Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 891. (Read 4382653 times)
August 10, 2012, 05:04:07 PM
Yup, that's what I did, though it took until now for the payout. Problem resolved either way.
August 10, 2012, 01:51:02 PM
Is there a way to force payout? I have some 0.11 btc on this pool, but I haven't been using the place since over a year. I don't mind if my account is deleted due to inactivity, but only after I retrieved the remaining bitcoins.
Change your minimum payout to 0.1 and wait 5 minutes. August 10, 2012, 01:34:59 PM
Is there a way to force payout? I have some 0.11 btc on this pool, but I haven't been using the place since over a year. I don't mind if my account is deleted due to inactivity, but only after I retrieved the remaining bitcoins.
August 07, 2012, 11:18:45 AM
But I spoke to the men in charge and demanded to get some 1-10 minute blocks next to get back on track.
Doesn't look like they were listening....
August 07, 2012, 10:04:16 AM
10+, 11+, 9+ seems not in order( 9,10,11)
August 07, 2012, 07:49:14 AM
Do we know if the pool is functioning properly?
11hr round and a 10.5+ blocks today (didnt finish yet).. we only have 24hrs in a day.
11hr round and a 10.5+ blocks today (didnt finish yet).. we only have 24hrs in a day.
It gets even worse: two 11h blocks within 24 hours and a third one is well on its way at 9:21+
Short term pool luck is down to 37% damnit
But I spoke to the men in charge and demanded to get some 1-10 minute blocks next to get back on track.
August 06, 2012, 09:08:01 PM
Do we know if the pool is functioning properly?
Yes, everything is working fine.
August 06, 2012, 08:11:04 PM
Two rounds of 10 hours each in less than 24 hours, I don't know
how "organofcorti" even dares to offer an insurance...
how "organofcorti" even dares to offer an insurance...
I dare because I take the long view. Feel free to take me up on the offer - I will provide insurance privately if you don't want to use GLBSE.
Edit: Another reason I'm happy to offer insurance is that I'm confident that Slush's pool stats are accurate.
August 06, 2012, 07:49:42 PM
We are not going through a bump of bad luck in pool... we just
felt into the deepest pit of misery and despair
Two rounds of 10 hours each in less than 24 hours, I don't know
how "organofcorti" even dares to offer an insurance...
felt into the deepest pit of misery and despair
Two rounds of 10 hours each in less than 24 hours, I don't know
how "organofcorti" even dares to offer an insurance...
August 06, 2012, 07:17:16 PM
Do we know if the pool is functioning properly?
11hr round and a 10.5+ blocks today (didnt finish yet).. we only have 24hrs in a day.
11hr round and a 10.5+ blocks today (didnt finish yet).. we only have 24hrs in a day.
July 31, 2012, 08:00:15 AM
AFAIK cgminer needs / on the end of URL. So try http://api.bitcoin.cz:8332/.
Hello, I'm having trouble connecting to the pool using my current .bat on cgminer.
cgminer -o http://api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 -u myworker.namehere -p MyWorkerPass
Am I doing something wrong? I was using GUIminer, but upgraded to two 7970s today and GUIminer doesn't support those. Can anyone point me to a guide on how to connect to this pool?
cgminer -o http://api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 -u myworker.namehere -p MyWorkerPass
Am I doing something wrong? I was using GUIminer, but upgraded to two 7970s today and GUIminer doesn't support those. Can anyone point me to a guide on how to connect to this pool?
July 25, 2012, 12:43:32 AM
Hello, I'm having trouble connecting to the pool using my current .bat on cgminer.
cgminer -o http://api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 -u myworker.namehere -p MyWorkerPass
Am I doing something wrong? I was using GUIminer, but upgraded to two 7970s today and GUIminer doesn't support those. Can anyone point me to a guide on how to connect to this pool?
cgminer -o http://api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 -u myworker.namehere -p MyWorkerPass
Am I doing something wrong? I was using GUIminer, but upgraded to two 7970s today and GUIminer doesn't support those. Can anyone point me to a guide on how to connect to this pool?
July 24, 2012, 04:34:25 PM
Three invalids in one day? Is this another problem with the database as has happened in the past?
No, it's just unbelievable luck. You can see that all broadcasted blocks are valid, we just lose the fight in bitcoin network, unfortunately.
July 24, 2012, 02:11:41 AM
Some short term unluckiness might take forever to recover. Today the pool had back to back 9hr and 8h45m rounds. Both of these are 99.3+ on the CDF.
What are the chances of that? 1/20,000?
The only good news was the next 2 rounds were short making the average about 4.5hrs for 4 rounds.
What are the chances of that? 1/20,000?
The only good news was the next 2 rounds were short making the average about 4.5hrs for 4 rounds.
July 23, 2012, 01:25:29 AM
My statement of opinion above is based on the number of blocks waiting to be confirmed at any given time. For example as of now Oz has 9 blocks on confirmation while Slush has 6. And as I said in my previous post, current stats aren't accurate as Oz has a consistently higher hash. This is just my observations from mining at both for awhile.
I see. Unfortunately you're looking at a short term difference there. I'd only be confortable saying there's a significant difference between pools if I had a significant number of observations which I could compare. A second problem is defining the luck. This can be done by comparing the pool's hashrate and blocks found to the networks' hashrate and blocks found. If it is greater than expected, you're lucky. Or you can compare total round shares / Difficulty. Once you've determined how you define you're luck, you can figure out how many observations you need to compare the pools. Or compare results for each pool to the expected population results.
See the last two sets of charts at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.855078 for these two types of luck measurement.
You don't suppose the fact that Ozcoin requires 120 confirmations and Slush requires only 100 confirmations might account for perhaps 1/6 of the difference there? Which narrows the difference between 9 confirming and 6 confirming a fair bit, or were you simply unaware of that difference?
Thralen
Thralen
It does, but as the current difference is 6 to 16 even the 20 extra confirms doesn't make me feel better about Slush. This is all relative as Oz has a higher hash rate right now.
Using confirming blocks is not a robust measurement of luck. But if you want to do this, you'll need to take into account the pools' % of network hashrate as well as the number of confirms until valid.
July 22, 2012, 11:33:43 PM
My statement of opinion above is based on the number of blocks waiting to be confirmed at any given time. For example as of now Oz has 9 blocks on confirmation while Slush has 6. And as I said in my previous post, current stats aren't accurate as Oz has a consistently higher hash. This is just my observations from mining at both for awhile.
You don't suppose the fact that Ozcoin requires 120 confirmations and Slush requires only 100 confirmations might account for perhaps 1/6 of the difference there? Which narrows the difference between 9 confirming and 6 confirming a fair bit, or were you simply unaware of that difference?
Thralen
It does, but as the current difference is 6 to 16 even the 20 extra confirms doesn't make me feel better about Slush. This is all relative as Oz has a higher hash rate right now.
July 22, 2012, 08:22:48 PM
My statement of opinion above is based on the number of blocks waiting to be confirmed at any given time. For example as of now Oz has 9 blocks on confirmation while Slush has 6. And as I said in my previous post, current stats aren't accurate as Oz has a consistently higher hash. This is just my observations from mining at both for awhile.
You don't suppose the fact that Ozcoin requires 120 confirmations and Slush requires only 100 confirmations might account for perhaps 1/6 of the difference there? Which narrows the difference between 9 confirming and 6 confirming a fair bit, or were you simply unaware of that difference?
Thralen
July 22, 2012, 02:43:33 PM
I always wondered why while Slush's pool and Oz's pool always had similar hash rates Oz always had much better luck, usually twice the luck or more. Not as easy to compare right now as Oz has consistently high hash rates now, I asssume because of the better luck.
That's not even close to the truth: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.855078 . Luck hasn't been significantly better for either pool compared to the other for any length of time.
Anyway, how are you defining luck? Unless you mean round length / D? In which case you mean Ozcoin had half the round length on average. Or do you mean number of blocks mined compared to number of blocks expected?
Thats an interesting chart, especially the % of orphans when looking at Oz compared to Slush...or many other pools.
My statement of opinion above is based on the number of blocks waiting to be confirmed at any given time. For example as of now Oz has 9 blocks on confirmation while Slush has 6. And as I said in my previous post, current stats aren't accurate as Oz has a consistently higher hash. This is just my observations from mining at both for awhile.
July 22, 2012, 04:41:14 AM
I always wondered why while Slush's pool and Oz's pool always had similar hash rates Oz always had much better luck, usually twice the luck or more. Not as easy to compare right now as Oz has consistently high hash rates now, I asssume because of the better luck.
That's not even close to the truth: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.855078 . Luck hasn't been significantly better for either pool compared to the other for any length of time.
Anyway, how are you defining luck? Unless you mean round length / D? In which case you mean Ozcoin had half the round length on average. Or do you mean number of blocks mined compared to number of blocks expected?
July 21, 2012, 08:47:05 PM
Slush, the pool page is nice for checking if all miners we have are working without logging to their hosts. But it would be much better to have also the current hash rate displayed [calculated based on the current round not the last 10 rounds, which can take a day], especially if the mining farm is unstable. I know that this estimation will be very poor at the beginning of the round so maybe at least the last round only could be used for this. I can calculate it myself by taking my shares/score and the pools shares/score form the other page and divide and multiply but this is time consuming :-) can we have this displayed on the MyAccount page in the Workers section maybe in parentheses after the 10-round based estimation ? I would greatly appreciate this :-)
The hashrate updates have been asked over a year go already. Except for the nice translations, I'm sorry to say but this pool is pretty much dead. I wouldn't say it if I didn't cared about it. The pool is still hoppable, and very much hopped every day, DGM is probably never going to appear because one programmer may just be not enough for such a project, the pool has been underperforming for the longest time (you see next to never that 30day average is 99%+ or more), and namecoins (not Slush's fault) are about dead because its purpose is undermined: 3-5 people have "squatted" all the domains, and namecoin price is just plummeting, even though we mine them less and less due to rising diff.
Slush, if you still want to be in the game when Asics hit, you should get your act together and update some more things than just a fanboy page (Facebook). I'm still mining here with three cards, but when my internet connection fails, as it does sometimes, it will be much better for me to be on a PPS pool like BTCGuild for the occasional mining. The rest of my cards have moved over to LTC mining. Much higher profit.
I always wondered why while Slush's pool and Oz's pool always had similar hash rates Oz always had much better luck, usually twice the luck or more. Not as easy to compare right now as Oz has consistently high hash rates now, I asssume because of the better luck.
Jump to: