Nice, 2nd block down!
I'm still a little fuzzy on what happens when your test period ends, at 850,000 shares or now 1mil?
Will the server continue to offer work or will it just shut down? If it continues to offer work, will there be any payouts for that work?
In any case, I would like to request you put the total share count for the test somewhere on the site, so that once we hit 850k or 1m, I can direct my miners elsewhere again?
(mainly just want to avoid continuing work if there will not be any payout, if there will be continued compensation I would be more then happy to keep them pointed to your pool)
We will not shut down the server of course. The Server will still continue handing out work, unless there is some urgent reason to shut it down(remember we are testing stability and the pool frontend/engine). We are currently considering whether we will let it on PPS after the testing period or whether we will set it to PPLNS ("semi"-hopper-proof proportional). On the one hand, of course PPS is nice for miners, on the other hand there's the problem that we could face a monster block that takes us many million shares to solve it, which could make us default(I mean, c'mon, an 8mil share block would cost us like BTC240), and we don't want that to happen. On the other hand PPLNS offers only basic protection against poolhoppers and long blocks that would be inconvenient to the miners. So we are still thinking about this, but most likely we will let the users decide.
about the total share count for the test(we decided to raise it to 1Million to be round, I'll update funds and the front page tomorrow)... I will put it on the round history page tomorrow(damn it's 3 AM again over here).
Last but not least, we will definetely continue to pay out after we have reached our testing goal, given that no disastrous catastrophies happen.
Is there something wrong with the stats on the page.
Round history doesnt seems to be updated.
Current round time 3h 56m, current block 18642. That block did start like 11 mins ago.
It can sometimes be a bit delayed, although it should not be 11 minutes. Currently, all those data are updated in a 5 minute-interval, just to be on the safe side with performance and to make the hashing-rates spike out less. I'm also already working on a way to take more mature data into account when calculating these so we can make the update periods shorter.
Thank you for pointing it out to me, though, I'll definitely investigate this!
And to all the others here, we always appreciate feedback(we hope for it in fact!)