Topic: [18 GH] Swepool.net 0% fee proportional, LP, API, SSL! - page 12. (Read 42056 times)
I'll be adding about 1.6-2GH in the next day or so, stay tuned
I'm enjoying mining at this pool since a week back, it's a young pool with low PPSfee. It has been great. Hopefully we reach 30 GH soon.
Ok no prob. It seems ok now.
Bitcoins.lc has had some DDOS attacks recently, I wonder if ur being targeted too?
Bitcoins.lc has had some DDOS attacks recently, I wonder if ur being targeted too?
Is the pool having problems? I can't load the website at the moment and my miner has reported a few RPC communication issues but is working right this minute.
There are a huge number of connections to web server right now and it has problem dealing with those. RPC server seems not to have these problems though.Edit: Got rid of the IPs causing the high number of connections, web server should be working fine now. No mining has been affected.
Is the pool having problems? I can't load the website at the moment and my miner has reported a few RPC communication issues but is working right this minute.
+1 for notifications! That is a really handy feature to have
* Working of a new autopay feature.
Is there any you users would want from swepool? Is there anything you feel are missing?
Is there any you users would want from swepool? Is there anything you feel are missing?
You think you can implement worker offline notifications (phoenix idle bug
) and also payout notifications through email?and
https?
Wait - signup for swepool isn't even in SSL / HTTPS?
So I am merrily sending out user/pass etc plain text?
Plus email?
What?
So I am merrily sending out user/pass etc plain text?
Plus email?
What?
Fixed, added -f1 and -a2 to poclbm....getting 410mh/s
I live in Australia, so yeah just a bit away from Sweden lol
do you have plans to host a server in the US?
For comparison, my ping to deepbit is about 400ms.
I have high latency from my home anyway. From work the ping to you is about 350ms....
Ah, yeah I pinged a australian server center and I get about 350ms.do you have plans to host a server in the US?
For comparison, my ping to deepbit is about 400ms.
I have high latency from my home anyway. From work the ping to you is about 350ms....
No plans yet, if the pool grows larger and there is a demand so why not.
I live in Australia, so yeah just a bit away from Sweden lol
do you have plans to host a server in the US?
For comparison, my ping to deepbit is about 400ms.
I have high latency from my home anyway. From work the ping to you is about 350ms....
do you have plans to host a server in the US?
For comparison, my ping to deepbit is about 400ms.
I have high latency from my home anyway. From work the ping to you is about 350ms....
Ok, so I point one of my GPU's at it which usually runs around 400M/sec but on swepool it averages about 360! I think it's solving shares quicker than it's recieving them...
Also had a couple more time out errors again.
My ping to swepool.net is nearly 600ms!
Also, I worked out the 0.00018xxxx figure was on the old difficulty. Deepbit has gone down to 0.000103xxxx.
At this stage I want to switch but the connectivity issues/reduced hash rate is a problem.
600ms is way to much. I assume you live a bit from sweden?Also had a couple more time out errors again.
My ping to swepool.net is nearly 600ms!
Also, I worked out the 0.00018xxxx figure was on the old difficulty. Deepbit has gone down to 0.000103xxxx.
At this stage I want to switch but the connectivity issues/reduced hash rate is a problem.
The ping at some online pingtools doesn't seem that high:
35ms (ping.eu, EU-based): http://ping.eu/ping/
150ms (network-tools.com, probably US-based): http://network-tools.com/default.asp?prog=ping&host=swepool.net
Swepool pays you per share instead which gives you much more stable payouts since the payouts dont depend on if we solve a block or not. You always get your expected payout, no need for block solve or block maturity. You can see of it as most of the other pools put the risk/variance on you and swepool doesnt.
Thought slush used shares as well?
They all use some sort of share based system but it's generally a proportional payment and only when the pool solves a block.
Pay per share is ideal for the miner if you want reliable income.
Swepool pays you per share instead which gives you much more stable payouts since the payouts dont depend on if we solve a block or not. You always get your expected payout, no need for block solve or block maturity. You can see of it as most of the other pools put the risk/variance on you and swepool doesnt.
Thought slush used shares as well?
Ok, so I point one of my GPU's at it which usually runs around 400M/sec but on swepool it averages about 360! I think it's solving shares quicker than it's recieving them...
Also had a couple more time out errors again.
My ping to swepool.net is nearly 600ms!
Also, I worked out the 0.00018xxxx figure was on the old difficulty. Deepbit has gone down to 0.000103xxxx.
At this stage I want to switch but the connectivity issues/reduced hash rate is a problem.
Also had a couple more time out errors again.
My ping to swepool.net is nearly 600ms!
Also, I worked out the 0.00018xxxx figure was on the old difficulty. Deepbit has gone down to 0.000103xxxx.
At this stage I want to switch but the connectivity issues/reduced hash rate is a problem.
I've started up a CPU miner to test out your pool.
I got this error after a few minutes and it resumed after the 30 second retry:
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] HTTP request failed: Empty reply from server
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] json_rpc_call failed, retry after 30 seconds
After 1 share my balance was 0.00010577564409762 btc. Shouldn't it be 0.00018841688243877 which is your per share payment?
Hmm, CPU miner.. Which one are you using? There have not been any problems with GPU miners so far.I got this error after a few minutes and it resumed after the 30 second retry:
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] HTTP request failed: Empty reply from server
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] json_rpc_call failed, retry after 30 seconds
After 1 share my balance was 0.00010577564409762 btc. Shouldn't it be 0.00018841688243877 which is your per share payment?
I pay 0.00010577564409762btc/share since difficulty upgrade, please consult my indexpage for current compensation.
---
Other pools pay you when they solve a block according to some model. This means that the longer time for them to solve the block, the less you get. If the pool are "unlucky" you could easily get a couple of percent less than expected. You could of course also get more than expected, it's like a lottery.
Swepool pays you per share instead which gives you much more stable payouts since the payouts dont depend on if we solve a block or not. You always get your expected payout, no need for block solve or block maturity. You can see of it as most of the other pools put the risk/variance on you and swepool doesnt.
I've started up a CPU miner to test out your pool.
I got this error after a few minutes and it resumed after the 30 second retry:
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] HTTP request failed: Empty reply from server
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] json_rpc_call failed, retry after 30 seconds
After 1 share my balance was 0.00010577564409762 btc. Shouldn't it be 0.00018841688243877 which is your per share payment?
I got this error after a few minutes and it resumed after the 30 second retry:
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] HTTP request failed: Empty reply from server
[2011-05-28 08:38:06] json_rpc_call failed, retry after 30 seconds
After 1 share my balance was 0.00010577564409762 btc. Shouldn't it be 0.00018841688243877 which is your per share payment?
I would like to objectively be able to figure out if it's more efficient / "cheaper" to be using you instead of deepbit/slush/BTCMiner.
I currently have no idea what all the 50 different share/participation models end up meaning in real world more or less output of BTC.
About the only "simple" comparison seemed to have been the % of fee, and even that has been obscured by a per block thingie. Or, something.
Bottom line - it would be great if there were a more transparent reason why one should mine here instead of there or there.
I'm not averse to switching pools, if it had a good reason.
Same goes for payout logic btw.
I currently have no idea what all the 50 different share/participation models end up meaning in real world more or less output of BTC.
About the only "simple" comparison seemed to have been the % of fee, and even that has been obscured by a per block thingie. Or, something.
Bottom line - it would be great if there were a more transparent reason why one should mine here instead of there or there.
I'm not averse to switching pools, if it had a good reason.
Same goes for payout logic btw.
I'm pretty much in this boat too. I've been mining on deepbit for a few days and getting really good results. Given the need to pay off my investment I don't have time to go pointing my miners at other pools just to see if it's worth it. Maybe I can do that in a couple of weeks when I have enough BTC.
Do you have any real world comparisons/results that will compel users to switch from other pools to yours?
* Working of a new autopay feature.
Is there any you users would want from swepool? Is there anything you feel are missing?
Is there any you users would want from swepool? Is there anything you feel are missing?
I would like to objectively be able to figure out if it's more efficient / "cheaper" to be using you instead of deepbit/slush/BTCMiner.
I currently have no idea what all the 50 different share/participation models end up meaning in real world more or less output of BTC.
About the only "simple" comparison seemed to have been the % of fee, and even that has been obscured by a per block thingie. Or, something.
Bottom line - it would be great if there were a more transparent reason why one should mine here instead of there or there.
I'm not averse to switching pools, if it had a good reason.
Same goes for payout logic btw.
* Working of a new autopay feature.
Is there any you users would want from swepool? Is there anything you feel are missing?
Is there any you users would want from swepool? Is there anything you feel are missing?
Jump to: