also see above what the devices are doing waiting on the device level getworks:
129391 work requests taking a total of 114.686699s so on average 0.000089s
Edit: so if you load-balance all 4 servers for a few hours you can use these stats to help decide
java API stats
reports the pool getwork performance.
e.g. like:
[STATS2] =>
(
[STATS] => 2
[ID] => POOL0
[Elapsed] => 456605
[Calls] => 129391
[Wait] => 114.686699
[Max] => 41.213763
[Min] => 0.000003
[Pool Calls] => 23844
[Pool Attempts] => 23852
[Pool Wait] => 12037.374767
[Pool Max] => 19.118501
[Pool Min] => 0.456760
)
This shows that I network called the pool 'getwork' 23844 times successfully and waited a total of 12037.374767 seconds
Thus an average of 0.50... seconds for the pool to reply to the getwork requests
My Pool Max is high coz I do a network reset each night at midnight (but the Pool Min also shows it's never faster than 0.456760s for me)
My numbers are good since you can also see above what the devices are doing waiting on the device level getworks:
129391 work requests taking a total of 114.686699s so on average 0.000089s
Edit: so if you load-balance all 4 servers for a few hours you can use these stats to help decide
June 18, 2012, 06:27:23 PM
I'd like a 0:00 -> 23.59 total aka what you made this day...
hehThis is what I was afraid of, voting split 50/50
cheers
For those intertested
us.ozco.in runs close to a Terahash or over most of the time
us2.ozco.in is usually under 50Ghash
eu.ozco.in runs at 200-300Ghash
eu2.ozco.in runs at under 50Ghash
If the node you are on is giving slow longpolls consider using a less loaded node
June 18, 2012, 06:07:13 PM
I'd like a 0:00 -> 23.59 total aka what you made this day...
June 18, 2012, 09:42:19 AM
another example due to the linked thread: bitcoinwatch.com tells us average for 24h, 7d and 30d - that could be a different call on api for lightening your traffic.
Not regarding the api but the webinterface I'd prefer if I could set my timezone, I always get confused due to your UTC - timestamps.
keep up your good work
Not regarding the api but the webinterface I'd prefer if I could set my timezone, I always get confused due to your UTC - timestamps.
keep up your good work
Jump to: