Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 1098. (Read 4382648 times)
February 25, 2011, 05:55:05 PM
bobR, Bitcoin seems to be a currency very much based on trust right now. I don't trust you, because you seem to be unstable in this forum. I hope in the future, you can show me I'm wrong.
February 25, 2011, 05:53:02 PM
Congratulations bobR, you've just managed to alienate me, and I have no plans to ever do business with you until you learn some basic social skills.
February 25, 2011, 05:51:04 PM
Go bother some one else
I already go a sufficient answer IN CASE you can't read
Flame some were else mister 2 posts
You are not helping or wanted
O an thanks teach I MEANT TO SHOUT
Maybe you should proof read for a living
Get a life stop trying to be a teacher and correct all your students
That's just being rude & ill mannered
I already go a sufficient answer IN CASE you can't read
Flame some were else mister 2 posts
You are not helping or wanted
O an thanks teach I MEANT TO SHOUT
Maybe you should proof read for a living
Get a life stop trying to be a teacher and correct all your students
That's just being rude & ill mannered
Excellent. So you won't have any further questions that have already been answered in the thread that you claim to have read. And, just in case you do, you'll now know to use Google instead of leaping in with "SMART ASS" comments.
February 25, 2011, 05:47:35 PM
If you had actually read every post in this thread like you said, then you would already know that that means that we (the pool) submitted a valid solution for Block 110331 AFTER somebody else had already submitted a valid solution for Block 110331. Therefor, our solution was discarded.
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49222
Ok thats as clear as mud (just what is a preval hash ?) not too clear
Your explanition was better
So you *hadn't* read every post in this thread? Or had you just missed that one? Are there any others that you may have missed? If so, you can Google for them, like the rest of us do when we don't understand something.
Go bother some one else
I already go a sufficient answer IN CASE you can't read
Flame some were else mister 2 posts
You are not helping or wanted
O an thanks teach I MEANT TO SHOUT
Maybe you should proof read for a living
Get a life stop trying to be a teacher and correct all your students
That's just being rude & ill mannered
February 25, 2011, 05:41:18 PM
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
After all of your bitching about how slush's pool is unfair, you're still using it? Then you get an attitude with the people who try to answer your question? The question that you would know the answer to if you had read the thread?
LOOK I never said it was unfair
I JUST HAD QUESTIONS
people with an attitude like your are NOT helping
I HAVE READ ALL 1000+ posts
I did a search
I FOUND NO EXPLANATION for that log entry
So again point out WHICH thread explained it
If you cant SHUT THE H UP
Time for a lesson in Internet etiquette.
Capital letters do not ascribe emphasis to said words. It does not get make the point you are attempting to convey come across to the audience clearer, except in certain situations. It is the equivalent of shouting, just as rude, and just as likely to make people not want to answer your questions. If you want people on the Internet to take you seriously, and to not instantly assume you're trying to evoke a negative reaction amongst the users, sentences with correct capitalization, punctuation, and lack of sequential capital letters would do you better than your attempts thus far at attempting to integrate yourself into the community.
February 25, 2011, 05:39:12 PM
What's with
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
If you had actually read every post in this thread like you said, then you would already know that that means that we (the pool) submitted a valid solution for Block 110331 AFTER somebody else had already submitted a valid solution for Block 110331. Therefor, our solution was discarded.
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49222
Ok thats as clear as mud (just what is a preval hash ?) not too clear
Your explanition was better
Also:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.42513
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51172
February 25, 2011, 05:37:42 PM
If you had actually read every post in this thread like you said, then you would already know that that means that we (the pool) submitted a valid solution for Block 110331 AFTER somebody else had already submitted a valid solution for Block 110331. Therefor, our solution was discarded.
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49222
Ok thats as clear as mud (just what is a preval hash ?) not too clear
Your explanition was better
So you *hadn't* read every post in this thread? Or had you just missed that one? Are there any others that you may have missed? If so, you can Google for them, like the rest of us do when we don't understand something.
February 25, 2011, 05:34:58 PM
What's with
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
If you had actually read every post in this thread like you said, then you would already know that that means that we (the pool) submitted a valid solution for Block 110331 AFTER somebody else had already submitted a valid solution for Block 110331. Therefor, our solution was discarded.
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49222
Ok thats as clear as mud (just what is a preval hash ?) not too clear
Your explanition was better
February 25, 2011, 05:30:45 PM
LOOK I never said it was unfair
I JUST HAD QUESTIONS
people with an attitude like your are NOT helping
I HAVE READ ALL 1000+ posts
I did a search
I FOUND NO EXPLANATION for that log entry
So again point out WHICH thread explained it
If you cant SHUT THE H UP
I JUST HAD QUESTIONS
people with an attitude like your are NOT helping
I HAVE READ ALL 1000+ posts
I did a search
I FOUND NO EXPLANATION for that log entry
So again point out WHICH thread explained it
If you cant SHUT THE H UP
Let me Google that for you...
February 25, 2011, 05:29:49 PM
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
After all of your bitching about how slush's pool is unfair, you're still using it? Then you get an attitude with the people who try to answer your question? The question that you would know the answer to if you had read the thread?
LOOK I never said it was unfair
I JUST HAD QUESTIONS
people with an attitude like your are NOT helping
I HAVE READ ALL 1000+ posts
I did a search
I FOUND NO EXPLANATION for that log entry
So again point out WHICH thread explained it
If you cant SHUT THE H UP
February 25, 2011, 05:29:32 PM
What's with
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
If you had actually read every post in this thread like you said, then you would already know that that means that we (the pool) submitted a valid solution for Block 110331 AFTER somebody else had already submitted a valid solution for Block 110331. Therefor, our solution was discarded.
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49222
February 25, 2011, 05:21:03 PM
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
After all of your bitching about how slush's pool is unfair, you're still using it? Then you get an attitude with the people who try to answer your question? The question that you would know the answer to if you had read the thread?
February 25, 2011, 05:17:38 PM
What's with
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
If you had actually read every post in this thread like you said, then you would already know that that means that we (the pool) submitted a valid solution for Block 110331 AFTER somebody else had already submitted a valid solution for Block 110331. Therefor, our solution was discarded.
And WHICH OTHER post explained this SMART ASS
February 25, 2011, 04:59:00 PM
What's with
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
If you had actually read every post in this thread like you said, then you would already know that that means that we (the pool) submitted a valid solution for Block 110331 AFTER somebody else had already submitted a valid solution for Block 110331. Therefor, our solution was discarded.
February 25, 2011, 04:48:49 PM
What's with
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
1468 2011-02-25 10:11:58 1:13:34 75678 xxxxxx 110332 invalid
February 25, 2011, 04:34:41 PM
Any word on when new users will be able to register?
February 25, 2011, 04:08:28 PM
To all users: Please update to latest version of miners (jgarzik's, m0mchil's, Diablo's) and if you use other miner, be sure that it supports "keep alive" connections to the pool. Otherwise you will see "connection timeout" often...
In last two days, I tweaked the pool server configuration and solve some overload issues by this. There are now hard limits to "new connections per second" (currently 500/s); when there are more connection attemps than allowed, you will see "connection timeout" on the miner side. But this is not an issue for new miner versions, because they are able to reuse existing connection for the long time.
There are lot of old miners which flood the server with connection attempts and when they fail, they try to connect immediately, which make the situation even worse. With this behavior, any tiny lockup of pool started packet storm of thousands retransmissions per second and pool often needed some time to stabilize. So I decided to set hard limits to force users to update.
In the meantime, before the old miners get an update, this may affect also startup of updated miners. This is just because old miners fill all available slots for new connections per second. Just give it a time, after few seconds the miner will succeed and once the connection will be estabilished, everything will be fine.
In last two days, I tweaked the pool server configuration and solve some overload issues by this. There are now hard limits to "new connections per second" (currently 500/s); when there are more connection attemps than allowed, you will see "connection timeout" on the miner side. But this is not an issue for new miner versions, because they are able to reuse existing connection for the long time.
There are lot of old miners which flood the server with connection attempts and when they fail, they try to connect immediately, which make the situation even worse. With this behavior, any tiny lockup of pool started packet storm of thousands retransmissions per second and pool often needed some time to stabilize. So I decided to set hard limits to force users to update.
In the meantime, before the old miners get an update, this may affect also startup of updated miners. This is just because old miners fill all available slots for new connections per second. Just give it a time, after few seconds the miner will succeed and once the connection will be estabilished, everything will be fine.
Just wanted to say I'm seeing ALOT less stale or invalids so thank you for your continued work slush!
February 25, 2011, 03:12:22 PM
To all users: Please update to latest version of miners (jgarzik's, m0mchil's, Diablo's) and if you use other miner, be sure that it supports "keep alive" connections to the pool. Otherwise you will see "connection timeout" often...
In last two days, I tweaked the pool server configuration and solve some overload issues by this. There are now hard limits to "new connections per second" (currently 500/s); when there are more connection attemps than allowed, you will see "connection timeout" on the miner side. But this is not an issue for new miner versions, because they are able to reuse existing connection for the long time.
There are lot of old miners which flood the server with connection attempts and when they fail, they try to connect immediately, which make the situation even worse. With this behavior, any tiny lockup of pool started packet storm of thousands retransmissions per second and pool often needed some time to stabilize. So I decided to set hard limits to force users to update.
In the meantime, before the old miners get an update, this may affect also startup of updated miners. This is just because old miners fill all available slots for new connections per second. Just give it a time, after few seconds the miner will succeed and once the connection will be estabilished, everything will be fine.
In last two days, I tweaked the pool server configuration and solve some overload issues by this. There are now hard limits to "new connections per second" (currently 500/s); when there are more connection attemps than allowed, you will see "connection timeout" on the miner side. But this is not an issue for new miner versions, because they are able to reuse existing connection for the long time.
There are lot of old miners which flood the server with connection attempts and when they fail, they try to connect immediately, which make the situation even worse. With this behavior, any tiny lockup of pool started packet storm of thousands retransmissions per second and pool often needed some time to stabilize. So I decided to set hard limits to force users to update.
In the meantime, before the old miners get an update, this may affect also startup of updated miners. This is just because old miners fill all available slots for new connections per second. Just give it a time, after few seconds the miner will succeed and once the connection will be estabilished, everything will be fine.
February 25, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Is it possible to change your account's password? I'm not seeing that ability on the webpage.
Yes, on login page, use "Forgot password?" link (you have to logout before
). Little tricky, but works. February 25, 2011, 01:04:57 PM
Is it possible to change your account's password? I'm not seeing that ability on the webpage.
Jump to: