seriously, i have issues with my account.
just in PM or E-mail
just in PM or E-mail
Live support on the account page ?
Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 514. (Read 4382714 times)
October 30, 2013, 01:02:15 AM
Live support on the account page ?
October 29, 2013, 10:46:59 PM
ok, it must be variance.
block 20642 and block 20656 round length was exactly the same ( 1hour 10min )
in the same round time I had 10.000 shares less in round 20656 and 20% less payout.
so I guess on top of the bad pool luck I now also have bad luck and a constant low variance
I wish Slush would have a user hash rate graph ( like WeMineLTC ) that would show the variance over time.
block 20642 and block 20656 round length was exactly the same ( 1hour 10min )
in the same round time I had 10.000 shares less in round 20656 and 20% less payout.
so I guess on top of the bad pool luck I now also have bad luck and a constant low variance
I wish Slush would have a user hash rate graph ( like WeMineLTC ) that would show the variance over time.
October 29, 2013, 09:58:05 PM
20% change can be variance and hash power increase combined together.
October 29, 2013, 09:35:14 PM
hmm,
my block reward dropped from 0.025 to 0.0215 progressively in the last 10 hours, that's close to a 20% decrease !
please correct me, but I don't remember the pool hash-rate being much lower 10 hours ago, or was there really a almost 20% increase in hash power in recent hours ?
my 3 AVALON's hashing constant at 240 - 245 G/hash per sec.
anybody else ?
my block reward dropped from 0.025 to 0.0215 progressively in the last 10 hours, that's close to a 20% decrease !
please correct me, but I don't remember the pool hash-rate being much lower 10 hours ago, or was there really a almost 20% increase in hash power in recent hours ?
my 3 AVALON's hashing constant at 240 - 245 G/hash per sec.
anybody else ?
October 29, 2013, 09:26:01 PM
Our luck is going down the drain 
Well, it was nice last week. Now, this is just plain awful.
It's the same anywhere you mine at the moment.
October 29, 2013, 08:50:35 PM
I just recently switched to Slush's pool, literally 20 minutes ago with my KNC miner. My miner stats page and cgminer says I'm hashing at 280Gh/s, but on Slush's pool profile page I'm only seeing 166381.1 Mh/s which is only 166Gh/s, right?
Where is the missing hash rate going?
Where is the missing hash rate going?
The average hash rate on slush takes 10 rounds to show correctly.
The approximate rate for your individual slush miner needs a few hours to stabilize.
October 29, 2013, 07:22:50 PM
I just recently switched to Slush's pool, literally 20 minutes ago with my KNC miner. My miner stats page and cgminer says I'm hashing at 280Gh/s, but on Slush's pool profile page I'm only seeing 166381.1 Mh/s which is only 166Gh/s, right?
Where is the missing hash rate going?
Where is the missing hash rate going?
How long the block has been running affects the reported hashrate. It won't be correct until a new block is started.
October 29, 2013, 07:16:06 PM
I just recently switched to Slush's pool, literally 20 minutes ago with my KNC miner. My miner stats page and cgminer says I'm hashing at 280Gh/s, but on Slush's pool profile page I'm only seeing 166381.1 Mh/s which is only 166Gh/s, right?
Where is the missing hash rate going?
Where is the missing hash rate going?
October 29, 2013, 02:24:04 PM
Our luck is going down the drain
Well, it was nice last week. Now, this is just plain awful.
October 29, 2013, 02:14:29 PM
Our luck is going down the drain
October 29, 2013, 02:08:22 PM
seriously, i have issues with my account.
just in PM or E-mail
just in PM or E-mail
October 29, 2013, 01:15:10 PM
hi,
where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?
where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?
You must travel to their location and speak with them in person. But only after passing a background check and paying a fee of 142 BTC.
October 29, 2013, 08:53:54 AM
hi,
where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?
where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?
October 29, 2013, 05:49:16 AM
I am running the proxy's on 2 different desktops both are new installs of windows 7 64bit ultimate that do nothing but mine Usb Eruptors. I originally had a proxy on a windows 7 32bt ultimate machine which did no better.
something else I am noticing, the blade says it is at 6100mh/s yet slush is reporting 5300mh/s over time.
These 2 new blocks that happened slush had it at 6000mh/s after an hour it settles down to 5300. 35minutes into this new block now and its down to 5800 on slush. yet the blade says 6100 over that whole time.
Total MHS: 06157
Received: 0000015854
Accepted: 0000010555
Per Minute: 084.12
Efficiency: 066.57%
Up Time: 0d,02h,05m,28s
now slush showing 5400mh/s 1 hour later.
Total MHS: 06035
Received: 0000019876
Accepted: 0000012974
Per Minute: 082.47
Efficiency: 065.27%
Up Time: 0d,02h,37m,19s
something else I am noticing, the blade says it is at 6100mh/s yet slush is reporting 5300mh/s over time.
These 2 new blocks that happened slush had it at 6000mh/s after an hour it settles down to 5300. 35minutes into this new block now and its down to 5800 on slush. yet the blade says 6100 over that whole time.
Total MHS: 06157
Received: 0000015854
Accepted: 0000010555
Per Minute: 084.12
Efficiency: 066.57%
Up Time: 0d,02h,05m,28s
now slush showing 5400mh/s 1 hour later.
Total MHS: 06035
Received: 0000019876
Accepted: 0000012974
Per Minute: 082.47
Efficiency: 065.27%
Up Time: 0d,02h,37m,19s
The only other thing I can think of is you network. The IP address of your proxy has me a bit perplexed...I've not seen that IP range in a consumer router before. I put all my mining equipment on a separate simple Linksys router so its all on its own network.
If nothing else, you may have just gotten a bad blade and you need to get it exchanged.
What are your DNS settings. I am also under a corporate network, and I had to use my main gateway (or a router gateway) as my main DNS and I used 2.2.2.2 (google) as my second. This seemed to clear up some of my problems, but the systems I have at home (Avalon mini's) are always running at 60GH 24/7. My 115GH Avalon clones fluctuate from 98GH to 120GH on Slush throughout the day, but they both seem to get the same amount of shares in proportion to what the ones at home get, so I don't understand the fluctuations .... but at least they seem to be operating properly.
October 29, 2013, 02:48:13 AM
I doubt it affects any other pool. Based on their post, I'm guessing 50BTC in their infinite lack of wisdom did not invalidate previous jobs, or did not set the difficulty (payout rate) on a per-job basis when a miner changed their difficulty. This would allow a miner to store up high diff shares (not submit them), then regularly alter their difficulty on the pool interface, and submit them for more credit at a higher difficulty. It's a completely obvious exploit, but the description points to this scenario.
Fun fact: I did the math on how much extra payout you'd get on a pool with such an exploit. I think 50BTC's limit was diff=512, in jumps of powers of 2. So 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512, 10 different levels. The formula for how much extra you'd expect to be paid on a power-of-2 difficulty adjustment system is: (# of difficulty settings + 1) / 2. So in this case, a person exploiting a manual difficulty adjustment with 10 different levels would be making 5.5x more than they should at a given hash rate.
The luck part isn't a mystery. 40% and 120% days aren't even close to unusual. I think they were too used to controlling a massive portion of the network, so when they became a relatively small part, they were caught off guard by how much daily variance you see.
eleuthria I wanted to thank you, I always value your information (even on competing pools). Fun fact: I did the math on how much extra payout you'd get on a pool with such an exploit. I think 50BTC's limit was diff=512, in jumps of powers of 2. So 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512, 10 different levels. The formula for how much extra you'd expect to be paid on a power-of-2 difficulty adjustment system is: (# of difficulty settings + 1) / 2. So in this case, a person exploiting a manual difficulty adjustment with 10 different levels would be making 5.5x more than they should at a given hash rate.
The luck part isn't a mystery. 40% and 120% days aren't even close to unusual. I think they were too used to controlling a massive portion of the network, so when they became a relatively small part, they were caught off guard by how much daily variance you see.
October 28, 2013, 03:59:59 PM
I doubt it affects any other pool. Based on their post, I'm guessing 50BTC in their infinite lack of wisdom did not invalidate previous jobs, or did not set the difficulty (payout rate) on a per-job basis when a miner changed their difficulty. This would allow a miner to store up high diff shares (not submit them), then regularly alter their difficulty on the pool interface, and submit them for more credit at a higher difficulty. It's a completely obvious exploit, but the description points to this scenario.
Fun fact: I did the math on how much extra payout you'd get on a pool with such an exploit. I think 50BTC's limit was diff=512, in jumps of powers of 2. So 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512, 10 different levels. The formula for how much extra you'd expect to be paid on a power-of-2 difficulty adjustment system is: (# of difficulty settings + 1) / 2. So in this case, a person exploiting a manual difficulty adjustment with 10 different levels would be making 5.5x more than they should at a given hash rate.
The luck part isn't a mystery. 40% and 120% days aren't even close to unusual. I think they were too used to controlling a massive portion of the network, so when they became a relatively small part, they were caught off guard by how much daily variance you see.
Fun fact: I did the math on how much extra payout you'd get on a pool with such an exploit. I think 50BTC's limit was diff=512, in jumps of powers of 2. So 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512, 10 different levels. The formula for how much extra you'd expect to be paid on a power-of-2 difficulty adjustment system is: (# of difficulty settings + 1) / 2. So in this case, a person exploiting a manual difficulty adjustment with 10 different levels would be making 5.5x more than they should at a given hash rate.
The luck part isn't a mystery. 40% and 120% days aren't even close to unusual. I think they were too used to controlling a massive portion of the network, so when they became a relatively small part, they were caught off guard by how much daily variance you see.
October 28, 2013, 03:54:41 PM
50BTC hack status update
Currently we have few topics to deal with:
First thing that we’ve been able to figure out is that few fast miners have been cheating us using vulnerability in difficulty checking algorithm. This vulnerability is probably applicable to the other fair pools, so we will publish description in next few hours to help others avoid our fate. This difficulty fraud have led to the loss of the significant part of the funds.
Second thing is incessant DDOS attacks that started in early August and magically stopped in few days after billing was hacked (that seems to be the last stage of the attack).
Third thing is that we have weird jumping luck during August-September period which jumped from 40% to 120% daily and sharply increased hash rate of the few new users with abnormal large amount of stale shares.
Obviously this couldn’t be a regular coincidence and obviously this can’t be applied by one certain user. In general all of this only make sense if one or few competing pools decided to eliminate 50BTC for whatever reason. We are exploring all available data to figure out if some users was not real users but the proxied shares from the evilpool.
Weird jumps in luck and fast miners cheating? I wonder if this affects this pool as well.
It would be nice to hear from slush regarding to these issues.
Quote
Currently we have few topics to deal with:
First thing that we’ve been able to figure out is that few fast miners have been cheating us using vulnerability in difficulty checking algorithm. This vulnerability is probably applicable to the other fair pools, so we will publish description in next few hours to help others avoid our fate. This difficulty fraud have led to the loss of the significant part of the funds.
Second thing is incessant DDOS attacks that started in early August and magically stopped in few days after billing was hacked (that seems to be the last stage of the attack).
Third thing is that we have weird jumping luck during August-September period which jumped from 40% to 120% daily and sharply increased hash rate of the few new users with abnormal large amount of stale shares.
Obviously this couldn’t be a regular coincidence and obviously this can’t be applied by one certain user. In general all of this only make sense if one or few competing pools decided to eliminate 50BTC for whatever reason. We are exploring all available data to figure out if some users was not real users but the proxied shares from the evilpool.
Weird jumps in luck and fast miners cheating? I wonder if this affects this pool as well.
It would be nice to hear from slush regarding to these issues.
October 28, 2013, 03:27:23 PM
hrmm I just noticed this in the proxy output
2013-10-28 16:25:41,467 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting befd0b3a
2013-10-28 16:25:41,469 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:41,470 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:42,334 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 0c8e9c8a
2013-10-28 16:25:42,335 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:42,336 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:42,638 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 18a6e676
2013-10-28 16:25:42,640 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:42,641 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,158 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 53458523
2013-10-28 16:25:43,160 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,163 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,427 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 330a97aa
2013-10-28 16:25:43,430 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,430 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,450 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting aaa36a03
2013-10-28 16:25:43,450 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,453 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,805 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 7854f9b7
2013-10-28 16:25:43,806 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,808 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,815 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 3fd0d079
2013-10-28 16:25:43,818 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,819 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:44,611 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 667f5edc
2013-10-28 16:25:44,611 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' accepted, diff 1
2013-10-28 16:25:45,270 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 28737752
2013-10-28 16:25:45,273 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:45,273 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:41,467 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting befd0b3a
2013-10-28 16:25:41,469 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:41,470 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:42,334 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 0c8e9c8a
2013-10-28 16:25:42,335 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:42,336 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:42,638 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 18a6e676
2013-10-28 16:25:42,640 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:42,641 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,158 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 53458523
2013-10-28 16:25:43,160 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,163 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,427 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 330a97aa
2013-10-28 16:25:43,430 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,430 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,450 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting aaa36a03
2013-10-28 16:25:43,450 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,453 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,805 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 7854f9b7
2013-10-28 16:25:43,806 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,808 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:43,815 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 3fd0d079
2013-10-28 16:25:43,818 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:43,819 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
2013-10-28 16:25:44,611 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 667f5edc
2013-10-28 16:25:44,611 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' accepted, diff 1
2013-10-28 16:25:45,270 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Submitting 28737752
2013-10-28 16:25:45,273 INFO proxy jobs.submit # Job not found
2013-10-28 16:25:45,273 WARNING proxy getwork_listener._on_submit # [0ms] Share
from 'nonobra.worker1' REJECTED
October 28, 2013, 03:21:46 PM
hi,
where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?
where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?
October 28, 2013, 03:18:32 PM
This is a network at work. 10.x is a non public network like 192.168.x and 172.16.x
You don't use 192.168.x on work networks unless your IT Staff are buffoons. It makes it easier to type and recognize DMZ with 10.1.x 10.2.x etc isolation. I am pretty sure these are also plugged into the same switch, but I may be wrong.
If not in the morning I will get them on the same switch and then also test it with a 650watt power supply.
You don't use 192.168.x on work networks unless your IT Staff are buffoons. It makes it easier to type and recognize DMZ with 10.1.x 10.2.x etc isolation. I am pretty sure these are also plugged into the same switch, but I may be wrong.
If not in the morning I will get them on the same switch and then also test it with a 650watt power supply.
Ah, that explains that IP range.
The way I see it, you have two possibilities: 1. A bad Blade. 2. Some wonky network setting preventing the proxy from working correctly. You have tried different proxy's, multiple proxy's, two different power supply's and I'm guessing you probably have entered all your configurations in multiple times...there just isn't much left to these blades.
Before you give up and send that blade back, I'd try running off a proxy outside of where you work and have the blade connect to it and see if it make any difference. I tested my blade (that is up at my shop) and I ran it off a proxy I set up on my home PC. My blade still ran fine off the other proxy.
Ok I connected this up to a 575 watt power supply. there is no difference as I already knew since the 375 supplies more than enough current. It's sitting at 72% efficiency 6800mh/s for 45minutes, I call this no difference as it varied 6100-6500 on the 375 and +300mh/s is garbage to the missing 3000+.
no connectors are getting warm which is a sign of a poor connection so there is good connections, aka it is getting all the current it wants without a problem of high resistance.
I have a box fan blowing on it on high in a cooled server room. the blade both sides are mildly warm, the block eruptors in the same air are hot. so this blade is not over heating, it is getting all the power it needs and more than enough air flow. I have to conclude it is shot.
I changed the proxy ports to 8333 and 8334 restarted the blade. now I am sitting at 61% per usual and 5300mh/s aka the 575watt supply or a 375watt makes no difference to how well this works.
I am watching the 2 proxy screens....
This will get a ton of work then sit there sit there sit there... then get a ton of work from the other proxy or sometimes the same one but mostly flips...
i rebooted the blade and now its back to 6700... so odd 41minutes in and its settled to 5800 worse than when powered by 375watts
Jump to: